Lazy Fair City

[Jonathan]

This post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore posts by Jonathan. View it anyway?

This post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore posts by Mikee. View it anyway?

This post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore posts by Jonathan. View it anyway?

This post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore posts by Mikee. View it anyway?

This post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore posts by Jonathan. View it anyway?

- game over -

Dayamn! What did Mikee do? He stood up for the Chief Justice of Philosophy of Law. And how does His Honour reward Mikee? By sentencing him to "ignore"!

Hee hee hee, haw haw hee haw; chortle, chortle, snort, guffaw!!!

J

[Brant Gaede]

It would seem this thread is once again appropriately in the HUMOR section.

Sort of.

There seem to be two active dynamics and one implied but not much if any used.

There is Wolf kind of trying to explain LFC and his role in it. But this is from the inside out, not from outside in as in a proper objective analysis.

There is Jonathan who seems to want information to jump up and down on such as LFC and any who had anything to do with it.

That's the two, essentially. Others wander in and out.

The third would be objective analysis and evaluation based on data, some of which is likely missing and not available. Who cares?

Ironically, the party that might care is Jonathan, but he's stuck hitting the turtle on the shell, chortling for him to come out and get whapped on its soft parts. The turtle has the data but hasn't done much with it and is disinclined for all the whapping to provide much more.

--Brant

[Mikee]

Okay, now I understand. Jonathan is the idiot savant of mental illness. He cannot be surpassed or controlled, he is a force of nature.

Remember folks:

Edited to be clear.

[Peter]

Brant wrote: But this is from the inside out, not from outside in as in a proper objective analysis.
end quote

I was hoping the readers of this thread would comment on the text of Wolf’s “The Freeman's Constitution.” The idea of starting from scratch or of starting over is the siren’s song I hear from Wolf but without music or lyrics – he is an organ Grinder cranking out The Carnival of Venice. And I am not saying anyone here is a dancing monkey. As a counter example to TFC remember the arguments, brilliance, and coalitions formed during the beginning of The United States? It was compromising but based on a decent rough draft. Our Constitution has the ability to be perfected. It has been over 230 since the Constitution was written and over a decade since the final draft of The Freeman’s Constitution was written, so isn’t it time to get them right? Which is a better constitution? TFC or The U.S. Constitution? It's No contest.

From TFC: Five or more attorneys, acting on behalf of ten or more natural persons, may convene a court of first instance by electing one of their number to serve as a law judge . . . .
end quote

I am guessing this election would be using the first people to settle in Lazy Fair City. That sounds like the Oligarchy in The Hunger Games. What happens after the first group of cherry picked citizens? What happens when those LESSER folk decide to go there? You know who I mean. Immigrants. To work the fields and kitchens of the elites? The ignorant or uncaring second and third wave of immigrants?

From TFC: To make these provisions effective, a majority of the first twenty signatories to this Constitution shall assemble or correspond for the purpose of nominating one or more members of the first Supreme Court . . .
end quote

What happens when rebellious teens come of age and decide the hell with Pop’s friends in high places. Eff the Man! If Wolf would simply print a passage on any thread and ask for comments, and then refute them, then that would be more objective.
Peter

[Jules Troy]

I like to take pictures, does that help?

[Brant Gaede]

I like to take pictures, does that help?

Yes--for the pathologist.

--Brant

[Jonathan]

It would seem this thread is once again appropriately in the HUMOR section.

Sort of.

There seem to be two active dynamics and one implied but not much if any used.

There is Wolf kind of trying to explain LFC and his role in it. But this is from the inside out, not from outside in as in a proper objective analysis.

There is Jonathan who seems to want information to jump up and down on such as LFC and any who had anything to do with it.

That's the two, essentially. Others wander in and out.

The third would be objective analysis and evaluation based on data, some of which is likely missing and not available. Who cares?

Ironically, the party that might care is Jonathan, but he's stuck hitting the turtle on the shell, chortling for him to come out and get whapped on its soft parts. The turtle has the data but hasn't done much with it and is disinclined for all the whapping to provide much more.

--Brant

I've gotten a lot of information that I wanted to know. It's been a successful conversation.

