Eva Mathews


Brant Gaede

Recommended Posts

What are some of the published papers you helped your mother with (preferably online, but print will do)? Did she credit you? Academic papers usually put acknowledgements in an epilogue or in the first footnote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 96
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

On my profile page, 'male' seems to be the default, as is 'Singapore' for time zone'. Perhaps some noticed that, to? So am I Malay or ethnic Chinese?

In any case, these errors bunch nicely with my spelling as for viable cause: i'm always in a rush & simply don't bother to correct what's otherwise a 'social' (non-academic) endeavor.

In this way, among others, I'm a typical, slobby student: jeans, little makeup, 5-6 slender, inter-mural soccer (all-state high school!).

I'm not really 'looking' for another steadyguy, as I enjoy the freedom after a two-year relationship.

My special side is having been raised a college brat (particle physics, psych) & having tested 3-400 level college apt in math at 10. Last year I did teach theoretical math, but this year I'm working with mom in experimental psych. I padooddle the numbers, of course.

My intellectual extras do include philo, but also lit and, now, anthropology.

My take on Libertarianism is somewhat minoritarian, but actually not by much. Lowering taxes has nothing to do with freedom, rather, the practicality of freeing more money for the private sector.

Consequently, I'm hard on Rand because a misstated philosophical solution is a fly in the soup, as far as realistic political action is concerned.

I think that maybe we should ask Ashleigh Volland what she thinks of your using her image and pretending that it's yours.

J

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On my profile page, 'male' seems to be the default, as is 'Singapore' for time zone'. Perhaps some noticed that, to? So am I Malay or ethnic Chinese?

In any case, these errors bunch nicely with my spelling as for viable cause: i'm always in a rush & simply don't bother to correct what's otherwise a 'social' (non-academic) endeavor.

I think that maybe we should ask Ashleigh Volland what she thinks of your using her image and pretending that it's yours.

J

Caught red-handed. I did notice that at some point she described herself as having brown hair and blue eyes. And Ashleigh Volland has neither.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ms. Volland's (now Mrs. Whitmore) myspace photo page has an image of her playing soccer, which is apparently why "Eva" came up with the specific lie that she ("Eva") plays "inter-mural" soccer and was all-state in high school. Perhaps "Eva" was planning on reserving the option of posting Volland/Whitmore's soccer image as further proof that "Eva" was a real person?

J

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does Mrs Whitmore née Volland know you are using her photo in place of your own face, Eva?

Here is a section from the Rules and Regs of Objectivist Living:

6. We discourage pseudonyms. Please register and post under your name. If you are using a display name, please enter your real name into your profile. Members who conceal their identity from the site owners could become subject to removal. Although you may send your name to the site owners privately via personal message, as a courtesy, we prefer the name to be in the profile so people know who they are speaking with online.

7. We want to see you! Please upload a photo of yourself, (headshot preferred) to use as an avatar through your Control Panel (My Controls). Animated gifs are very distracting and have been disabled by the software.

Pseudonyms (and made up monikers) are in practice not harried by the list owners, nor are those of us who use alternative pics to represent us (as I use poppies). This is probably because Michael and Kat know us through years of OL posting.

But using someone else's visual ID marker seems to be deceptive. Having adopted an avatar that belongs to another person is a mistake, an error in judgement that only makes your identity more mysterious and much more subject to doubt.

I suggest you come clean on using Volland/Whitmore's face as your own.

************************

Or not. The cleaver has come down, enforced the OL contract, voided your ability to participate. This is rather an object lesson in how to get banned in one easy step.

Meanwhile, over at a former sister forum, the only one unbanned seems to be the Emperor of SOLO. You might try to set up and post over there, Eva, one on one. Bear in mind that SOLO demands a real name and picture also (or, The Doug Bandler Show).

It's not the end, Eva, but a new beginning. So many doors fly open!

Edited by william.scherk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ms. Volland's (now Mrs. Whitmore) myspace photo page has an image of her playing soccer, which is apparently why "Eva" came up with the specific lie that she ("Eva") plays "inter-mural" soccer and was all-state in high school. Perhaps "Eva" was planning on reserving the option of posting Volland/Whitmore's soccer image as further proof that "Eva" was a real person?

J

The Volland (Whitmore) photos might also be the source for "Sissy" and the ex-boyfriend.

Regarding the Darren hypothesis: Darren is good at statistics - especially at using hokey statistics as purported support for his Intelligent Design thesis.

At any rate, I'm glad to have "Eva" gone so I don't have to keep considering whether to address the scientific snarls "Eva" was producing.

Ellen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Volland (Whitmore) photos might also be the source for "Sissy" and the ex-boyfriend.

And the middle photo could be the source of, "Last year I did teach theoretical math..."

