Forums

Imbesil wrote:

You make an online "career" from being an impossible dick.

Are you thirsty for cock, imbesil?

That's one way you and the ILP others can find a use for yourself here. Because it sure as fuck won't be for an interesting conversation, faggot.

Imbesil wrote:

Satyr wrote:

KT is popular, these days, amongst the sheeple.

You make an online "career" from being an impossible dick.

"Career"?
You mean "impact"?

Exposing duplicity and stupidity is a full time job.
I do it because it's my duty.
If I was not successful at it, in some small or big way, then nobody would pay me any heed.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The imagery of "spilling over", is based on this human need for Being, which accumulates, in the Flux, energies, to self-sustain and to "spill over" as growth and self creation.

There is no "what" as in "what is flowing?" because this implies, linguistically, what it then pretends to be asking for. It has already presupposed the answer in the question.

There is flow, exhibiting divergence in rate.
This, the human brain, which is an ordering tool, interprets in sensual ways: hard/soft, cold/hot, good/bad, and so on.
This Flux/Flow (capitalized, just because of emphasis) is sensed, by a self-organizing emergent unity, as a stress upon it, as a contradiction to it = need/suffering.

From this fullness/emptiness, good/bad, strong/weak, become words describing the relation of this emergent unity to the Flux - this ordering to the eternal changing which confronts it, this towards BEING/Power/Life.
The object/objective, whatever word you want to use to symbolize it, is but a human projection of what it lacks, and what it lacks is what it Wills, it is what it needs, desires, wants.

Man as creative agency...not as a slave seeking its master's validation, His Oneness, His Holy Wholeness.
But when a miser feels pride in what he is, then it is a happy day for all..and when a woman, pretending to be a man, feels proud of his femininity, then it is a moment to rejoice...because the veils have lifted and the light shines through.

"Yes-men" find validation amongst other Yes-men, and pride in being the best at saying "Yes" to their common values.
Their "Yes" is but a "Nay" to all others, and it is this "Nay" that divides and distinguishes one from the other.

All "Yeses" begin with a negation.

It's ridiculous that posts on ILP have to be "approved" first by a moderator before they can appear... maybe that's just for a period of time until you have x amount of posts...but still, FAR busier forums don't have this stupid rule.

They have the post approval procedure to mimic their liberal policies about "approving" speech. They want to prescreen thoughts and allow only the "right" posters onto the site. And who are the "right" members for ILP? What constitutes the norm there, and what is its antithesis or natural enemy?

Simpletons are content with simple things: filling their bellies, manipulating other simpler simpletons, emptying their testicles on a regular basis...it's enough.

My parakeet seems happy in its little cage, with its seeds, water, and little toys.
My fish can swim for weeks from one side of its bowl to the other, not once feeling like it is missing out on something.

Exploration begins when one is already content, at leisure, full of what is required to meet the immediate needs. What remains is a 'splinter in the mind's eye' wanting to be scratched.
And those who pretend to be happy, while accusing those others they congregate with of sadness, are inadvertently showing how unhappy they really feel.
To a point where they must unload this internal sadness, masked beneath the hypocrisy, upon the others...who they go to meet, daily, to see their own misery reflected back at them....

What's real funny is that I'm not really what you would call a Nietzschean.
But don't tell the turds...because any word recalling pre-Socratic Hellenism and Paganism is automatically about the only idol they know who spoke about it.

When a wolf howls in the distance, even the sheep that do not get along, huddle together.
It's a binding force....creating love.

Fixed gets high, and he becomes all sentimental.
Feels camaraderie with a sheeple, sees himself in there.

If a KTS member were to come across a post like this referring to someone here, they would say

You are so obsessed with Smears, and then toss in some psychological hypotheses expressed as certainties.

Here at KTS we tell our children not to pay any attention to people like Smears, and then we.............

Quote :

Shit-Smears wrote:
"Dawkins doesn't do anything philosophical. His entire existence is as a salesman.I mean you can't be serious right?"

Right there, he delivers his self-identification card to us all.
You notice it in the ease with which he alters positions.
One moment he is laughing at race, mocking it, claiming it is absurd....and the next he admits that there are races, but nobody should be cruel about it.
In between, he declares himself a genius, a philosopher, but is unable to provide evidence for it.
He finds ways to avoid topics when they become too-deep, and go beyond his intellectual comfort zones.
He prefers to insinuate, as you will see in what follows, rather than to act.