As for the continued characterization by people here that I'm a horribly nasty meanie, I think I've actually been pretty generous considering what I and perhaps only a few others have learned about "Wolf," and some of the things that he has or has not done. In the bigger picture context that most of you are missing, and which I'm being very kind in not revealing and publicly connecting to "Wolf's" real name, you and he should be praising me for my tolerance and mercy.

J

[moralist]

Jonathan writes:

As for the continued characterization by people here that I'm a horribly nasty meanie...

First you make up words nobody said, and then you say you aren't the words nobody said.

That's dishonest, Jonathan.

I've said you have an ugly attitude and that it's an obstacle to success in life because it poisons relationships.

Greg

[Ellen Stuttle]

This post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore posts by Jonathan. View it anyway?

This post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore posts by Mikee. View it anyway?

This post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore posts by Jonathan. View it anyway?

This post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore posts by Mikee. View it anyway?

This post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore posts by Jonathan. View it anyway?

- game over -

Dayamn! What did Mikee do? He stood up for the Chief Justice of Philosophy of Law. And how does His Honour reward Mikee? By sentencing him to "ignore"!

Hee hee hee, haw haw hee haw; chortle, chortle, snort, guffaw!!!

J

This post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore posts by Mikee.

Dude, you won, remember?

Now I remember why I have Mikee's posts hidden.

[....]

Wolf responded to a few of Mikee's posts subsequently to putting Mikee on "Ignore," but he doesn't indicate that he ever dis-Ignored, so possibly he wasn't aware that Mike was defending him - or at least objecting to Jonathan's attacks - on this thread.

Ellen

[Brant Gaede]

Uh, why do I need "tolerance and mercy," Jonathan? And Wolf should praise you for not coming down on his head with a 2 x 4--if that's what you've got? You sound heroic in your struggle. For me it would just be an unremarkable courtesy. Grace is never a sweat. If I screw up I try--usually--to go back and fix it up. I don't deny some past purblindedness on my part and there must have been some things I never became aware of, but we are what we do and do what we are. I have left dead people behind me. If you call 911 and that's the result--I did that--you'll never get over it. It doesn't matter if you did the right thing, all considered at the time. I joined the army. I enlisted for photography school. Then I got all romantic and became a killer medic and almost got killed--for nothing. Pride and pain. Sugar and salt. Basically you need to spit, not swallow, but swallow is it. I still want to do something(s) good and remarkable with my life and not just be congratulated for public appearances or an objective examination of my personal c.v. For almost 70 years--since I consciously remember starting thinking--I've lived an heroic life, of sorts--everybody needs to--and I have no idea of ramping it up or down for it's all consequential to choices I make which in themselves are not. We all get trapped in personal matrixes that represent variable ratios of both comfort and discomfort and maybe we need to regularly shed them as if they were exoskeletons. We can even get trapped by our material possessions or too much dwelling on the past. So, what's so heroic about me now? Nothing much. I've put off mourning to deal with something else. It's hard to know pain and not do something about it, especially if you know what you have to do in the particulars, even though you also know you will be doing that in the near future.

I'm happy you have the luxury of chasing after Wolf for the time and effort involved, but my own rifle does not go snap, crackle and pop.

--Brant

[9thdoctor]

I'm going to be crying buckets when all these Wolf-intensive threads die out...

[Ellen Stuttle]

I've gotten a lot of information that I wanted to know. It's been a successful conversation.

As for the continued characterization by people here that I'm a horribly nasty meanie, I think I've actually been pretty generous considering what I and perhaps only a few others have learned about "Wolf," and some of the things that he has or has not done. In the bigger picture context that most of you are missing, and which I'm being very kind in not revealing and publicly connecting to "Wolf's" real name, you and he should be praising me for my tolerance and mercy.

J

The "if you knew what I know" excuse. But we don't know. And so what if you know things we don't know? Does your knowledge justify the use of distortive caricaturing as a method of attack (and of defense - see Greg's #383).

Ellen

[Wolf DeVoon]

I've gotten a lot of information that I wanted to know. It's been a successful conversation.

