Where are my fellow thinkers? [Archive]

Theodore J. Kaczynski

1st August 2005, 17:52

Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2005, 04:48 PM
What's the purpose of having an Opposing Ideologies forum when you simply ban Opposing Ideologies?

Dumbasses.
It is a method called choose-and-pick. They wait for topics by non-leftists that are admittedly idiotic, and keep them for public perusing. If a topic is particularily intelligent and shows the numerous flaws of the leftist way of thinking, then that topic results in a deletion and/or banning.

It is done from an emotional basis: the leftist feels good when he makes what he percieves as a particularily good argument against a non-leftist (or "fascist" they are often called) and if the argument against the leftist way of thinking is unrelenting, then the leftist become angry and in response exert dominance over the poster in order to gain happiness.

redstar2000

1st August 2005, 18:02

Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2005, 11:28 AM
I'd like to know what got them banned.
It must have been something worthy of witnessing.
:lol:
No, I think the primary reason that we banned t_wolves_fan and Professor Moneybags is because we got bored with them...they no longer had anything interesting to say and were, more and more, just responding with one-line spam posts.

Publius and Loknar are still here...as is Capitalist Lawyer. And I think there might be one or two others.

Now this "new" guy -- "Theodore J. Kaczynski" -- has been whining up a storm every since he got here -- we commies "ban" people because we are "afraid" to argue with them.

I'm pretty sure that this account is a sockpuppet for someone who has been banned recently.

But who?

At any rate, he really gets around (Puerto Rico, Germany, Japan, China, etc.). He has a different IP address for each post he makes...suggesting "less than honorable" motives for his presence.

We may let him post a while longer...or we may just ban him because he's "up to no good"...we'll see.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

Publius

1st August 2005, 18:05

That should do a lot of good when it's obvious he's using proxies...

Non-Sectarian Bastard!

1st August 2005, 18:07

Kinda weird though to register at a forum under the name of a vicious anti-technologist.

Theodore J. Kaczynski

1st August 2005, 18:48

Originally posted by redstar2000+Aug 1 2005, 05:02 PM--> (redstar2000 @ Aug 1 2005, 05:02 PM)
[email protected] 1 2005, 11:28 AM
I'd like to know what got them banned.
It must have been something worthy of witnessing.
:lol:
No, I think the primary reason that we banned t_wolves_fan and Professor Moneybags is because we got bored with them...they no longer had anything interesting to say and were, more and more, just responding with one-line spam posts.

Publius and Loknar are still here...as is Capitalist Lawyer. And I think there might be one or two others.

Now this "new" guy -- "Theodore J. Kaczynski" -- has been whining up a storm every since he got here -- we commies "ban" people because we are "afraid" to argue with them.

I'm pretty sure that this account is a sockpuppet for someone who has been banned recently.

But who?

At any rate, he really gets around (Puerto Rico, Germany, Japan, China, etc.). He has a different IP address for each post he makes...suggesting "less than honorable" motives for his presence.

We may let him post a while longer...or we may just ban him because he's "up to no good"...we'll see.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif [/b]
Perhaps it is because I am smart enought to use proxies when I go to various internet forums? It is better than allowing people to see my ip address and DDOS me or whatnot.

You must be afraid of me if you are so insistent of me being a "sockpuppet" and refusing to unlock my thread, and considering to ban me for nebulous reasons. My words are the most vile poison, burning a hole through lies and ignorance.

Ele'ill

1st August 2005, 18:55

http://www.voccoquan.com/images/religious%20left%20sock%20puppet.JPG

Socialistpenguin

1st August 2005, 19:46

Originally posted by Theodore J. [email protected] 1 2005, 05:48 PM
Perhaps it is because I am smart enought to use proxies when I go to various internet forums? It is better than allowing people to see my ip address and DDOS me or whatnot.

You must be afraid of me if you are so insistent of me being a "sockpuppet" and refusing to unlock my thread, and considering to ban me for nebulous reasons. My words are the most vile poison, burning a hole through lies and ignorance .

Well YOU certainly have a high opinion of yourself. Tell me, do you wear tin foil hats and contact aliens through your fillings? Everything about you is conspiritorial. Your arguement basically ammounts to this: "w00t! 4ll teh l3ftists R t3h suX0rz c0z tehy smell bad. 1 r teh 1337est r0x0r!!1111oneo1!!11w00t stfu roflmao omg lol"
http://www.rpgsource.net/gallery/teh-suck.jpg

That is all.

