On 10/2/2018 at 1:41 PM, McFoy said:

TL:DR

This study was based on tweets specifically directed at Rian Johnson within an 8 month period after the release. It counted tweets from 967 separate users, of those 206 were negative and about 50% were from people labeled as bots/ trolls or politically motivated. In this particular sample it get's the authors point across but is a laughably small section of the actual discussion of TLJ.

BUT WHAT ABOUT THIS OTHER CONCLUSION THEY DIDN’T MAKE????

this is how everyone who doesn’t like the outcomes of real science tries to make it wrong

19 hours ago, Ambaryerno said:

My only concern is that now anyone who expresses their dislike of TLJ because it's simply not a good movie are going to get jumped on and lumped together with the trolls.

Tbf most of their criticisms are pretty trollish.

14 hours ago, Admiral Deathrain said:

Not particularly suprising given that so much traffic on the internet (and especially mainstream social media like twitter) is created by bots. The interesting part is on whose behalf the bots post, but that is very difficult to say. Sure it's russian bots, but that doesn't mean Putin wants to take down the western world by taking away our star wars. Russians just offer shady internet buisness cheaply. It is basically impossible for us to tell wether some very sad individuals need to amplify their voice to seem like a majority by wasting their money or wether there is a political actor at work.

It’s part of Russia’s agenda to inflame tensions along racial and social lines in the west. Telling a bunch of LOUD man-babies on the net that Disney hates Luke because he’s white and male definitely fits their overall goals.

2 hours ago, McFoy said:

For a political poll that may be enough but the 2016 US elections are a good indicator just how skewed and incorrect polls can be.

The outcome of the 2016 election was well within polling margins of error. This myth that the polls were wrong needs to go away.

58 minutes ago, FTS Gecko said:

*snort* "in the US". As if it doesn't happen all over the world.

What you're essentially describing is advertising. It works on the weak willed. And if you're talking about "trying to sway public opinion", bots posting tweets on Twitter is nothing compared to the demonization of entire countries and cultures that Hollywood has been doing for decades.

You aren't wrong about this. I was wrong to make my statements so US-centric. But it's still something to be concerned about, even if there are other evils out there.

Doubled.

5 minutes ago, TasteTheRainbow said:

The outcome of the 2016 election was well within polling margins of error. This myth that the polls were wrong needs to go away.

What in the world is the point of polls if their margin for error is so big?

The presidency was decided by under 100,000 votes in three key states. That is well within any margin of error.

26 minutes ago, McFoy said:

What in the world is the point of polls if their margin for error is so big?

The margin wasn’t big. It was just a close election.

1 hour ago, Ixidor said:

You aren't wrong about this. I was wrong to make my statements so US-centric. But it's still something to be concerned about, even if there are other evils out there.

Oh, absolutely. Without descending into tinfoil hat territory, it's always worth thinking carefully about what you see and hear.

As far as I'm concerned though, this latest line is just about as laughable as Trump's fake news tantrums.

1 hour ago, TasteTheRainbow said:

Tbf most of their criticisms are pretty trollish.

No more so than the ostrich defence mechanism employed by the film's more hysterical fans...

"If we ignore people's complaints and criticisms then maybe they'll just go awaaaaaaay"

7 hours ago, Scopes said:

That's a curious opinion. Can you elaborate?

The polls for the 2016 election were for example closer to the true result than for the 2012 election. They got the total vote result wrong by 1% - keep in mind that Hillary won the popular vote. The prediction for the result on who would win were within 2-3% of the actual result. That is as accurate as they have always been since 1968. 538 gave Trump a winning chance of 29%, meaning he wins one of three elections because it was incredibly close. More careful, unbiased analysis did show that Hillary's lead came from non-swing states.

So there are a couple of conclusions you can draw:

• Polls are always bad because they will never be 100% accurate
• Landing within 1-3% of the actual result is pretty amazing. Think about X-Wing for example: if we could determine the meta with a 1-3% accuracy, we would know exactly what to expect.
• If you call the polls of 2016 "skewed and incorrect" as McFoy did, then polls of presidential elections in general have been skewed and incorrect for 50 years. The way he phrased it indicates to me that this is not what he meant.

