News: Goddess of the Market by Jennifer Burns

[Philip Coates]

Dear Mr. Pericles,

It is a pleasure to have such a fine example of our public educational system join us here at Objectionist Loving. You are a real catch as an addition to our stellar list of luminaries.

If you happen to see Roger E. Bissell on your travels, can you tell him it's safe to come home again? Malappropriately, he is known to be a [sic] flounder and to wear women's underwear.

Sincerely,

Dramatic Princess Schoolmarm

Edited February 7, 2010 by Philip Coates

[Philip Coates]

I also have it on good authority from James Valliant that he also writes long-windedly on two key areas of philosophy - Metamucil and Epistolary - which are underemphasized here on Objectively Litigious.

[9thdoctor]

I may be a drama queen, but I don't have petticoats so I can't flounce.

The only place I can remember seeing the word flounce, outside of here and SLOP, is Tigger’s song from Winnie the Pooh. Definition time, from Merriam Webster:

intransitive verb

a to move with exaggerated jerky or bouncy motions: also to move so as to draw attention to oneself

b to go with sudden determination

noun

a strip of fabric attached by one edge; also : a wide ruffle

...

It seems you’re trying to evoke the noun meaning with your reference to petticoats, yet you used the word as a verb. Tut-tut. If you wanted the noun you should have written: “…so I can’t be a flounce”. But it’s ok, we’re all accustomed to making allowances for your faulty prose.

Make up your mind which feminine epithet you are going to stick me with. Either I'm a drama queen or a schoolmarm. Choose.

Whichever one inspires you to cut the crap, to live and let live. No more essays about how other’s contributions aren’t up to your standards, you've hit that note too many times. Some people think your contributions are long winded and prententious. Admission’s free, and no one has to visit all the exhibits.

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="

name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="

type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object> Edited February 7, 2010 by Ninth Doctor

[Philip Coates]

> No more essays about how other’s contributions aren’t up to your standards [ND]

They're not -my- standards, they're objective standards that civilized people follow. Popular and mass-media websites enforce on reader comments.

Civility and not calling your opponents evil monsters is as basic as not pooping on the floor. And you really can't get anywhere until you address and remedy the excrement on the floor first.

> you've hit that note too many times

Actually, no I haven't - I probably erupt with it once every six months and then it drags on because people try to get around it, claim it doesn't apply to them, argue against the obvious. Sometimes you have to rub the dogs' nose in the poop repeatedly before he gets it.

You're the one who may be getting too repetitious with your claim that it's inappropriate for me to repeatedly call for civility.

> Some people think your contributions are long winded and prententious.

So what? I'm not addressing them. My posts are usually well-written. Unlike many posters, I actually edit them. And there is a big difference between writing a post that's too long and writing one whose point is to -- talk about repetition -- constantly accuse one's bitterest opponents of evil or dishonesty or seeking to become a big shot in the Oist movement.

"Live and let live" applies to whether or not one likes brocolli or lima beans, not to character assassination, illwill, sliming people, and dragging conversations through the gutter.

Just be grateful all my posts are not on this subject - that I post on literature, language, politics, anthropology, etc - and support the points I'm making instead of whining that I've said them before.

If you want to complain about posters, why not complain about the offense not about the person who complains about the offense?

If repetitiousness were a cardinal offense, most of the posters on this list would have to become silent.

Edited February 7, 2010 by Philip Coates

[Selene]

> No more essays about how other's contributions aren't up to your standards [ND]

They're not -my- standards, they're objective standards that civilized people follow. Popular and mass-media websites enforce on reader comments.

Civility and not calling your opponents evil monsters is as basic as not pooping on the floor. And you really can't get anywhere until you address and remedy the excrement on the floor first.

> you've hit that note too many times

Actually, no I haven't - I probably erupt with it once every six months and then it drags on because people try to get around it, claim it doesn't apply to them, argue against the obvious. Sometimes you have to rub the dogs' nose in the poop repeatedly before he gets it.