Theodore J. Kaczynski

1st August 2005, 19:55

Originally posted by Socialistpenguin+Aug 1 2005, 06:46 PM--> (Socialistpenguin @ Aug 1 2005, 06:46 PM)
Theodore J. [email protected] 1 2005, 05:48 PM
Perhaps it is because I am smart enought to use proxies when I go to various internet forums? It is better than allowing people to see my ip address and DDOS me or whatnot.

You must be afraid of me if you are so insistent of me being a "sockpuppet" and refusing to unlock my thread, and considering to ban me for nebulous reasons. My words are the most vile poison, burning a hole through lies and ignorance .

Well YOU certainly have a high opinion of yourself. Tell me, do you wear tin foil hats and contact aliens through your fillings? Everything about you is conspiritorial. Your arguement basically ammounts to this: "w00t! 4ll teh l3ftists R t3h suX0rz c0z tehy smell bad. 1 r teh 1337est r0x0r!!1111oneo1!!11w00t stfu roflmao omg lol"
http://www.rpgsource.net/gallery/teh-suck.jpg

That is all. [/b]
Please, let us not result to Ad Hominem... perchance someone is angry with my soothsaying?

Socialistpenguin

1st August 2005, 20:00

No, I just find your paranoid ramblings of "I am the centre of the universe! Bow down before me!" rather amusing, that's all. :D :) Please, continue.

Theodore J. Kaczynski

1st August 2005, 20:03

Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2005, 07:00 PM
No, I just find your paranoid ramblings of "I am the centre of the universe! Bow down before me!" rather amusing, that's all. :D :) Please, continue.
And could you tell me when and where I have said that?

Socialistpenguin

1st August 2005, 20:08

I'm not saying you said it, I'm saying it reflects your attitude rather well. You seem to have a VERY HIGH opinion of your views and yourself. I used the aforementioned sentence to convey that message in a blend of humour and of good will.

Edit: Hey redstar, why was ahh_money_is_comfort banned? Not that I miss the whiny little twit, I was just curious.

Ele'ill

1st August 2005, 20:10

They should all be unbanned.
Atleast t wolves and pro money

Elect Marx

1st August 2005, 20:12

Originally posted by Non-Sectarian Bastard!@Aug 1 2005, 11:07 AM
Kinda weird though to register at a forum under the name of a vicious anti-technologist.
Wouldn't be the first; look at the primitivists that come around... this just shows the irrationality of their ideological justification, no connection with material reality.

Elect Marx

1st August 2005, 20:16

Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2005, 01:10 PM
They should all be unbanned.
Atleast t wolves and pro money
So we should keep people around that aren't interested in discussion, on a discussion board?

Could you explain your logic on this one?

Theodore J. Kaczynski

1st August 2005, 20:19

Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2005, 07:08 PM
I'm not saying you said it, I'm saying it reflects your attitude rather well. You seem to have a VERY HIGH opinion of your views and yourself. I used the aforementioned sentence to convey that message in a blend of humour and of good will.
So I ought to be humble and unsure of my views? So I ought to have a low self-esteem?

Socialistpenguin

1st August 2005, 20:27

I'm not saying you have to, I'm just saying there is a happy middle ground between the two extremes. The key is finding it.

violencia.Proletariat

1st August 2005, 21:00

i agree you shouldnt ban someone because of their views but some of the counter arguements were pathetic. i dont think some even read the leftist pov because they turn right around and spew the same shit out. im all for intelligent counter arguements though.

redstar2000

2nd August 2005, 02:33

Originally posted by Socialistpenguin+--> (Socialistpenguin)Hey redstar, why was ahh_money_is_comfort banned? Not that I miss the whiny little twit, I was just curious.[/b]

Spamming & trolling; approved by the CC 22-13.

Theodore J. Kaczynski
My words are the most vile poison, burning a hole through lies and ignorance.

No, Teddy, your words thus far have been more like a fart in a crowded elevator than anything else.

You still have a little bit of time left to say something interesting...though I realize that may be asking too much.

