i think its hilarious that ecmandu posts all this weird incel shit and hates people who have sex and proclaims himself to be so deep and to be saying such insightful shit and then he turns around and demonstrates that he doesnt understand the most basic shit about sex like bruh women dont get hard ons you have to have a penis to get a hard on also your post violates my consent
You guys really don’t get it.
Like I stated before: I’m crazy enough to try to herd cats. That’s about the only crazy I have left in me anymore.
You guys are out of your fucking minds.
I can obviously quote you and explain how ridiculous your posts are. At this point, the shitheads can rule the ILP roost.
I’m trying to tell you how to avoid intense hell first and foremost. I understand that it’s like trying to teach a blind person how to avoid the color green.
This is not projection: you don’t know what you’re talking about.
I’m not threatening you with hell. It exists whether you’ve seen it or not. After I die here (whenever that is), I’m not reincarnating on an earthly plane again.
I’m going to much higher dimensions after this to work on cosmic reconstruction.
You’ll never find satisfaction in a zero sum reality. If that sentence doesn’t wake you up, nothing will.
ecmandu u r delusional like for real bruh
This is typical mindreading dominance stuff. Of course such things could be true, but the troll or dominance move is to state it like it is a fact. Or if you are, ahem, a non-objectivist, say it, then say you can’t be sure (for the record), but never try to demonstrate that it is true or engage with other possible explanations. Assume the onus is on the other and be smug about the assumption for the gallery.
Most of us I see around ILP have engaged in this type of behavior. But if it is central to your approach you are moving toward trolling. And often the trolls assume that the person they are mindreading has the onus to prove that their claim about what is in your mind is wrong. They have no onus to prove they are psychic or that their claims are true, but you have to demonstrate, here for example that you do not have a hard on for Ecmandu.
I do think that there are different types of problems. Trolling is one, where the actual goal is to trigger others. Another problem is not interacting with ideas. Often this means one labels the other person: communiist, fascist, moron, objectivist, hater. And now the onus is on the other person to demonstrate they are not. IOW the discussion moves into who and what someone is, not the topic.
A third problem is really not understanding how people think at all, and this can include oneself. So, one thinks one has demonstrated something when one has not. This generally shifts over into blame and labeling quite quickly. I said it perfectly, so you are a moron or are evil.
Damn you Karpel,
I can’t let this one slide. Members on this board are handicapped. Now it’s not cool to make fun of handicapped people. When I state very simple things like “nobody will ever find satisfaction in a zero sum reality, and we all live forever, and that means we all go to hell forever”
What I mean also by this is that explaining this to ILP is like telling a blind person to avoid the color green.
It’s absurd for me even to attempt it, but nonetheless, I try. Its like trying to herd cats. It’s somewhat noble.
So here’s the real fool here? Both of us.
I know that mindreading is your number one trigger word. We’ve been through this before. There are inferences people know are true, you use them as well. That’s why you’re so triggered by them.
I don’t want to be anyone’s fucking psychologist dude, I’m tired of that shit… but I will give you axioms.
Truth is, someone in earth is invariably hurt by another person enjoying the zero sum nature of reality. (Which means enjoying it is sadism). Is that who you are? A sadist? By definition, all of you are.
Then Mr. R walks in, a psychopath if I’ve ever met one, and states that my posting violated his consent (therefor I’m a hypocrite)
Ok, let’s analyze this… people can always speak to abuse… it’s the eternal loophole to being a hypocrite.
I’m sure it violates a rapists consent that they found DNA and convicted him or her. Of course it does!! But it doesn’t violate the universal loophole.
I’m actually getting tired of ILPers minds. It’s like talking to a trash bin everyday. I think most of you are extreme psychopaths.
My charge by the way of mag having a hardon for me is a common metaphorical colloquium. It means, someone has it out for you.
From my own vantage point, the reason many need to deem me a troll is because I expose the objectivists here among us as neither moronic not evil.
Instead, my argument is that, in regard to moral and political value judgments, there are no brilliant or moronic philosophers/people…there are no good or evil philosophers/people.
Instead, there are only value judgments rooted subjectively/subjunctively in moral and political prejudices. Prejudices themselves rooted in dasein, in the existential life that one lives.
A life examined in my signature threads culminating in this:
If I am always of the opinion that 1] my own values are rooted in dasein and 2] that there are no objective values “I” can reach, then every time I make one particular moral/political leap, I am admitting that I might have gone in the other direction…or that I might just as well have gone in the other direction. Then “I” begins to fracture and fragment to the point there is nothing able to actually keep it all together. At least not with respect to choosing sides morally and politically.
