Flame garbage from Tracinski discussion

[sjw]

All you have to do is shrug.

Seems like not too far away from: All you have to do is die. It's a very Buddhist viewpoint. Might be a fine plot device, but there's no Galt's Gulch waiting for us in the real world, and if we tried to create one -- well just look what happened at Ruby Ridge or Waco (the Feds would view us in the same light regardless of the difference in philosophy).

I really don't think Rand intended that plot device as a strategy for dealing with tyranny.

Shayne

[kiaer.ts]

I eagerly turned to this thread, interested to see the reactions to Robert Tracinski's very important and courageous article. Instead, I've predominantly had to wade though an orgy of ridiculous and embarrassing name-calling. Do most of you -- who post to a forum called Objectivist Living -- not think that what Tracinski rightly calls "the suicide of the Objectivist movement" is important enough to comment on? I wonder what you would think important. Is this an intellectual forum or a home for delinquent children -- or perhaps a franchise of Solo?

Barbara

I respectfully reject the implication of moral equivalence. I can provide links to Shayne's prior gratuitous attacks to anyone who wants to see. I did not address Shayne in this thread, except once, to respond to his once again repeated accusation of stalking, which, the reader can note, he levels against several people. Whether such accusations result from moral or mental causes no longer interests me.

The owner here has explicitly stated his refusal to moderate the forum. I have not asked, and am not asking, for anyone to be blocked, banned, or asked to leave the forum. I invite the moderator simply to warn myself, Shayne, and all other posters that name-calling and unsupported accusations will be subject to administrative response. I tire of having to defend myself against smears or allow them to remain forever archived hear without response.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Just a simple comment here.

There are 52 posts in this thread before the one I am now making. The thread those posts were taken from--up to and including Barbara's complaint--has only 45. That's well over 50% bickering in an important discussion.

I realize that some flaming happens on forums and that is normal. Often people work out their differences (and that makes me happy when I see it).

The above case is way too much name-calling to tolerate for a healthy forum. Also, the people engaged have shown no indication of backing off. They literally hogged a discussion with bickering about each other.

So it's garbage and now it's here.

Moreover, the original thread is a serious discussion again.

For the record, I intensely dislike doing this. But if I don't look out for the health of the forum, I certainly cannot expect others to.

Michael

[9thdoctor]

attacks at random intervals and in random threads with these sweeping character assassinations. If Michael allows it to continue, I suppose I will follow Philip out the door.

In a totally different thread, just jumping in out of the blue, offering nothing of substance to the thread except for rudely poking his head into the conversation, telling George H. Smith not to talk to me any more because, according to Ninth, I'll only end up insulting George.

In case the meaning of this juxtaposition isn’t clear: I gave you what you asked for. Your conditions for going away. And yes, I’ve noted that you reversed your position, which is such a pity.

I have not asked, and am not asking, for anyone to be blocked, banned, or asked to leave the forum.

And for the record, neither have I. But when Shayne, who has established himself as the OL Perigo, tells us what it will take to make him go away, don’t be surprised if he gets it, by express delivery.

[sjw]

And for the record, neither have I. But when Shayne, who has established himself as the OL Perigo, tells us what it will take to make him go away, don’t be surprised if he gets it, by express delivery.

Any honest person reading this thread will observe my change in opinion, my shift in agreement toward (but not to) MSK's opinion, though I do understand that one who is too stubborn to ever learn anything cannot possibly comprehend the behavior of someone who isn't.

In the future I will just point out your prissy-scorned-little-girl/bag-o-crap behavior and point people here.

Shayne

[sjw]

For the record, I intensely dislike doing this. But if I don't look out for the health of the forum, I certainly cannot expect others to.

Michael

I'm sorry you had to do that but I don't think it was a waste: Now that this thread is here I think I have dealt with the motivating principle behind these three, I'll just be adding a link to this thread whenever they rudely barge into a thread and start tossing their bag-o-crap. In retrospect I could have seen fit to create the thread myself in advance of the mess and preemptively cleaned it up, so I apologize for that.

Of course, they could always decide to change their behavior, stop stalking me, stop throwing in insults that are completely irrelevant to the context of the thread, and participate in a normal manner like the rest of the people at OL do. Nobody has a free pass for not being insulted from time to time, I've received my share of non-initiated insults. But these three turn it into some massive vendetta and then take their psychological bag-o-crap and smear it everywhere.

Shayne

Edited October 3, 2010 by sjw

[9thdoctor]

Hey there, I have to credit you with a good edit. I was about to reply with another trenchant critique of your reading comprehension, but you took out the offending statements. This is progress!

Of course, they could always decide to change their behavior, stop stalking me, stop throwing in insults that are completely irrelevant to the context of the thread, and participate in a normal manner like the rest of the people at OL do.