The clock is moving.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

OleMarxco

2nd August 2005, 19:50

Yes, it is movin', but only because someone is pullin' da lever's, heavin' the machinery in'rat direction, drawin' da chain's ;)

Seriously, 'tho. I'm still a leftie, but I've always - ALWAYS - aslong as I've been here, I know I've hated - to my guts - this existance of forum, OPPOSIN' IDEOLOGIES, merely a foolish restriction, and with RELIGION as sub-forum? What the fuck is that shit? Surely, it's a crock of bullshit, but it's not just simply a instrument of our nemesis, the reactionaries (Both facists and Capitalists) but also some people (albeit idiotically) believe in it! Or want to talk about it. So, I kind of side with the "New-comer" on this, shoot me, kill me, send me to the gulag's, but he's still right. I -know- we might seem as crazy activists sometimes and some of us even are....technically....but the cause is still just, no matter. Atleast, until I'm convinced otherwise, I'm perhaps "opportunistic" ideolically here. Whatever helps the people, and as I see it, it's true Communism which is the way. Not all action's are just, however. We're not blind killers. But layin' down in front of cars solves no fuckin' shit :P

Actions does not make our ideology obsolote or wrong! Leftism forever, muddafukka's. You ain't gon'change me, 'less I see I am wrong! Heck, I even posted a link to Theodore's long-essay , his manifesto here, a few month's ago - when I first joined! And bannin' of reactionaries is even worse. We need a healthy debate, to prove 'em wrong, no matter we might think about 'em. I don't like Theodore still, however, even thought a primitive life is funnier than a high-tech one, and he has all society unravaled in his "artifical"-rants, it doesn't justify bombs of people just withouth any specific cause. But to hell with law's and regulations, or profit, what matters are HUMANS. That should be the core of it all. Theodore's simplistic view of Leftists purely as insane leftists who just want "niggers" to become "whitish" and sabotage society because they are bored, is pretty way off. There are reasonable lefties too, aswell, believe it - or not <_<

Signin' off, Marxist-Luxembourgist. Revolution is 'sposed'ta be more tolerance for the worker's than hunting of bosses :hammer:

Ele'ill

2nd August 2005, 22:39

So we should keep people around that aren't interested in discussion, on a discussion board?

Could you explain your logic on this one?

Sure.

Most of the topics they started were carried out over fifteen or so pages. They were obviously interested in discussion. In fact some of the longest debates or discussions on this board were started by restricted members. Explain how they weren't interested in discussion. Was it because they weren't interested in agreeing with your views? If they did agree with your views, how long would the discussion last?

Theodore J. Kaczynski

3rd August 2005, 01:26

Originally posted by redstar2000+Aug 2 2005, 01:33 AM--> (redstar2000 @ Aug 2 2005, 01:33 AM)
Originally posted by [email protected]
Hey redstar, why was ahh_money_is_comfort banned? Not that I miss the whiny little twit, I was just curious.

Spamming & trolling; approved by the CC 22-13.

Theodore J. Kaczynski
My words are the most vile poison, burning a hole through lies and ignorance.

No, Teddy, your words thus far have been more like a fart in a crowded elevator than anything else.

You still have a little bit of time left to say something interesting...though I realize that may be asking too much.

The clock is moving.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif [/b]
It seems you don't want to get in a discussion with me, because all my topics are either deleted or locked. Quite an excellent opposing ideologies forum when censorship is the stench permeating the air.

redstar2000

3rd August 2005, 01:53

Originally posted by OleMarxo
Seriously, 'tho. I'm still a leftie, but I've always - ALWAYS - as long as I've been here, I know I've hated - to my guts - this existence of forum, OPPOSIN' IDEOLOGIES, merely a foolish restriction, and with RELIGION as sub-forum?

Well, you've seen what the alternative looks like at RA. Do you like that better?

I looked at that board and saw pages and pages of clutter...especially from such well-known spammers as "gaf" and "elmo" who've been repeatedly banned from this site.

Why should we waste people's time with that crap?

You know what the next step MAY be? To get rid of OI and Religion altogether. To put it in the RevLeft guidelines -- "no cappie/religious trash". And anyone who comes here with that crap is immediately banned...just like Nazis or fascists.

I'd like to see that happen, myself...perhaps in two or three years, the people on the board will be ready for that.

Look at the broad range of internet message boards; how much "debate" is really present? Conservative message boards contain debates among conservatives. Lefties are quickly banned. This is common all across the political spectrum...there is a "range" of "acceptable discourse" and views that fall outside that range are banned.

Except here...where some insist on the proposition that "we" should be "different" and "tolerate anything".

I find this position frankly incomprehensible. If I want to critique a capitalist position, I can quote from an article or editorial in The Economist...or some similar source of intelligent capitalist opinion. I don't need to "debate" with people who can neither spell nor compose coherent sentences -- much less read with comprehension and respond with relevant points.

At the very least, I think that the "tougher" we are on our political opponents who come here, the better the board will be. Perhaps if they realize that they'd "better" come up with something more than mindless clichés, they will actually put some real thought into their posts.