Regarding the Darren hypothesis: Darren is good at statistics - especially at using hokey statistics as purported support for his Intelligent Design thesis.

At any rate, I'm glad to have "Eva" gone so I don't have to keep considering whether to address the scientific snarls "Eva" was producing.

Ellen

It was all a lot of pretty bad bluffing and posing, and I think that it quickly became clear to most people here that there was no need to take her seriously. Even without the visual identity fraud, the game was up, and it was becoming very easy to identify how to instantly cut to the chase and call her bluffs.

J

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

I just wrote some thoughts about the remote control mentality of the young. (I was addressing one of the young intelligent new members here.)

I have a theory about the younger generation and a remote control perspective. If you don't like a show, you push a button and change the channel. If you don't like one group of people, you push a button and get in touch with another. If you don't like the temperature, you push a button and make it colder or hotter. If you don't like what you're eating, you push a button and get something else. And so on. This is the way you've grown up and it's the only reality you've known.

But some things don't work that way--like wars. And I see this cause a lot of stress and impatience in the younger people. It does in my generation, too, but it's different. The older people oppose or support wars because of long-held convictions (even when at odds with each other). They get really pissed off when those convictions are violated. The younger folks, from what I perceive in the media, get irritated because long-term problems don't go away quickly. They get bored, but the damn thing is still there the next day. And that irks them.

This is the only reality this generation has known. And it is actually a form of learned helplessness. I've been talking about this remote control mentality in the culture for a while, but the idea of linking it to learned helplessness never occurred to me until just now. Probably because I just wrote about learned helplessness.

Researchers have been shocking dogs (and God knows what else) to test this. Essentially they teach a dog that nothing it can do will avoid random shocks, then later put it in a box where all it has to do is jump over a partition of some kind right in front of it and the shocks will stop. But the dog just lays down and whimpers. Other dogs that are taught that shocks can be stopped by pushing a lever, or other ways, will jump over the partition immediately when placed in the new box.

Thus, in this case, teaching the dog helplessness was done by "forced association," but later, after the learning happened, when there was one easy alternative available that was not forced that ended the suffering, the dog didn't take action.

All you have to do is morph this out to human relationships and see the real evil that can be done by it. (Good, too, when dealing with real, but not apparent, dangers, but I don't want to get too nitpicky at this point.)

The standard story told in marketing circles to illustrate learned helplessness is about circus elephants. When they are small, the owners fix a rope or chain to one of their legs and attach it to a stake in the ground. The calf cannot budge the stake. After an elephant grows up and gets huge, it will no longer try to leave the confines of the stake, even though it could easily pull it up just by walking away. The story goes that elephants in this condition have died in tent fires, burning to death rather than simply walking away from the danger.

I'm pretty sure this story has had some morphing of its own over the years, but it persists because it is such a great metaphor for limiting beliefs (i.e., learned helplessness for humans).

If you think in terms of a positive stimulus, the nonstop instant gratification that results in the remote control mentality is a form of learned helplessness.

...

Good observations. I wonder if that's what is on in those old Westerns when the cowboy rides up to the hitching post, throws the reigns over the cross bar, maybe looping them once, walks off, and the horse stays there. I'm sure the horse could pull free quite easily, but doesn't.

Also, you should really watch this:

Darrell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Goodbye, Eva.

Michael

And goodbye (worse* than) nothing.

Only Victor Pross was worse*--that is, the worst of the worst (if we leave Hetlor, Stolun, Moa and Pal Put out of this)

--Brant

*some day Michael might figure me out, but I think that will take a God-like intelligence

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read about a third of the 415 "Matthews" ("Eva Matthews") posts on RoR (link to the user-information page). I started with about the first thirty and then read samples from the subsequent posts.

My thought that the poster might be Darren Wrede on a lark doesn't pan out. Too many discrepancies of interests, opinions, angle of approach, and style.

Possibly the poster is this person whom Peter Reidy found when doing a search on stasi phanomen - here and here for Peter's posts pertaining to "former member" "Tom" from the Atlanta Objectivist Meet-Up board.

Ellen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Possibly the poster is this person whom Peter Reidy found when doing a search on stasi phanomen - here and here for Peter's posts pertaining to "former member" "Tom" from the Atlanta Objectivist Meet-Up board.

Eva, who said she was 20 years old, is "Tom"? I'm skeptical. Tom is a good speller and wrote,"I'm rather well-versed in Philosophy, having taken honors at London School of Economics far back in the seventies."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eva, who said she was 20 years old, is "Tom"? I'm skeptical. Tom is a good speller and wrote,"I'm rather well-versed in Philosophy, having taken honors at London School of Economics far back in the seventies."

Big deal, "Eva" said she's 20. "Eva" said a lot of stuff which doesn't add up, and Tom's claiming to be well-versed in philosophy doesn't mean he is. Peter Reidy was non-impressed.

