My view about the Moderators here

[Drau]

Maybe I'm naturally oversensitive, or maybe someone just slipped me decaf coffee this morning, but Lord Dark Angel will adopt or abandon any principle to obtain power. For the sake of review, someone has to be willing to embark on a new path towards change. Even if it's not polite to do so. Even if it hurts a lot of people's feelings. Even if everyone else is pretending that it is loathsome to question Lord Angel's ideals. He hates you -- yes, you, because you, like me, want to give our young people the values that will inspire them to think outside the box. So we're supposed to give Lord Angel permission to use organized violence to suppress opposition and hope he's rational enough not to do so? How naive! If he ever claims that he is a martyr for freedom and a victim of Pyrrhonism, we must answer only one thing: "No, the reverse is true." If you've ever watched television or read a book, odds are that you already know that of all of his exaggerations and incorrect comparisons, one in particular stands out: "Lord Angel can change his ridiculous ways." I don't know where he came up with this, but his statement is dead wrong. The following theorem may therefore be established as an eternally valid truth: One of the things I find quite interesting is listening to other people's takes on things. For instance, I recently overheard some folks remark that I'm sticking out my neck a bit in talking about his viewpoints. It's quite likely he will try to retaliate against me for my telling you that he accuses me of being narrow-minded. Does he believe I'm narrow-minded because I refuse to accept his claim that freedom must be abolished in order for people to be more secure and comfortable? If so, then I guess I'm as narrow-minded as I could possibly be.

You can waste all your time arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Or you can actually do what comes naturally. You decide. While there is inevitable overlap at the edges of political movements, Lord Angel says it is within his legal right to feed information from sources inside the government to organizations with particularly blinkered agendas. Whether or not he indeed has such a right, Lord Angel is an opportunist. That is, he is an ideological chameleon, without any real morality, without a soul. I have two words for him: Grow up!

The struggle against the most unforgiving doofuses you'll ever see must be a struggle against emotionalism, mandarinism, and narcissism, or it is doomed to failure. Unlike Lord Angel, when I make a mistake I'm willing to admit it. Consequently, if -- and I'm bending over backwards to maintain the illusion of "innocent until proven guilty" -- he were not actually responsible for trying to shout direct personal insults and invitations to exchange fisticuffs, then I'd stop saying that Lord Angel wants to make us all miserable. What's wrong with that? What's wrong is Lord Angel's gossamer grasp of reality. If you are not smart enough to realize this, then you become the victim of your own ignorance. Let me conclude by saying that we who want to begin a course of careful, planned, and coordinated action will not rest until we do.

[316what]

In response to Mung's opuscula, I would like to offer the following opposing points. Let me begin by saying that Mung is not only immoral, but amoral. This view dangerously underestimates the uncivilized quality of factionalism. The best example of this, culled from many, would have to be the time Mung tried to convince impressionable young people that the cure for evil is more evil. Mung thinks it's good that its wheelings and dealings judge people by the color of their skin while ignoring the content of their character. It is difficult to know how to respond to such monumentally misplaced values, but let's try this: It has never gotten ahead because of its hard work or innovative ideas. Rather, all of its successes are due to kickbacks, bribes, black market double-dealing, outright thuggery, and unsavory political intrigue. Are Mung's bromides good for the country? The nation's suicide statistics, drug statistics, crime statistics, divorce statistics, and mental illness statistics give us part of the answer. These statistics should make it clear that if there's an untold story here, it's that its invectives are continually evolving into more and more twisted incarnations. Here, I'm not just talking about evolution in a simply Darwinist sense; I'm also talking about how we find among narrow and uneducated minds the belief that the sun rises just for Mung. This belief is due to a basic confusion, which can be cleared up simply by stating that almost every day, Mung outreaches itself in setting new records for arrogance, deceit, and greed. It's truly breathtaking to watch it.

Even if our society had no social problems at all, we could still say that negligent Huns (also known as Mung's cat's-paws) must be treated with political justice, not with civil justice, as they are unmistakably not real citizens. It will almost certainly tiptoe around that glaringly evident fact, because if it didn't, you might come to realize that the world has a surplus of stupidity. Think about it, and I'm sure you'll agree with me. Mung may have the right to start wars, ruin the environment, invent diseases, and routinely do a hundred other things that kill people. It may have the right to spit in the face of propriety. But Mung crosses the line when it uses its bully pulpit to threaten the existence of human life, perhaps all life on the planet. To bring the matter closer to home, let me remind you that Mung is like a magician who produces a dove in one hand, while the other hand is busy trying to toss quaint concepts like decency, fairness, and rational debate out the window. For the purpose of this discussion, let's say that even when the facts don't fit, Mung sometimes tries to use them anyway. It still maintains, for instance, that the boogeyman is going to get us if we don't agree to its demands.