But I'm not holding my breath.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

Theodore J. Kaczynski

3rd August 2005, 02:24

You know what the next step MAY be? To get rid of OI and Religion altogether. To put it in the RevLeft guidelines -- "no cappie/religious trash". And anyone who comes here with that crap is immediately banned...just like Nazis or fascists.

You very may as well get rid of this forum, because under leftist vocabulary a fascist is someone who doesn't agree with Karl Marx.

I don't need to "debate" with people who can neither spell nor compose coherent sentences -- much less read with comprehension and respond with relevant points.

That is understandable. But what about the intelligent and articulate dissidents who are censored, such as myself?

I find it understandable you restrict non-Marxists to our own forum, as is your prerogative. But when you have a forum for non-Marxists that restricts dissident opinions and is a cesspool of censorship, it reflects upon your group's outlook and ability to uphold your ideologies.

Ele'ill

3rd August 2005, 03:42

You very may as well get rid of this forum, because under leftist vocabulary a fascist is someone who doesn't agree with Karl Marx.

Well keep in mind again this forum doesn't represent the left. I consider myself on the left however most of the people on this board dislike my views. Or rather they dislike me showing them the flaws in their ideas.

I enjoy viewing this board and the ideas presented however scary they may be. I'd like to know why I haven't been banned. Are my views legitimate enough? It would help me move in the right direction on this forum if I had an answer.

redstar2000

3rd August 2005, 04:48

Originally posted by Theodore J. Kaczynski+--> (Theodore J. Kaczynski)You very may as well get rid of this forum, because under leftist vocabulary a fascist is someone who doesn't agree with Karl Marx.[/b]

Nothing like having my remarks more or less immediately confirmed -- a semi-literate sentence which, when deciphered, yields a dumbass comment.

Teddy, I disagree with Karl Marx...does that make me a "fascist"?

And I disagree with Lenin almost completely.

There is actually a wide variety of left opinion here...Marxists, Leninists, Stalinists, Trotskyists, Maoists, etc. as well as several kinds of anarchists and even a few moderate socialists.

I don't deny that the word "fascist" is often used carelessly on the left -- often by newcomers who simply don't know what it means...or sometimes by liars.

But neither your latest comment nor anything you've said previously has any relationship to what the left is actually like...even at its worst.

You simply have no idea of what you are blathering about.

Mari3L
I'd like to know why I haven't been banned.

Most likely, you haven't pissed anyone off in a serious way. I generally find your posts rather "fuzzy" and "all over the place" politically...so I don't usually make an effort to read them.

I would recommend greater clarity. Tell us what you really think -- and you may be unrestricted...or banned.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

Ele'ill

3rd August 2005, 07:28

Most likely, you haven't pissed anyone off in a serious way. I generally find your posts rather "fuzzy" and "all over the place" politically...so I don't usually make an effort to read them.

I would recommend greater clarity. Tell us what you really think -- and you may be unrestricted...or banned.

If my posts are fuzzy and all over the place why did you humor me in so many of my 10 pagers?
Thus, Maybe if you bothered to read them, they would no longer be fuzzy or unclear.

If something is unclear, ask. But you didn't bother to read so you wouldn't know if it was fuzzy, or the extent of the clarity.

Thanks for the suggestions. ;)

Elect Marx

3rd August 2005, 07:37

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2005, 03:39 PM
Most of the topics they started were carried out over fifteen or so pages.
Yes; that many pages of rhetoric. Sure they might have engaged in debates at one point, intermittently.

They were obviously interested in discussion.

What would lead you to that conclusion?

From my experience; cappies are mostly interested in being "right." Not to say this is just cappies; I suspect this is an idealist phenomenon.

In fact some of the longest debates or discussions on this board were started by restricted members.

I wont say that RM's can't encourage good discussion but they don't usually participate much; quite often destroying the cohesion of their own thread.

Explain how they weren't interested in discussion.

That would be a question for them? Like I've said, they often seem to have other priorities.

Was it because they weren't interested in agreeing with your views?

That is the sort of biased ad hominem question I would expect from someone more interested in their agenda than actually discussing the issue at hand.

If they did agree with your views, how long would the discussion last?

If they agreed with me; they wouldn't use slander and distractionary tactics, so we might have a productive conversation.

Ele'ill

3rd August 2005, 17:51

Yes; that many pages of rhetoric. Sure they might have engaged in debates at one point, intermittently

It wasn't really rhetoric, it was them asking questions that had yet to be answered. Everyone on this board including yourself humored them to the debate yet they end up banned.