You're the one who may be getting too repetitious with your claim that it's inappropriate for me to repeatedly call for civility.

> Some people think your contributions are long winded and prententious.

So what? I'm not addressing them. My posts are usually well-written. Unlike many posters, I actually edit them. And there is a big difference between writing a post that's too long and writing one whose point is to -- talk about repetition -- constantly accuse one's bitterest opponents of evil or dishonesty or seeking to become a big shot in the Oist movement.

"Live and let live" applies to whether or not one likes brocolli or lima beans, not to character assassination, illwill, sliming people, and dragging conversations through the gutter.

Just be grateful all my posts are not on this subject - that I post on literature, language, politics, anthropology, etc - and support the points I'm making instead of whining that I've said them before.

If you want to complain about posters, why not complain about the offense not about the person who complains about the offense?

If repetitiousness were a cardinal offense, most of the posters on this list would have to become silent.

Phil:

After you finish wiping your nose and whining about...

"What you see around you is people who are unable to love one another..." and listening to this beautiful song...

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=eZGWQauQOAQ

You can go to the Game Day thread and make your picks, then either...

or sit in the dark and curse.

Adam

Awaits your explosive response

[9thdoctor]

Phil,

...

I think you're cute.

I agree, and it’s such fun to yank his chain.

> you've hit that note too many times

Actually, no I haven't - I probably erupt with it once every six months and then it drags on because people try to get around it, claim it doesn't apply to them, argue against the obvious.

Perhaps you don’t recognize what note is overplayed. And a tin ear is no sin. You just used Pericles’s obvious prank post as an excuse to dump on the whole forum and its “stellar list of luminaries”. The problem isn’t too many calls for civility, its your condescension, which shows up in various ways. I don’t have time now to list them, besides MSK’s dressed you down pretty thouroughly on other threads, so I’ll leave it there.

"Live and let live" applies to whether or not one likes brocolli or lima beans, not to character assassination, illwill, sliming people, and dragging conversations through the gutter.

Live and let live does apply to whether a contributor tends to make one line posts, or write whole essays. Sometimes a brief “snarky” (and “laconic” would be a nicer way of putting it) post illuminates the issue at hand better than a treatise. It’s certainly quicker.

One note I've maybe hit too much, but here I go again anyway: Phil, ahem, the quote function?

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Dear Mr. Pericles,

It is a pleasure to have such a fine example of our public educational system join us here at Objectionist Loving.

Phil,

That is one hell of a nickname.

All your finger-wagging sins are hereby forgiven.

Hell, for that one, they are pre-forgiven even before you commit them.

(overcome with emotion and wiping a tear...)

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Eye my self hate influence pedaling. Won day knot long a go, eye was peddling my bicycle over two the Burke Lee campus too get a cup of coffee at the student coffee shop when watt two my wandering I should a peer butt a common pedaler sitting behind a table on Telegraph Avenue trying too cell influence two passing students. Eye was sew shocked eye all most wrecked my bike. Sum thing kneads two bee dun.

Distractedly,

Roland Pericles

Row Lunde,

Wayhal cum to OH HELL.

Wii arf laddered with the prezun ss of satcha Loom 'n ARI.

My Cool

[merjet]

Row Lunde,

Wayhal cum to OH HELL.

Wii arf laddered with the prezun ss of satcha Loom 'n ARI.

My Cool

There is a trait of Row Land Pericles' writing that yew a parent lea have knot yet noticed.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Meer Lan,

Ume ene dat other 23 pohsts on the say meye pee?

Michael

[9thdoctor]

Ume ene dat other 23 pohsts on the say meye pee?

?

?

.

I’d better provide the intended translation:

So Pericles is a nom de plume? Greek? Surely not from our country.

…

I had free time, I’m just not into football.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Dennis,

Think Atlantis...

If you don't know what that means, I'll leave it up to Roland to see if he wants to explain.

