Carry on with what? This is a fucking joke.
Without trying I made a better forum than this one.
I’m not brilliant, but I put you to shame.
So the site I threw together has about as many active members as the one that has been around for years? lol yeah you got me there.
I’m not trying to get you. I’m just doing a reality check. You only have a few active posters.
FJ, a quick tip for you. The snarky and underhandedly insulting comments hurt you as a mod. Sarcasm doesn’t help. You want to know “far and wide” who cares about what Gobbo says? I do, for one. A simpler response to diffuse any situation, when Gobbo says you’re not openminded, would just be to say, “Well, I try to be openminded. But engaging with X, Y, Z is outside the scope of the Math forum.” Period. End of story. No sarcasm, no snark, no insult.
You don’t need to wonder who cares about what Gobbo says. Or say that you’re “soo embarassed”. Or lie about what was asked of you.
Gobbo, you know you’re my brother from another mother, but I looked at your forum, and pezer and Bill Wiltrack owned 99% of all new topics. I’m looking forward to seeing the forum grow, sort of to dilute their contributions with ones from other people.
On an unrelated note: I own a set of tarot cards and I’m down with them. I use them every so often. I suppose I use them kind of like a meditative tool----when I want to think about some topic or concern, but don’t know where to start, I lay out the cards, and then reflect on the topic based on the impetus I get from the card. Perhaps what I get is an entirely random starting point, based only on a shuffle of the cards. Frankly, that wouldn’t matter, since a starting point for my own reflection was what I needed. Perhaps also some starry dynamo or lesser spirit intervened in the machinery of random chance to guide some otherwise unnoticed card to the fore. That’d be cool as well.
If you remove the vacuous nothing posts from here, per hour we have the same amount of real philosophy going on. Maybe even slightly more.
Anyway, that said, it’s good to see you are sneaking around my forum checking up on this that vaguely have to do with a conversation you’re not even a part of. That’s not very telling at all.
Why?
Because I am interesting.
I admit you’re interesting, even if you’re a bit of a crackpot. You’re interesting to me because you’re entertaining, but that doesn’t mean I care what you say. In fact, I care remarkably little. But that’s only because I don’t value your judgment whatever. I got the impression from Rivers that he wasn’t talking about entertainment value, but that of your judgments. I am just curious why.
For the record, when I said ‘see who cares’, I wasn’t talking about caring what Gobbo thinks in general. I was specifically referring to me failing the litmus test.
“According to Gobbo’s litmus test, I’m unintelligent. Let it be known far and wide, see who cares.”
In the entirety of the world, I imagine there aren’t that many people who would take that particular test for intelligence seriously, and of those that do, and who would tell me that I’m unintelligent because I’m not into occult stuff, I’m not sure I care what they think about my intelligence. Do you, Von Rivers, care about the litmus test specifically?
Stat,
I am right about far more than you likely think. I’m wrong sometimes, but not that often. The thing with me is that I don’t care if I come across as unprofessional because real thinkers can see past the goofiness/trolliness that is just part of my character.
The difference between Von and me, or most people and me, is that I have done the research. If you bother to look, you’ll likely come to the same conclusions. Often times the research is boring unless you really like the occult/conspiracy. That is honestly the main thing that most people can’t overcome. They just don’t find look at the fringe interesting enough to continue to do it. Some of the things I say I can only say after I’ve sat and watched a three hour interview or something super dry like that.
I’m out there putting in the time. I have no vested interest to lie or misrepresent the information. Same with Siatd. That guy sits around reading army documents. Throughout history, it was the crackpots that were noticed. Weird, radical ideas drive society.
In the entirety of the world there aren’t that many people that understand deduction. I guess that means you don’t need to be concerned with it.
If you can’t see how the occult fits into a “proper” knowledge base concerning science, then I just feel bad for you. All public science derives from the occult. It’s been like that since the beginning of history. I didn’t bring it up just for the sake of it. That you refuse to answer is one thing, but that you don’t even recognize the legitimacy is another. To you, because you read a wiki article, the occult refers to ‘magicians’ and shit like that. This is important. For the sake the people that will have to be moderated by you, this is crucial to get.
FJ was Humpty?
That makes me lose respect for the guy… if true. Humpty was a devout Libertarian :-&
FJ, I say you dish out some heavy handed warnings and bans to show 'em who’s boss 
that’ll stop all this contemptible questioning of your new authorataaa. Well, anything you could do would be better than the decisions Magsj makes at least…
Gobbo, at least you attract negative attention, not that I really read you. No one bad-mouths me 
Yeah I was half hoping for one. Usually when I come here and just start criticizing random things it means I’m bored and should likely be made to focus on something else.