In my own subjective/subjunctive view, the objectivists here are most perturbed by me to the extent that [consciously or otherwise] I confront them with the possibility that this might be applicable to them too.
They have so much invested over the years in their own rendition of the “psychology of objectivism”. The “real me” in sync with the “right thing to do” allowing them to make that crucial distinction between “one of us” [the good guys] and “one of them” [the bad guys].
Look, I’ve been confronting moral and political objectivists now for years. Reactions of this sort from them are old hat stuff for me. Also, I still recall so vividly by own experience with losing that “objectivist feeling”.
It’s just that with Karpel Tunnel, he is not an objectivist at all. I puzzled over why he would react to me in turn as the objectivists did. Then it dawned on me. And what dawned on me prompted me to create this thread: ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop … 1&t=196034
Iambiguous!
How many fucking times to I have to explain this to you before it really sinks in?!?!
You are not the one exception in all of existence who wants their consent violated now or ever or forever. That’s objective. This is why I (personally) call you a troll. Because you lie everyday, and you do it over and over again.
What violates your consent? Dasein and being self-fractured. You seem to think these two things are a necessary law of existence forever. They’re not. Zero sum realities suck, I get it. The real fight, the one you cower from is to say to zero sum realities, “fuck you!”, but like sheeple, you accept it. It’s unacceptable iambiguous.
You do irritating stuff. What’s so hard to understand about that??
If Socrates picked his nose, it would bug some people. They would tell him to stop doing it. It has nothing to do with Socrates’ philosophy.
Simply unbelievable.
You reduce all of the points I make here…
…down to this:
And, I suspect, are not in the least bit embarrassed by it.
Right?
After all, at least ecmandu has a “condition”. 
Iambiguous,
Pathetic. You’re just going to ignore me again because of my “fragile ego”. I do not have a fragile ego iambiguous. You can lay into me with all of your might. You think you’re protecting me, when, really, you’re just scared of actual objective morality.
You miss the main point.
People keep telling you what’s bugging them. But you ignore all the feedback.
Okay, create whatever fantasy explanation you want.
…and this has been the crux and influence of his ill-found cray vendetta against me, i.e. a delusion.
The End!
Iambiguous,
I’m going to be very, very, very straight forward with you:
Consent violation is the ONLY problem in ALL of existence. Very simple. You are not an exception.
EVERYTHING you discuss is a SUBSET problem to the larger problem of consent violation in general…
You bitch and moan about your subset problem in every post you make!
The superset scares you shitless because it means that you’ve been trolling for over a decade.
The superset (nobody wants their consent violated now, ever or forever) is objective morality.
The problem I have with the moral nihilists on this board is that it comforts them to have no accountability.
Do you have any clue how much shit gets flung upon me for trying to represent the impossible task of not violating consent in a zero sum reality?!?! Piles and piles of shit.
How fucking hard is it to say, “I’m a moral nihilist so I have no accountability?!?!“
Fuck those people and fuck you. Seriously.
Think about it. Objectivity is the HARD work.
People on this board are philosophically lazy. They have every lame excuse under the sun and moon to ignore me or troll me. It’s lazy. It’s being scared of accountability.
I step right up to the fucking plate every time here.
Mag, you’re not right in the head. You not only banned me, you moved every post that in in the relevant section to rant, and then you started banning me for my fucking RANT posts!!!
I can’t remember if you were deleting stuff as well. It’s been a while, I know uccisore did that.
Ah, the futility of thread about trolls. 
Again:
What the hell happened to you?
“In my head” I still recall the far more substantive posts from you back in the day when Karpel Tunnel was Moreno. Now, Moreno is still providing us with considerably more in-depth reactions to me as a “troll” here. I don’t share his points of view, but I sure as shit respect the effort that he puts into making them.
You on the other hand?
A retort here, one or two lines there.
I’m sorry but from my own frame of mind, I can’t help but be embarrassed for you.
If the above is all you can now put into it, I really would suggest that you ignore my posts and move on to others.
Like, say, Zinnat? 
Edit:
See what I mean:
duplicate post
Yes, they use it to defend themselves in… ironic.
Edited to add: Iam needs to get over the past and expectations based on it,
…and the Other guy needs to get over his past altogether. 
What happened to me?
I changed over 10 years.
I lost interest in some things and gained interest in other things.
I discovered what I want to say and what I don’t want to say … who I want to be around and who I don’t want to be around.
I altered how I spend my time and energy.