Strange, isn't it, how ostentatious fanatics are always the first to increase alienation and delinquency among our young people? If we can understand what has caused the current plague of foolhardy, crude dissemblers, I believe that we can then oppose evil wherever it rears its barbaric, malicious head. How can we expect to reveal the nature and activity of Mung's lickspittles and expose their inner contexts as well as their ultimate final aims if we walk right into Mung's trap? We can't, and that's why I like to speak of it as "incomprehensible". That's a reasonable term to use, I suspect, but let's now try to understand it a little better. For starters, if you can go more than a minute without hearing Mung talk about clericalism, you're either deaf, dumb, or in a serious case of denial. To wrap up, I'll just hit the key elements of this letter one last time. First, Mung is a walking time bomb of teetotalism. Second, Mung is a bad role model for children. And finally, Mung should stop playing verbal games and tell us what it really means.

[madadman]

LOL! I just emailed a complaint about myself to a few of my coworkers. Let the fun begin... [img]graemlins/devil.gif[/img] [img]biggrin.gif[/img]

[Peter Peeker]

MUNG? immoral?
perish the thought! [img]tongue.gif[/img]

[Peter Peeker]

(italics by me)

Wrongheaded. Headstrong. Self-righteous. In case you can't tell, I'm making a direct reference to My Arsehole. Here's the story: My Arsehole's politics will come back to bite us in the behind( [img]biggrin.gif[/img] ) as soon as our backs are turned. If that fact hurts, get over it; it's called reality. And for another dose of reality, consider that My Arsehole is off his rocker. Am I aware of how My Arsehole will react when he reads that last sentence? Yes. Do I care? No, because he uses the very intellectual tools he criticizes, namely consequentialist arguments rather than arguments about truth or falsity. Now for some parting advice: Look at the facts. Analyze the arguments. Think about the motives of the people who are telling you that My Arsehole's vices are the only true virtues. And have confidence in yourself. Remember, like other empty-headed, deranged psychics, he has a finely honed ability to scapegoat easy, unpopular targets, thereby diverting responsibility from more culpable parties.

[The Cheshire Cat]

I was on a forum where a mod was constantly on my ass and would delete everything I post. He had this thing with me talking slang, so if I write something like 'Hey man, I think this show is great...' it'd get deleted...

Not 2 seconds after I posted a thread saying I was leaving they banned me...

[img]tongue.gif[/img]

[Peter Peeker]

*bans Chesh*


(mostly for not reading the whole thread)

[The Cheshire Cat]

I read most of it, but this just happened right now so I felt like posting it anyways [img]tongue.gif[/img]

[Peter Peeker]

OH!

I didn't realize this was a "now" thing...

and how the hell are you posting when I banned you?!? [img]confused.gif[/img]


[img]wink.gif[/img]

[sculpey]

This is to voice my dissatisfaction with your penis's long-term goals. As this letter will make clear, ancient Greek dramatists discerned a peculiar virtue in being tragic. Your penis would do well to realize that they never discerned any virtue in being acrimonious. What if we collectively just told your penis's secret police, "Sure, go ahead and up the ante considerably. Have fun!"? That would be worse than effete; it would contaminate clear thinking with its execrable whinges. Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Of course, if your penis had learned anything from history, it'd know that its animadversions reek of ethnocentrism. I use the word "reek", because I, not being one of the many unscrupulous couch potatoes of this world, am not up on the latest gossip. Still, I have heard people say that those of us who are still sane, those of us who still have a firm grip on reality, those of us who still insist that to forestall its savage nostrums, it would be immensely helpful to have more people understand that it is an organization of questionable moral character, have an obligation to do more than just observe what it is doing from a safe distance. We have an obligation to go placidly amid the noise and haste. We have an obligation to detail the specific steps and objectives needed to thwart its worthless little schemes. And we have an obligation to make plans and carry them out.

Your penis claims that children should get into cars with strangers who wave lots of yummy candy at them. That claim is preposterous and, to use your penis's own language, overtly crotchety. No history can justify it. Don't give your penis's assertions a credibility they don't deserve. Life isn't fair. We've all known this since the beginning of time, so why is your penis so compelled to complain about situations over which it has no control? I'll tell you what I think the answer is. I can't prove it, but if I'm correct, events soon will prove me right. I think that you may make the comment, "What does this have to do with patronizing mendicants?" Well, once you begin to see the light, you'll realize that your penis uses the word "antiprestidigitation" without ever having taken the time to look it up in the dictionary. Organizations that are too lazy to get their basic terms right should be ignored, not debated. To summarize my views: These kinds of insidious braggadocios should be dealt with immediately.