Tu quoque.

[sjw]

Hey there, I have to credit you with a good edit. I was about to reply with another trenchant critique of your reading comprehension, but you took out the offending statements. This is progress!

Yes, well, you have taught me the habit of not reading most of what you write so yes, I missed something relevant.

Of course, they could always decide to change their behavior, stop stalking me, stop throwing in insults that are completely irrelevant to the context of the thread, and participate in a normal manner like the rest of the people at OL do.

Tu quoque.

Even if your assumption were true, from here on if I happen drag a bag-o-crap into a thread, then I will apologize. Would you? In other words, all you three have a clean slate regarding any baggage I might be carrying around because of you, until you cross the line of corrupting a thread with your baggage. And no, I am not promising not to toss you a well-earned insult that refers to the context of what you said in-thread.

Now, I want to be wrong about this, but I'm fairly certain that you will toss in the bag-o-crap sometime very soon, in fact, I expect you to positively wallow in the bag-o-crap. I might add that this is the nature of evil -- to wallow in it with glee.

Shayne

[Mikee]

For the record, I intensely dislike doing this. But if I don't look out for the health of the forum, I certainly cannot expect others to.

Michael

I'm sorry you had to do that but I don't think it was a waste: Now that this thread is here I think I have dealt with the motivating principle behind these three, I'll just be adding a link to this thread whenever they rudely barge into a thread and start tossing their bag-o-crap. In retrospect I could have seen fit to create the thread myself in advance of the mess and preemptively cleaned it up, so I apologize for that.

Of course, they could always decide to change their behavior, stop stalking me, stop throwing in insults that are completely irrelevant to the context of the thread, and participate in a normal manner like the rest of the people at OL do. Nobody has a free pass for not being insulted from time to time, I've received my share of non-initiated insults. But these three turn it into some massive vendetta and then take their psychological bag-o-crap and smear it everywhere.

Shayne

Shayne,

You are a chronic, vicious, obsessive well practiced liar. I guess this follows from your extreme paranoia and your hatred of most living persons on earth. I'm not going to lose any sleep over you.

[Selene]

Shayne:

Honestly, do you seriously believe that anyone is stalking you by the following definition?

"Stalking can be defined as a pattern of repeated and unwanted attention, harassment, contact, or any other course of conduct directed at a specific person that would cause a reasonable person to feel fear. Stalking is against the law in every state. Stalking across state lines or in federal territories is illegal under federal law. Stalking is a course of conduct that can include:

• Repeated, unwanted, intrusive, and frightening communications from the perpetrator by phone, mail, and/or email.
• Repeatedly leaving or sending the victim unwanted items or presents.
• Following or laying in wait for the victim at places such as home, school, work, or recreation place.
• Making direct or indirect threats to harm the victim, the victim's children, relatives, friends, or pets.
• Damaging or threatening to damage the victim's property.
• Harassing victim through the internet.
• Posting information or spreading rumors about the victim on the internet, in a public place, or by word of mouth.
• Obtaining personal information about the victim by accessing public records, using internet search services, hiring private investigators, going through the victim's garbage, following the victim, contacting victim's friends, family work, or neighbors, etc.
• Technology can be used to stalk. Although newly-developed technology enhances our lives, it can also empower criminals. Cell phones, computers, networking sites like Myspace and Facebook, and surveillance equipment are just some of the technologies stalkers now use.
• To an outsider, stalking behavior can appear friendly and unthreatening, such as showering the victim with gifts or flattering messages. These acts, however, are intrusive and frightening if they are unwelcome to the victim."

[sjw]

Shayne,

You are a chronic, vicious, obsessive well practiced liar. I guess this follows from your extreme paranoia and your hatred of most living persons on earth. I'm not going to lose any sleep over you.

You just like shooting the messenger. Par for the course concerning your sense of justice.

Regarding my views on most living persons, I happen to have written about that a few days ago:

"I think we would be the vast majority, as I think a lot of people out there are better than the ideas they hold."

http://www.objectivistliving.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=9320&st=80&p=110050entry110050

So, again, my view is that most people are generally good, it's only the bad ideas that weigh them down. I also make specific mention of human nature in my book, and I argue for the Jeffersonian/Randian view, and argue against the Nockean view.

So it certainly seems that you sleep well at night because you build a straw-man version of me that you can paint as evil, such that you can justify your bad behavior.

Shayne

[sjw]

Shayne:

Honestly, do you seriously believe that anyone is stalking you by the following definition?

No, of course not. I use the term metaphorically. I've identified the relevant units of behavior clearly enough, e.g., Ninth's poking his head into a conversation George and I are having just to harass me. He even admits to doing that.

Shayne

[sjw]

Shayne:

Honestly, do you seriously believe that anyone is stalking you by the following definition?