Also note that "Eva," albeit with sloppy spelling and hasty manner, was making the same claims on RoR re Greek philosophers which Tom made, and that economics was a major focus of the "Matthews" posts.

ADD: Note, I didn't say "Eva" is "Tom," just "possibly."

Ellen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eva, who said she was 20 years old, is "Tom"? I'm skeptical. Tom is a good speller and wrote,"I'm rather well-versed in Philosophy, having taken honors at London School of Economics far back in the seventies."

Big deal, "Eva" said she's 20. "Eva" said a lot of stuff which doesn't add up, and Tom's claiming to be well-versed in philosophy doesn't mean he is. Peter Reidy was non-impressed.

Also note that "Eva," albeit with sloppy spelling and hasty manner, was making the same claims on RoR re Greek philosophers which Tom made, and that economics was a major focus of the "Matthews" posts.

ADD: Note, I didn't say "Eva" is "Tom," just "possibly."

Ellen

A Tom boy?

--Brant

but no Eva Peron (I knew Eva Peron, I slept with Eva Peron and Eva's no Eva Peron. [i knocked on her door and she did not answer. Eva Peron flung open her door, grabbed me by my shirt and threw me inside.])

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And here I thought you guys would have gotten tired of playing Kick the Corpse by now...

Greg :wink:

Boys just want to have fun! (Girls too!)

--Brant

the "Corpse" was never alive in the first place--just nothing was nothing (feeding frenzy?)

that's what sock puppets get from me--there was a huge amount of residual respect I've always had for other banned posters such as Victor Pross or Seymourblogger and even Philip Coats as irritating as he was--but not this guy/gal/thingie--not once was there the slightest courtesy of someone saying I'm a real person or the real person behind this persona with the slightest amount of sincerity or believability--not once, just more of the same "pretentious twaddle"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And here I thought you guys would have gotten tired of playing Kick the Corpse by now...

Greg :wink:

Boys just want to have fun! (Girls too!)

--Brant

the "Corpse" was never alive in the first place--just nothing was nothing (feeding frenzy?)

that's what sock puppets get from me--there was a huge amount of residual respect I've always had for other banned posters such as Victor Pross or Seymourblogger and even Philip Coats as irritating as he was--but not this guy/gal/thingie--not once was there the slightest courtesy of someone saying I'm a real person or the real person behind this persona with the slightest amount of sincerity or believability--not once, just more of the same "pretentious twaddle"

I totally understand, Brant. It naturally rubs everyone the wrong way when they're lied to because that person is saying:

"You are not even worth my telling the truth to you."

Greg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boys just want to have fun! (Girls too!)

This girl (a) wanted to know if "Eva" was a Darren game: (b) was and is interested by some of what the poster was saying, despite the poster's general incoherence and frequent hot air, and even thinks that there are some issues on which the poster was right.

Ellen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boys just want to have fun! (Girls too!)

This girl (a) wanted to know if "Eva" was a Darren game: (b) was and is interested by some of what the poster was saying, despite the poster's general incoherence and frequent hot air, and even thinks that there are some issues on which the poster was right.

Ellen

I wouldn't disagree. Why don't you do some recaps on a new thread for a continuing basis for discusion and for us to consider the poster substantively without animadversion upon same? You read a lot of her stuff on R of R and might fold in some of that.

--Brant

my guess it's the more scientific items

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eva, who said she was 20 years old, is "Tom"? I'm skeptical. Tom is a good speller and wrote,"I'm rather well-versed in Philosophy, having taken honors at London School of Economics far back in the seventies."

Big deal, "Eva" said she's 20. "Eva" said a lot of stuff which doesn't add up, and Tom's claiming to be well-versed in philosophy doesn't mean he is. Peter Reidy was non-impressed.

Also note that "Eva," albeit with sloppy spelling and hasty manner, was making the same claims on RoR re Greek philosophers which Tom made, and that economics was a major focus of the "Matthews" posts.

ADD: Note, I didn't say "Eva" is "Tom," just "possibly."

Ellen

No big deal intended. I only said I was skeptical. Another hypothesis -- more plausible to me -- is that Eva copied from Tom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boys just want to have fun! (Girls too!)

This girl ...and even thinks that there are some issues on which the poster was right.

Ellen

Heh, Guessed you might, Ellen. You didn't recognize your own criticism of Rand fed back at us?

Natch, you think she was right!

When she-he mooted AR's conceptual "opposites" (citing altruism/egoism, quite wrongly) - I thought immediately of you. It crossed my mind then, and I'm more sure now, he-she read of it first in the older thread amd 'borrowed' your idea. Like some otherwise intelligent people, paradoxically unoriginal and dependent on others' thinking and conclusions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now