Enter the Dean


deanwins

Recommended Posts

I rarely visit RoR because the discussions aren't very bright, original or insightful. They're dull.

Anyway, I just checked out some of the latest postings there. This, from Joe, is hilarious:

First of all, I don't expect people to agree with everything Rand said (I don't). Nor do I expect them to agree with me. There is no demand for uniformity or loyalty. I don't even demand civility, even if it would be nice.

What I do look for is whether a person is adding value to the site. If they're driving people away, or destroying meaningful discussions, I prefer they leave. Even then, people have wildly different views of what is valuable. Some people love arguing with others. And there can be value there. So I try to err on the side of generosity.

Hahahahaha!

Okay, so back to this thread:

I'm smart, successful, and I'm at heart a seeker of truth... and I have a very harsh serious character. I'm not so friendly with those who prefer to redistribute wealth from the likes of me, nor want to regulate what I can do in my privacy.


I would suggest that, in cases like that, you should try to get control over your emotions and try to defeat your opponents with substance, rather than by censoring them.

I think my presence is kind of like mirror that you can't look away from, which I think can very much change the mood and cause people to identify conflicts and make things less friendly.


When I was posting on RoR, I easily "looked away" from you. I found you to have a massively exaggerated opinion of yourself, laughed about it, and then went on with my discussions with others.

I was recently revisiting some old discussions on RoR, looking for an exchange that I had had with someone else, and I came across this comic bit of obliviousness:

http://www.objectivistliving.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=14018&hl=

Would it be rude of me to suggest that you should consider learning something from it?

And I think you like to host a more warm and less serious environment.


I think it's more accurate to say that MSK doesn't like to impose on his guests, and that he allows them to set the environment and choose how they wish to converse. Sometimes it's warm, and sometimes it's serious.

I don't know if my presence on RoR has contributed towards its loss of participants.


I see that you recently censored a person and put her on moderation. If that's how you deal with guests, then I would guess that you've contributed to RoR's loss of participants.

Objectivists never learn, and they never accept realities that they don't like. The ones who run discussion forums almost always censor and ban the most interesting thinkers, and then wonder why their forums have dried up from dullness. MSK and Kat are the only current exceptions.

J

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 169
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Surely there is some truth to Jonathan's post, right?

Indeed. My post was chock-full of truth.

J

J:

How about letting the man get his ass seated and warm before you start kicking it around the joint?

I think it's more fun to not extend to Dean the courtesies that he doesn't extend to others.

J

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dean,

I liked your wedding script.

And I wish you all the happiness in the world.

From the heart (and mind).

btw - I just looked on RoR for the first time in a while and I saw this.

Dayaamm!

:)

No bad vibes from me. I'm way more amused than accusatory. You've seen up close how running a forum is not easy. It's a learned skill and an acquired taste. :)

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael, My short description of that story was that the new poster was insulting other members... and Joe was completely unresponsive for like a week. So I felt like I needed to defend his website, and I took action... but then in the end he asked me not to do that again (and I conceded). I think if Joe had said something... anything... then I wouldn't have been so defensive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think if Joe had said something... anything... then I wouldn't have been so defensive.

Dean,

That feeling comes with the territory of being in the hot seat. But, as you saw for yourself, defensiveness is not a useful quality when you're the driver and doing 300mph.

:smile:

You're a reason dude, so think of this. The prefrontal neocortex (the aware rational part of the brain) processes about 40 sensory inputs per second. The rest of the brain (the subconscious on down) processes about 20 million per second.

There's no way to deal with humans in a leadership capacity solely on the basis of the 40 and ignore those 20 million. That's not only an unattainable utopia, the math doesn't even come distant to plausibility, much less close.

In other words, you can't force people to behave on a forum, or even reason them into it on the basis of reason alone. It's like herding cats. And the Objectivist literature is not very good at teaching people how to deal with those 20 million.

Except maybe this. Start with the law of identity (especially of those 20 million) and you eventually discover that herding cats is a learned skill (and even so, the cats will never behave like cattle). Some people are naturals, but for those who are not, they can learn what to do and how to do it without coming off either as a jerk or a pushover. (I'm talking about the impression to the general public, not to this person or that.)

I, for one, am not a natural. I'm an inherent softy, so I had to learn the hard way--on my own. I did not have the privilege of being guided by a mentor. I did learn and the intellectual and social health OL is proof, but I still make mistakes.