It's an old insider joke that I'm not supposed to be a part of.

btw - I just looked at my own stuff and it is too hard. After standing back and letting it cool off, I came back and was disappointed to see that it fell flat (to me). I think I went too far for the humor to work. So here are the translations:

Row Lunde, (Roland,)

Wayhal cum to OH HELL. (Welcome to OL.)

Wii arf laddered with the prezun ss of satcha Loom 'n ARI. (We are flattered with the presence of such a luminary.)

My Cool (Michael)

Meer Lan, (Merlin,)

Ume ene dat other 23 pohsts on the say meye pee? (You mean that other 23 posts on the same IP?)

Michael

[Philip Coates]

> All your finger-wagging sins are hereby forgiven. [MSK]

GREAT! In that case, I'll try to sin even more often

> Hell, for that one, they are pre-forgiven even before you commit them.

Even better...

I think I missed my calling. I could have been a Catholic nun, Sister Mary Philip, then I could have had a golden ruler [pun uninteded] to rap knuckles with all day in class.

I just LUV to squash people and crush any healthy anarchic individuality out of them....

Edited February 8, 2010 by Philip Coates

[jeffrey smith]

I may be a drama queen, but I don't have petticoats so I can't flounce.

The only place I can remember seeing the word flounce, outside of here and SLOP, is Tigger’s song from Winnie the Pooh. Definition time, from Merriam Webster:

intransitive verb

a to move with exaggerated jerky or bouncy motions: also to move so as to draw attention to oneself

b to go with sudden determination

noun

a strip of fabric attached by one edge; also : a wide ruffle

...

It seems you’re trying to evoke the noun meaning with your reference to petticoats, yet you used the word as a verb. Tut-tut. If you wanted the noun you should have written: “…so I can’t be a flounce”. But it’s ok, we’re all accustomed to making allowances for your faulty prose.

Make up your mind which feminine epithet you are going to stick me with. Either I'm a drama queen or a schoolmarm. Choose.

Whichever one inspires you to cut the crap, to live and let live. No more essays about how other’s contributions aren’t up to your standards, you've hit that note too many times. Some people think your contributions are long winded and prententious. Admission’s free, and no one has to visit all the exhibits.

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="

name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="

type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

I've heard "flounce" used as a verb for many years. Amusingly, given that Mr. Perigo uses it so routinely, it almost always referred to certain behaviors associated with overtly gay men.

Jeffrey S.

[jeffrey smith]

I had free time, I’m just not into football.

Could be worse. I live about five miles from the stadium.

Can you spell "traffic jam"?

Jeffrey S.

(Who Care!)

[Jonathan]

Sum thing kneads two bee dun.

Role end,

It wood bee a waist of you're thyme too try. Your knot going too change Burke Lee and the influence pedaling their.

Next thyme, ewe mite want two peddle over too Sauce Alito (ewe can take you're bike on the fairy). Theirs an ordnance against influence pedaling they're, and yule bee Abel two end joy you're cough fee inn piece.

Buy the whey, its good two halve ewe back. Long thyme, know sea.

J

[Robert Campbell]

Harry Binswanger has issued a blast at Jennifer Burns' Harvard magazine article, on Ayn Rand's 1962 appearance at an aesthetics conference.

The item was reposted on one of his followers' sites, supposedly with his permission:

http://www.gatorcoun...997&postcount=1

Dr. Binswanger claims that all of the public hostility on that fateful day came from John Hospers, and none from Ayn Rand.

Well, as it happens, I was present at that talk. I was 18 years old,

had only been introduced to Objectivism 7 months earlier, and was

entirely unfamiliar with ideas about decorum and moral sanction.

Nonetheless, I was stunned by the hostile manner of Hospers'

comments. I remember, verbatim how he began one of his

"comments": "Surely," he said in a really sneering way, "Miss

Rand doesn't expect us to believe that a painting of a landscape can

[here I'm unsure of the exact wording] convey a view about man's

relation to existence."

Hospers concluded his attack, then stepped down from the dais,

and, as is the academic fashion, Ayn Rand went up to give her

response.