No, of course not. I use the term metaphorically. I've identified the relevant units of behavior clearly enough, e.g., Ninth's poking his head into a conversation George and I are having just to harass me. He even admits to doing that.

Shayne

Dang, I just used another metaphor. No Selene, I didn't see Ninth's actual head, he didn't poke it anywhere as far as I know.

Shayne

[Mikee]

Shayne,

You are a chronic, vicious, obsessive well practiced liar. I guess this follows from your extreme paranoia and your hatred of most living persons on earth. I'm not going to lose any sleep over you.

You just like shooting the messenger. Par for the course concerning your sense of justice.

Regarding my views on most living persons, I happen to have written about that a few days ago:

"I think we would be the vast majority, as I think a lot of people out there are better than the ideas they hold."

http://www.objectivistliving.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=9320&st=80&p=110050entry110050

So, again, my view is that most people are generally good, it's only the bad ideas that weigh them down. I also make specific mention of human nature in my book, and I argue for the Jeffersonian/Randian view, and argue against the Nockean view.

So it certainly seems that you sleep well at night because you build a straw-man version of me that you can paint as evil, such that you can justify your bad behavior.

Shayne

You have no idea of the measure of me or what is in my mind. You have only fantasies of your own creation. I happen to believe that most people are decent and well meaning. Only a very few are as perverse as you appear to be.

[sjw]

You have no idea of the measure of me or what is in my mind. You have only fantasies of your own creation. I happen to believe that most people are decent and well meaning. Only a very few are as perverse as you appear to be.

Most people look past your hangups Mikee. I might have too, but you decided to add your hangup to the general pile I was in the middle of identifying at exactly the wrong time, and you added gasoline to the fire [no Selene, I don't mean literal gasoline, I'm not accusing Mikee of being an arsonist] by your other hypocritical remarks which again, is another hangup of yours that most people let you out of.

So now you are very mad at me for operating outside of the normal social rules where one doesn't point out another's faults, and we see yet another hangup of yours, which is to vilify that which you do not comprehend.

Shayne

[sjw]

As a general point, I would add that it is not ethical behavior to walk into a conversation amongst several different participants, and then to start insulting and otherwise attacking one of the participants for his alleged bad behavior from some other conversation. It is also unethical behavior to begin attacking the victim in random threads where he isn't even there to answer.

It is not ethical for at least several reasons:

1. It is unfair to the people who are there to interact with others regarding the subject of the thread or contents of the thread that pertain to this subject.

2. It is unfair to heap a burden onto the victim of the attack to justify his behavior in an unlimited number of other threads and contexts.

3. It is obsessive behavior indicating a serious lack of self-esteem that drives one to waste his time constructing a case against the victim instead of creating positive works of your own. It is perfectly valid behavior to build a case against a person's ideas, but to build a case against the person as such is psychotic and pointless and one might speculate as being driven by envy.

I do not particularly care about #3, but #1 and #2 I find extremely annoying, so annoying that my initial reaction was to want to leave OL, and my second reaction was to take this matter head-on. It is a "moron tax" that people who engage in such things add to the thread, and everyone ends up paying. My interlocutors like to accuse me of hypocrisy. Let us suppose for sake of argument that I have done this too. I don't claim to be perfect, maybe I have done it. That wouldn't make the behavior any more justified, and as I said, if I ever do it, I'll apologize.

Shayne

[Mikee]

You have no idea of the measure of me or what is in my mind. You have only fantasies of your own creation. I happen to believe that most people are decent and well meaning. Only a very few are as perverse as you appear to be.

Most people look past your hangups Mikee. I might have too, but you decided to add your hangup to the general pile I was in the middle of identifying at exactly the wrong time, and you added gasoline to the fire [no Selene, I don't mean literal gasoline, I'm not accusing Mikee of being an arsonist] by your other hypocritical remarks which again, is another hangup of yours that most people let you out of.

So now you are very mad at me for operating outside of the normal social rules where one doesn't point out another's faults, and we see yet another hangup of yours, which is to vilify that which you do not comprehend.

Shayne

You describe exactly what you do. Faced with disagreement or criticism you attack the person not the argument. When they respond to this injustice you pretend they did it first. Lie upon lie upon lie, never ending. Do you think ad hominem is a fault that should be overlooked when having supposedly rational discussion? I prefer rules of logic rather than your mysterious "normal social rules". These forums are informal but not THAT informal.

[sjw]

You describe exactly what you do. Faced with disagreement or criticism you attack the person not the argument. When they respond to this injustice you pretend they did it first. Lie upon lie upon lie, never ending. Do you think ad hominem is a fault that should be overlooked when having supposedly rational discussion? I prefer rules of logic rather than your mysterious "normal social rules". These forums are informal but not THAT informal.