Posting here is literally a weakness of mine. Dissatisfaction always turns into me being negative. Really I am not a negative person. I just have a very clear-cut conception of what I think is right. I don’t see how you can look at science without considering the occult. I mean, it just doesn’t make sense.
I’m not really interested in banning people so much. Me being a mod doesn’t change much about anything, as far as I’m aware. I’m not planning on just fucking with people I don’t like or anything like that. People are acting like I’m the new dictator or something.
Anyway, Gobbo, if you’d like a temporary ban so that you can do some stuff you’re more interested in, I can help you out with that. I know what it’s like to be drawn to this place and want to leave, trust me.
The way you feel comfortable making broad, sweeping generalizations about people’s intelligence, competence, and personal lives is very telling.
I do think you do research, and it shows sometimes. However, I also tend to think many of your conclusions are an exercise in confirmation bias. Like I said, you’re interesting and probably quite smart. I just have a terrible time taking you seriously. But maybe that’s just me, I don’t know.
FJ,
I would like a ban for a week if you have no interest in addressing what I think is a pretty integral aspect to having a (and I stress this because you worded it this way) “proper” scientific knowledge base. I know you (now) know this matters in a a priori establishment sense. Ontologically, the occult is the base to science. I don’t know what the fuck is so hard to understand about this, or why we wouldn’t want this included in the knowledge base. It makes everything more cool, and involved. It ads depth, and explanatory power. It just feels right.
So if you refuse to answer and ban me, you banned someone for something you know you should have addressed.
I believe that Gobbo (or just myself for that matter) would call you unintelligent for a blanket rejection of anything falling under the label, “occult”----as pretty much everything did, and does, until by empirical investigation it comes under the domain of scientific methodology. Blanket rejections of labels at that level of generality, when you couldn’t be quite sure what he’s talking about, is a sign of ignorance. That kind of blanket dismissal is simply not what you do in philosophy generally, or science for that matter. Nor is supposing that you know what Gobbo’s “test” is, when you don’t, because Gobbo didn’t specify what he meant. Nor is then taking whatever the test is, and declaring that “there aren’t many people in the entirety of the world who take that test for intelligence seriously”. Saying that is something that an asshole would say.
As I’ve said, if you don’t want to talk or think about anything occult, then the proper response is just to point out that it doesn’t fall within the boundaries of the math/science forum that you’ll operate. In other areas, until you have a more specific idea of what he’s talking about, (which you’d get by asking him), a blanket rejection is an insult. If by ‘occult’ he means topics not explainable by science, I’d only point out that practically all topics now explainable by science didn’t used to be, and that to expect there’s no more to come would be ridiculous.
Yes, of course. But principally about figuring out what it is.
I assure you it gets done to me more than I dish it out. By a factor of 10 or something. As someone who lives in a world where people feel comfortable calling me basically insane, stupid, and delusional, just because I (politely at first) just bring up a certain topic, I can assure you that for someone like me, I am the nicest person I know. Most people don’t recognize how much of an asshole they are without realizing it, because often times the people that get duped into conspiracy stuff cannot tell that the person they’re talking to doesn’t respect them, and is just using them as a psychological scratching post as a self-professed ‘skeptic.’ I’m trying to remember his name, but he was eventually banned and it me and him got into it the worst precisely because I recognized that in him. What I say online is literally the meanest stuff I would be found to say, and it’s never all that mean. I usually just say ‘Yeah that’s dumb/stupid/moronic.’ I feel guilty sometimes but, well, for example I feel more guilty for making fun of Maia’s pictures than I do about calling someone dumb. In essence it’s just saying, “I disagree with your stance on this theory” less than “I think you have biological limitations you cannot overcome.” Or I wouldn’t suggest people go read [this] thing.
If I was asked in court if I thought most people were dumb I would say yes. But keep in mind I am hardest on myself. I think I could be, and should be way smarter, but I do dumb things.
That confirmation bias argument has never made much sense to me. Why would I want to see the world this way? I go into it hoping it’s not true. I have a fairly normal life in the sense of a job, girlfriend, etc. I’m not obsessed with conspiracies. I am obsessed with keeping the world a place I want to live in, and so that de-facto means I have to look at conspiracies, because they drive all of politics.
If you think I am smart enough to distil truth from various sources, then how I act shouldn’t matter. It’s obvious I don’t take myself seriously. That’s largely how I keep my sanity. You don’t remember back when I am referring to, but the days when I took myself seriously and presented these arguments in full, with line-by-line breakdowns, were scary days. I was depressed. It sucks. I’m not meant to be taken seriously and persuade. I’m meant to provide information if asked. Point you in the right direction.
I don’t think I ever did that.