You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
2

[–] escape 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Because the primary way they try to get followers to their cause is by being fucking annoying. Loud spammy messages, obnoxious websites that are all random colored text on a dark background, all center aligned. They get hyper-emotional when you challenge their theories. Oddly enough the majority of them can't separate their wacky beliefs and their own identity, so they get personally hurt if you debate them. It's like zealotry.

0
0

[–] Beers ago 

What does it mean to be a conspiracy theorist, to you?

If someone believes the moon landing never happened, but they never tell anyone, or host any annoying websites, etc. Are they still a conspiracy theorist? Are you still "against them?" I don't see how any of the traits you described have anything to do with the definition of conspiracy theorist that I understand...

0
1

[–] HowAboutShutUp 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

If someone believes the moon landing never happened, but they never tell anyone, or host any annoying websites, etc. Are they still a conspiracy theorist?

Yes they are, they're just not one the general public has to put up with. They're still in denial, though.

I am generally not "for" anyone believing anything that's patently absurd, but if they're not holding the poop on the end of their stick under my nose, I won't generally go out of my way to complain about the smell.

You have to understand that when conspiracy theorists come up in conversation its the visible, annoying ones that are getting referred to, but the parlance is the same. Its like kleenex. Not every tissue is a kleenex, but every kleenex is a tissue, and people will still use kleenex to refer to all tissues.