In fact, you can't learn a skill without making mistakes. If you don't make them, you either don't need to learn or you are not doing anything.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyways... I thought there might have been more interest in my wedding ceremony script.

I thought it was lovely.

Although, I found it interesting that you promised to support "our goals" and she promised to support "your goals." There appears to be lots of support for your joint goals and for your individual goals, but none for her individual goals. On the other hand, you promised to respect her individuality, so I'm sure you have her back.

On another note, you did not contribute to my lack of interest at RoR, but I was never that active anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Deanna,

Yes, we agreed that once married, we'd from then on only be accomplishing my goals. Just kidding. No, we really meant to leave out anything "eternal" or say giving up one's will to serve the other. Not that her and I don't want our relationship to last... of course we do, and we work to make it enjoyable for the both of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael,

I was born and raised with the ethic of "turn the other cheek". (Christian ethic to let bad guys walk all over you and even offer for them to destroy more of you... supposedly that's since this life doesn't matter and you'll show the guy this and then maybe he'll accept Jesus.)

So its been a hell of a time trying to figure out how I should defend myself after I began doing so maybe after college. Generally I avoid situations that result in physical confrontation, and as for verbal, my ability and success kind of makes anyone who insults me kind of look foolish without even rebuttal. But now if I have the time I do take a moment to defend myself verbally.

Jules, Thanks for the laugh, well wishes, and compliment! :)

Deanna, Thanks for the compliment! Is it OK for me to say that its pleasant to see a beautiful woman's face while posting here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if my presence on RoR has contributed towards its loss of participants.

I see that you recently censored a person and put her on moderation. If that's how you deal with guests, then I would guess that you've contributed to RoR's loss of participants.

He DELETED her posts. They were unretrievable. And he did that outside of his duties as webmaster. Eva Matthews came to RoR as an admirer of The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged. She is, however, very young, a college senior. Moreover, both of her parents are tenured faculty. She sought to place Rand within the structure of academic scholarship. Just for one instance, she accepts "gross national product" as a valid concept. Gores called her "socialist scum."

Sure, he is a spiritual guy. Who isn't? I had a cute wedding too. My wife read from T. S. Eliot. I read from Ayn Rand.

Recently, Dean has been a cogent advocate for Bitcoins. He also speaks strongly for building families as the best means to establish a better future. But as much as I enjoy reading DMG's assertive posts, I would not give him a moral blank check.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haha Marotta...

We can count on you to bring entertainment in the form of scatter brain paragraphs, word games, and invalid information.

By the way, I successfully restored the "unretrievable DELETED" posts a few days ago, and even posted and linked to them on the Troll thread.

------------

Edit... but not to say that your posts are completely random crazyness, that all of your words are games, or that all of your information is valid. I still learn from you. Cheers, Dean

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haha Marotta...

We can count on you to bring entertainment in the form of scatter brain paragraphs, word games, and invalid information.

By the way, I successfully restored the "unretrievable DELETED" posts a few days ago, and even posted and linked to them on the Troll thread.

I don't care what it is you do at R of R. I stopped reading it years ago. Anybody who posts there has no real beef about what paterfamilias Joe Rowlands or whomever does what to them or their posts when they can come to OL and avoid that crap.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Anybody want to comment on this bitcoin story?

"Bitcoin exchange Mt. Gox disappears in blow to virtual currency."

TOKYO (Reuters) - Mt. Gox, once the world's biggest bitcoin exchange, looked to have essentially disappeared on Tuesday, with its website down, its founder unaccounted for and a Tokyo office empty bar a handful of protesters saying they had lost money investing in the virtual currency.

The digital marketplace operator, which began as a venue for trading cards, had surged to the top of the bitcoin world, but critics - from rival exchanges to burned investors - said Mt. Gox had long been lax over its security.

It was not clear what has become of the exchange, which this month halted withdrawals indefinitely after detecting "unusual activity." A global bitcoin organization referred to the exchange's "exit," while angry investors questioned whether it was still solvent.

http://news.yahoo.com/bitcoin-exchange-mt-gox-39-website-down-053727771--sector.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mtgox has been unreliable ever since the Feds shut down their dwolla bank account. Now mtgox apparently mistakenly gave away all their customers deposits due to a bug in their own software.

I am excited to see what happens with the new ATMs and increasing market acceptance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now mtgox apparently mistakenly gave away all their customers deposits due to a bug in their own software.

Dean:

Did you actually send a message from your obviously intelligent brain, to your fingers and directed them to type:

"...apparently mistakenly gave away all their customers deposits..."

A...

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