Here you are, hypocritically engaging in what you engage in, perfectly unconscious to the fact that you engage in it.

What are you referring to Mikee? A bunch of stuff in a bunch of other threads other than this one. Take it one step further (as Ted likes to do) and quote me out of context (or even in context -- it's all the same thing).

What I am referring to in my criticisms of you can be found in this very thread, and indeed, in your very comment above. You come in carrying all the past baggage of other threads into every thread. You can't stay on subject. You can't deal with the facts at hand. Everything is colored by a psychotic desire to right all past perceived wrongs. Which, hypocritically enough, is itself a wrong, the wrong that drove me to the point of attacking this moral outrage in this thread.

So here it is again in microcosm, all courtesy of Mikee, who is totally oblivious to the sin he repeatedly commits. Of the three individuals I refer to, I think he is the most innocent, I honestly believe that he does not comprehend what is going on.

Shayne

[sjw]

I would add another observation. This desire to correct all perceived wrongs is the essence of totalitarianism.

Note how obsessed these people are at inserting their judgement of me into everyone else's minds. They are so obsessed that they rudely barge into ongoing conversations I'm having to refer to a litany of their perceived wrongs outside the thread in order to insert their judgement of me into everyone else's minds.

This is perfectly fitting to spirit of totalitarianism, which seeks to assert the dictator's view of how the world should be onto everyone else. Left to their own devices, people participating in threads with me would form their own opinions. I suspect that a good number do not like what I have said in this thread, and think it underscores the bad behavior that these three object to. They are perfectly capable of forming their own first-handed opinions of me. And yet that is not good enough for these three. They insist on bringing in their own concept of me and ramming it down everyone's throats ad nauseam throughout the forum.

Shayne

Edited October 3, 2010 by sjw

[Mikee]

You describe exactly what you do. Faced with disagreement or criticism you attack the person not the argument. When they respond to this injustice you pretend they did it first. Lie upon lie upon lie, never ending. Do you think ad hominem is a fault that should be overlooked when having supposedly rational discussion? I prefer rules of logic rather than your mysterious "normal social rules". These forums are informal but not THAT informal.

Here you are, hypocritically engaging in what you engage in, perfectly unconscious to the fact that you engage in it.

What are you referring to Mikee? A bunch of stuff in a bunch of other threads other than this one. Take it one step further (as Ted likes to do) and quote me out of context (or even in context -- it's all the same thing).

What I am referring to in my criticisms of you can be found in this very thread, and indeed, in your very comment above. You come in carrying all the past baggage of other threads into every thread. You can't stay on subject. You can't deal with the facts at hand. Everything is colored by a psychotic desire to right all past perceived wrongs. Which, hypocritically enough, is itself a wrong, the wrong that drove me to the point of attacking this moral outrage in this thread.

So here it is again in microcosm, all courtesy of Mikee, who is totally oblivious to the sin he repeatedly commits. Of the three individuals I refer to, I think he is the most innocent, I honestly believe that he does not comprehend what is going on.

Shayne

What is this, some kind of game? "Everything you say bounces off me and sticks to you". My very short history with you: I recently made a perfectly reasonable post with several points on the patent thread. Instead of a reasoned reply, you respond with insults and character assassination. I note you doing the same to others in various threads. I recognized you, finally. I look you up on the old solo. Same behavior. I noted "emotional maturity of an infant" because you think you are the center of the universe. Metaphysical right and wrong is what's good for Shayne W. Other people simply don't matter unless they agree with Shayne W. Here's a newsflash: other peoples opinions differ from yours and sometimes they are right and you are wrong. You owe me an apology. You no doubt owe a lot of people an apology but it's my reputation I'm concerned about. We can talk about whatever bothers you about my pov either before or after your apology and either public or in private but I will get an apology. Unless you're a worm and not a human being.

[sjw]

Clearly I made a mistake regarding Mikee. Evidently he is totally and completely innocent. And I sincerely mean that.

Shayne

[Mikee]

Clearly I made a mistake regarding Mikee. Evidently he is totally and completely innocent. And I sincerely mean that.

Shayne

That's not an apology.

[sjw]

Clearly I made a mistake regarding Mikee. Evidently he is totally and completely innocent. And I sincerely mean that.

Shayne

That's not an apology.

I'm sorry. I should not have interacted with you the way I did.

Shayne

[Mikee]

Clearly I made a mistake regarding Mikee. Evidently he is totally and completely innocent. And I sincerely mean that.

Shayne

That's not an apology.

I'm sorry. I should not have interacted with you the way I did.

Shayne

Accepted. Thank you.

[9thdoctor]

I am not promising not to toss you a well-earned insult that refers to the context of what you said in-thread.

Bad idea. When you disagree with me in the future, try waiting for someone else to point out my folly.