Or as @TasteTheRainbow said:

7 hours ago, TasteTheRainbow said:

The outcome of the 2016 election was well within polling margins of error. This myth that the polls were wrong needs to go away.

10 hours ago, TasteTheRainbow said:

It’s part of Russia’s agenda to inflame tensions along racial and social lines in the west.

US does it for many years in many countries (including Russia).

19 hours ago, FTS Gecko said:

No more so than the ostrich defence mechanism employed by the film's more hysterical fans...

"If we ignore people's complaints and criticisms then maybe they'll just go awaaaaaaay"

That's not an ostrich defense mechanism. It's the understanding that a movie that has already been made and released can, in fact, NOT be changed no matter how valid nor how incessant the complaints are.

You've made this point numerous times so clearly you don't feel TLJ apologists are responding the right way to complaints. So what is it you would like us to do about the fact that you don't like a movie?

1 hour ago, Sekac said:

You've made this point numerous times so clearly you don't feel TLJ apologists are responding the right way to complaints.

They're not. Whether it's labelling people who criticise The Last Jedi as misogynists, racists, "man-babies" or Russian bots, a great deal of the "defence" for The Last Jedi focuses on attacking people who express their criticisms, not addressing their concerns. The remainder simply pretend the complaints don't exist. And that approach extends not only to the fanbase, but the studio itself apparently.

1 hour ago, Sekac said:

So what is it you would like us to do about the fact that you don't like a movie?

Other than accept that a lot of people - quite rightfully - think that The Last Jedi is a deeply flawed, deeply divisive utter waste of potential, you mean? I don't actually want you to do anything. There's nothing you can do.

However, just because Lucasfilm have blown their only opportunity to reunite the original trilogy cast and pass the torch to a new generation in any meaningful manner doesn't mean we should just blithely accept it. If your soup's cold or your steak's rancid you send it back, and make sure the restaurant staff know why. Feedback is important. You either try and make yourself heard, or you resign yourself for a lifetime of underwhelming dinners.

12 hours ago, bernh said:

US does it for many years in many countries (including Russia).

Oh? Which party in Russia has a self-defined mythology almost entirely rooted in US-borne propaganda?

19 minutes ago, FTS Gecko said:

They're not. Whether it's labelling people who criticise The Last Jedi as misogynists, racists, "man-babies" or Russian bots, a great deal of the "defence" for The Last Jedi focuses on attacking people who express their criticisms, not addressing their concerns. The remainder simply pretend the complaints don't exist. And that approach extends not only to the fanbase, but the studio itself apparently.

Other than accept that a lot of people - quite rightfully - think that The Last Jedi is a deeply flawed, deeply divisive utter waste of potential, you mean? I don't actually want you to do anything. There's nothing you can do.

However, just because Lucasfilm have blown their only opportunity to reunite the original trilogy cast and pass the torch to a new generation in any meaningful manner doesn't mean we should just blithely accept it. If your soup's cold or your steak's rancid you send it back, and make sure the restaurant staff know why. Feedback is important. You either try and make yourself heard, or you resign yourself for a lifetime of underwhelming dinners.

“5% of my town doesn’t like this particular steak. Another contingent larger than that 5% is actually just Russian internet trolls. So the best thing to do is throw an obnoxious, racist, sexist whinge-fest about how OUR definition of steak is the RIGHT definition and make sure that nobody anywhere ever wants to make steak again. At least if people stop making steak all together I won’t have to worry that someone out there might be enjoying a steak I wouldn’t like.”

Movie is still bad tough.

1 hour ago, FTS Gecko said:

They're not. Whether it's labelling people who criticise The Last Jedi as misogynists, racists, "man-babies" or Russian bots, a great deal of the "defence" for The Last Jedi focuses on attacking people who express their criticisms, not addressing their concerns. The remainder simply pretend the complaints don't exist. And that approach extends not only to the fanbase, but the studio itself apparently.