What would lead you to that conclusion?

From my experience; cappies are mostly interested in being "right." Not to say this is just cappies; I suspect this is an idealist phenomenon.

Not everyone that was banned or restricted for that matter was a 'cappy'.
I am very far from 'cappy' and i'm restricted. Although I have yet to be banned.

I wont say that RM's can't encourage good discussion but they don't usually participate much; quite often destroying the cohesion of their own thread.

I don't see this at all.

That would be a question for them? Like I've said, they often seem to have other priorities.

If this is such a secret question that only they can answer it how do you know of it?

That is the sort of biased ad hominem question I would expect from someone more interested in their agenda than actually discussing the issue at hand.

But in the act of answering we would be discussing the agenda at hand.

If they agreed with me; they wouldn't use slander and distractionary tactics, so we might have a productive conversation.

Yeah if they agreed with you there would be no discussion at all.

Elect Marx

3rd August 2005, 20:28

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2005, 10:51 AM

Yes; that many pages of rhetoric. Sure they might have engaged in debates at one point, intermittently

It wasn't really rhetoric, it was them asking questions that had yet to be answered. Everyone on this board including yourself humored them to the debate yet they end up banned.
To a point but they continued to discuss less and less. For the most part, they where using distractionary techniques/spam at the later part of their memberships.

T Wolves for example, was more interested in playing games then actually discussing; sure we discussed for a while but then he became weary of it and started asserting I was proven wrong because I refused to prove the basis for my entire ideology. He was quite good at derailing debates <_<

What would lead you to that conclusion?

From my experience; cappies are mostly interested in being "right." Not to say this is just cappies; I suspect this is an idealist phenomenon.

Not everyone that was banned or restricted for that matter was a 'cappy'.
I am very far from 'cappy' and i'm restricted. Although I have yet to be banned.

Well the people you brought up were. You seems to have idealist traits nonetheless (not to imply that constitutes restriction).

I wont say that RM's can't encourage good discussion but they don't usually participate much; quite often destroying the cohesion of their own thread.

I don't see this at all.

You don't see how cappies (and other reactionaries) often make a threads just to ridicule people that try to discuss the issues?

That would be a question for them? Like I've said, they often seem to have other priorities.

If this is such a secret question that only they can answer it how do you know of it?

A secret question? I didn't say anything of the sort.

That is the sort of biased ad hominem question I would expect from someone more interested in their agenda than actually discussing the issue at hand.

But in the act of answering we would be discussing the agenda at hand.

No; I was saying that your personal agenda is preempting the issue we are discussing.

If they agreed with me; they wouldn't use slander and distractionary tactics, so we might have a productive conversation.

Yeah if they agreed with you there would be no discussion at all.

That's nice; do you even think about what you post? I discuss issues with people that agree with me almost all of the time and I debate with people that are diametricaly opposed to my position but everyone has to "agree with me" on peaceable form or we wont accomplish anything.

Ele'ill

3rd August 2005, 22:59

You don't see how cappies (and other reactionaries) often make a threads just to ridicule people that try to discuss the issues?

Of course they do but we're talking about the two people that were recently banned.

That's nice; do you even think about what you post? I discuss issues with people that agree with me almost all of the time and I debate with people that are diametricaly opposed to my position but everyone has to "agree with me" on peaceable form or we wont accomplish anything.

We all have to think about what we post in order to type it onto the page. It would be impossible otherwise.

Guest1

4th August 2005, 02:32

Stop bothering.

This one's a waste of time.

I suggest you guys spend your time responding to theory or learning threads, rather than responding to this meaningless back and forth.

apathy maybe

4th August 2005, 05:41

Not all leftists are Marxist.
Not all the leftists on this board are Marxists.
Not all the leftists on this board want to ban and get rid of all the capitalists.

Personally I would like to have two stages of restriction. One, what we have now, where everyone can talk to the capitalists and ask them why and what not. Two, another forum for spammers, trolls, fascists and other people who can't have an intelligent conversation.
The first level would have a forum, like we have now.
The second level would have a forum where threads are periodically (automatically) deleted. This would in my opinion stop so many people reregistering once they have been banned. Those who have been 'banned' (restricted to the second level) would be able to entertain themselves.
No one could complain about RevLeft banning people.

Unlike redstar2000, I don't think that we should just get rid of these people, I would rather them waste their time caged in a smaller cage.