As for the continued characterization by people here that I'm a horribly nasty meanie, I think I've actually been pretty generous considering what I and perhaps only a few others have learned about "Wolf," and some of the things that he has or has not done. In the bigger picture context that most of you are missing, and which I'm being very kind in not revealing and publicly connecting to "Wolf's" real name, you and he should be praising me for my tolerance and mercy.

J

The "if you knew what I know" excuse. But we don't know. And so what if you know things we don't know? Does your knowledge justify the use of distortive caricaturing as a method of attack (and of defense - see Greg's #383_/url])?

Ellen

Excuse me, Ellen, I have something to say to Jonathan.

Alright, asshole, bring it. My real name is Alan von Altendorf. You're still ignored and always will be, because you can't think, won't think, probably don't know how. It takes a special sort of blank-out to believe what you're doing is proper.

[Brant Gaede]

My reply deletion.

Collateral damage.

--Brant

[syrakusos]

Ignoring Brant...

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Alan,

There are lots of people walking around with my name

So I like both your names.

Why can't I have a cool name like that?

Michael

[Jules Troy]

Perhaps it is time to step back. You are not Michael Moeller attack dog material J.

[Brant Gaede]

Ignoring Brant...

Don't tangle with me. Telling me I'm full of shit isn't tangling with me. Only implying I am is smarmy and cowardly. You specialize in these drive bys. This one is especially cheap. Go back to R of R.

--Brant

[Jules Troy]

Lol Brant, he probably only drops by as a reprieve from being bitch slapped by Steve Wolfer. MEM is as nutty as Loopy Janet.

[Mikee]

Ignoring Brant...

Don't tangle with me. Telling me I'm full of shit isn't tangling with me. Only implying I am is smarmy and cowardly. You specialize in these drive bys. This one is especially cheap. Go back to R of R.

--Brant

Brant,

It was humor directed at the irony of putting someone on "ignore" and then not being able to ignore them. MEM posted on this subject before. You deleted your previous post so I can't make a better connection to what you said there. Michael probably thought you'd make a different connection and get a laugh from you.

[Brant Gaede]

Ignoring Brant...

Don't tangle with me. Telling me I'm full of shit isn't tangling with me. Only implying I am is smarmy and cowardly. You specialize in these drive bys. This one is especially cheap. Go back to R of R.

--Brant

Brant,

It was humor directed at the irony of putting someone on "ignore" and then not being able to ignore them. MEM posted on this subject before. You deleted your previous post so I can't make a better connection to what you said there. Michael probably thought you'd make a different connection and get a laugh from you.

You're probably right. I still can't feel that. He got me by surprise from the rear, so to say. When it literally happens to me in real life I always spontaneously explode--violently. Then it immediately subsides as I figure it out. This is the first time I can recall it happening out of words only. That reaction is still going on although not as badly. There is no way I can look at Michael and evaluate what's going on by other data. Since he only comes and quickly goes he could have interjected himself into a situation he had no proper understanding of. It was like he walked into an operating room I was doing surgery in and destroyed my sterile field. I always end up looking foolish when this happens. I don't know why I'm like this. It might be from a mild form of PTSD, ironically not from Vietnam.

There is also the problem of this thread being in the HUMOR section. That may have given Michael the idea of light-heartedness when hardly anyone is being that way. I admit there is too much incongruity between Michael's great brain-power and what I thought he did.

--Brant

continuing to calm down

[moralist]

Brant writes:

There is also the problem of this thread being in the HUMOR section.

I think you're funny.

Greg

[Brant Gaede]

Yeah, funny haha and funny strange.

--Brantzo

I swing both ways--I'm bi

[Brant Gaede]

Now I'm starting to feel guilty about blowing up on Michael. Calling on Rand's dictum of not accepting an unearned guilt isn't helping. That's worrying. It usually works. (If you're good at rationalization it can also work for earned guilt.)

--Brant

I may be reduced to my John Wayne core: "Never apologize. It's a sign of weakness."

that's better than blubbering at Michael's feet begging for forgiveness

[Jules Troy]

I wouldn't, he is an asshole.