Got it. 100% of TLJ apologists fall into 2 categories: either they call you a bigot or they pretend they don't hear your complaints.

I'm curious, though, which category I fall in. Im addressing you and asking for feedback and I even managed to not call you a bigot in the process.

So of the 2 (and only 2) catgories, which am I?

Or is there maybe a 3rd group of people that you're burying your head in the sand to avoid acknowledging the existence of? People that, perhaps, just don't see the point in whining endlessly about a movie. It's not that we don't acknowledge your complaints, but are we forced to acknowledge them every time you repeat them for as long as you see fit to repeat them--lest we risk giving you the impression people are persecuting you with silence?

I feel like 10 months is way more than enough continuous acknowledgement.

3 hours ago, Sekac said:

You've made this point numerous times so clearly you don't feel TLJ apologists are responding the right way to complaints. So what is it you would like us to do about the fact that you don't like a movie?

He wants us to hate the movie as much as he does.

2 hours ago, TasteTheRainbow said:

Oh? Which party in Russia has a self-defined mythology almost entirely rooted in US-borne propaganda?

This one for example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solidarnost

2 hours ago, FTS Gecko said:

not addressing their concerns

Personally I've only ever addressed concerns. Or rather, the reasoning underlying these concerns. That reasoning, not the movie, is deeply flawed.

The typical ones are far-fetched pseudo-rational points, from "bad jokes", "lack of" character arcs (not understanding Poe as Holdo vs Leia, Finn as Rose vs DJ, Rey as Luke vs Kylo), canto bight is "pointless" up to Luke was character assassinated (including misrepresenting Mark Hamill's interviews to "strengthen" the point) and the infamous hyperdrive on an asteroid. These points are all deeply flawed and intellectually lazy. Furthermore they show a severe misunderstanding of the overall theme of the movie.

I get that you want more of the same old feeling but in a new story. That TLJ is demanding much more insight and attention than previous Episodes. But to many this movie was great as a movie (not just as Star Wars) and has the potential to drive the core of Star Wars to greatness. Because, let's be real: most of our Star Wars experience does not come from the movies. It comes from games, books, comics, fantheories even. The core saga has three short moments out of an immense story, and the prequels were widely hated for 15 years. So what else is it that got our fan loyalty to this degree? The TIE fighter game, and then Rogue Squadron on the N64 and later Gamecube. The Jedi Knight series. Star Wars Battleground (for me the strategy game). The Thrawn and X-Wing books. The Vader comics. Maybe Darth Jar Jar, too. But most of them were pretty trashy, story- and plotwise.

So when you complain about TLJ, what do you compare it to?

38 minutes ago, bernh said:

This one for example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solidarnost

Kasparov working for Bush intel authorities? This isn’t cats and dogs. This is ice and a thermonuclear explosion. No way that herd of people is being pushed by US intel on the net.

45 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

So what else is it that got our fan loyalty to this degree? The TIE fighter game, and then Rogue Squadron on the N64 and later Gamecube. The Jedi Knight series. Star Wars Battleground (for me the strategy game). The Thrawn and X-Wing books. 

Um.... Never played any of those video games and have never read the X-Wing books.

Did like the Thrawn books though. I’d already been a rabid SW fan for more than 15 years before I read them.

17 hours ago, bernh said:

US does it for many years in many countries (including Russia).

Whataboutism is a very Russian device. Well done comrade Trollski.

40 minutes ago, BlodVargarna said:

Whataboutism is a very Russian device. Well done comrade Trollski.

I'm not particularly interested in this argument, but from a debate standpoint: if pointing out hypocrisy is "whataboutism" then someone claiming the moral high ground becomes an unassailable position, which is ridiculous.

Whataboutism is a deflection tactic to redirect the focus onto something else, or to reframe the conversation in a different light.

Say you're discussing a business with many clear examples of unethical practices. Whataboutism would be "yeah, but what about the charities they give to?"

Pointing out a double standard is not.