Robert Campbell

[Selene]

Harry Binswanger has issued a blast at Jennifer Burns' Harvard magazine article, on Ayn Rand's 1962 appearance at an aesthetics conference.

The item was reposted on one of his followers' sites, supposedly with his permission:

http://www.gatorcoun...997&postcount=1

Dr. Binswanger claims that all of the public hostility on that fateful day came from John Hospers, and none from Ayn Rand.

Well, as it happens, I was present at that talk. I was 18 years old,

had only been introduced to Objectivism 7 months earlier, and was

entirely unfamiliar with ideas about decorum and moral sanction.

Nonetheless, I was stunned by the hostile manner of Hospers'

comments. I remember, verbatim how he began one of his

"comments": "Surely," he said in a really sneering way, "Miss

Rand doesn't expect us to believe that a painting of a landscape can

[here I'm unsure of the exact wording] convey a view about man's

relation to existence."

Hospers concluded his attack, then stepped down from the dais,

and, as is the academic fashion, Ayn Rand went up to give her

response.

Robert Campbell

Robert:

I just opened the Burns' book to page 188 wherein Jennifer states that Ayn, "This was not the type of treatment Rand had expected."

Burns then relates that at the reception afterword, "...neither she nor the Collective would acknowledge Hosper's presence." The footnote refers to three separate sources, one of which is Hosper's, An Introduction to Philosophical Analysis, a second to, Letters and a third to Hazel Barnes, An Existential Ethics.

I wonder if we can acquire the actual article, since clearly he cannot be referring to the book he did not read.

http://harvardmagazi...ayn-rand?page=1

What happened next is a matter of some dispute. As the designated commentator, Hospers rose and delivered some remarks on Rand’s presentation. At least one of her entourage remembered his words as surprisingly sarcastic and harsh. Hospers himself thought his comments, while critical, were entirely typical. “I could not simply say how great her remarks were and then sit down,” he recalled.

That's it? Hmm. Seems that this is much ado about nothing.

Adam

Edited February 8, 2010 by Selene

[9thdoctor]

Think Atlantis...

If you don't know what that means, I'll leave it up to Roland to see if he wants to explain.

I’m familiar with the Yahoo group, and it’s predecessor. The interface isn’t for me.

btw - I just looked at my own stuff and it is too hard. After standing back and letting it cool off, I came back and was disappointed to see that it fell flat (to me). I think I went too far for the humor to work. So here are the translations:

Eyed say yore “F” forts whir fun knee.

[Dragonfly]

A joke repeated too often...

[Selene]

A joke too far...

A bridge too far...

[merjet]

Meer Lan,

Ume ene dat other 23 pohsts on the say meye pee?

Michael

I meant that Roland's writing passes a spell checker. Yours doesn't.

Edited February 9, 2010 by Merlin Jetton

[Robert Campbell]

That's it? Hmm. Seems that this is much ado about nothing.

Adam,

You could say the same, unfortunately, about a great many of Dr. Binswanger's utterances.

That people pay to belong to his list lends support to the old adage about a fool and his money.

Robert Campbell

[Robert Campbell]

At what's left of SOLO, plenty of ado is being made about the Binswanger statement:

http://www.solopassion.com/node/7295#comment-84325

By the way, is it just some quirk of my browser, or is SOLO no longer displaying who is logged in?

Robert Campbell

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Robert,

It looks like they put up Adsense and either screwed up the user information widgets (or other coding if not widgets), or decided to take them off. I think they screwed up, but that is only speculation. Drupal is not all that easy.

On the other hand, I do see how Perigo would want to keep the informaiton about the site's paltry traffic off the front page, then try to make it appear as much more than it is. His thing is manipulating public image to give false impressions.

Right now the Adsense is showing public service ads instead of the paid ones. This is now normal until the Google bots do their thing, or during the time the Google bots are making some kind of major change, or if changes stop happening on the site (which will not be the case with SLOP), or when the Google Gods decide, at their pleasure and whim, whatever they wish to decide.

Michael