Some would call this "trolling", and he is the first to use this term as a defensive attack, but here the word is misleading.
He does get a self-esteem boost when he makes others pay attention to him, but his need is genuine, not faked.
He actually believes himself. He's used this technique for so long it has become second-nature to him....it has buried the underlying weakness, insecurity, neediness, under a level of manufactured bravado and arrogance.

He thinks he's smart because he can make minds incomprehensible to him, react to him...pay attention to him.
He has tricked them into taking him seriously.
They've failed to see how stupid he knows he is, and they waste their energies upon him.

shit-Smears wrote:
"He's a pop-pseudoscientist who's work is intended for people who aren't reading Kant or Kripke or you know....any real philosophers."

He uses the name-dropping technique, implying that he is far above Dawkins.
His positions on Dawkins are interesting since this fella is more of a scientist dealing with evolution, and someone attacking modern religious stupidity.
Shit-Smears, the douche-bag, calls himself an atheist, no...so why this attack on Dawkins?
A ploy. He wants to become controversial...attention whoring. If he feels pressure he'll use one of his usual methods of cutting and running...having already achieved what he wanted.

He simply wants attention, and is willing to do and say anything to get it.
no matter how insignificant and dull he feels he is, he can forget it, for a while...the rest of the time he must medicate himself to accomplish the same escape from himself.

I wondered why such an obvious simpleton would have nothing to say on philosophical matters, except as references and deference to text, and then still be a consistent contributor on a "philosophy forum".

Then I saw his pictures, and observed his posts when he was ignored.
The images alone screamed of desperation...and their consistency.
All circled around him, his life, his supposed personality, genius and so on.
He is "living the life" we talk about.
Yet, here he is day after day....even on Saturday nights...
Why would someone who is as happy and living such an exciting life be on ILP day after day...when no philosophy really interests him beyond Game Theory (theory of serious playas), or anything dealing with cost/benefit analysis?

Simple...
Neeeeeeed.

Need, hidden beneath a carefully cultivated image, reflecting a modern American ideal: the Tupac urban poet,/hustler, gangsta image.
In one of the pics, with his supposed buddies, you see them all relaxed, and then him, right in the middle, with this attempt to appear tough, taller...his arms wrapped around two guy, raising his shoulders above them...his brow furrowed, like a sneer.

Then you see him bounce from thread to thread with one-liners, one one paragraph contributions, mind-farting himself across ILP domestication.

Then there was the incident when he was partially exposed as what he is (a common drug-dealer, and penny-stock internet dealer)...and how long he disappeared from the scene - licking his wounds.

No doubt his defensive aggressive stance has some success amongst the simpletons he hangs around with...inflating his self--esteem.
His verbal acrobatics are effective, within modern contexts.
They impress.
But he is way over his head here...even if he is participating on ILP where most of the bright ones have fled, leaving behind some average minds, and a few dumb cows.

Now he indulges in baiting....trolling.
Offering controversial statements, he cannot support, name-dropping, so as to insinuate that he might know what he is talking about, and then falling back on what has worked for him in his daily life when he's been cornered, and threatened with being exposed as the needy, insecure, unhappy, imbecile that he truly is.

He is interesting in this sense alone: a perfect representation of Americanism...of modernity, of nihilism.

A fatherless, man-child, seeking an identity, adopting what is popular, trying to be liked, but also wanting to manipulate, preserving an modernistic, gangsta (playa, hustler) image.

shit-Smears wrote:
"Same as Dennett. I've met those guys several times, and when they get done selling books to teenage atheists and start talking about philosophy among their peers, they usually just end up chuckling and talking about how many books they sold."

Here we see how he uses the usual methods of manipulation...to produce an effect.

It's all innuendo, with no direct statements.
He knows what they do amongst their peers.
No doubt from Youtube and Wikipedia.
He's met them...
Got an autograph.
They are hustlers, selling books....
Like he wants to be....he wants to sell, to be marketable.
He envies them because they make money by selling to teenagers.
They sell to teenagers...
He finds dumb females to sell drugs to, and then fucks them, sometimes.
Surprising what some pot can do when dealing with a fatherless, cultural-less, clue-less, dumb female raised to think that being a whore is how you get attention.

His original distaste for me was that I failed to be what he thinks I ought to be, to sell to as many as possible.
He, mistaking his motive for mine, is a better manipulator, a more talented hustler.
You see it in how fast he switches positions, when he dares to say anything concrete.
He avoids being clear because he wants to leave his options open.
A clever hustler always implies, never says anything honestly, definitely.
When he faces resistance or the threat of exposure, he has his verbal talents to deny, redirect, using sarcasm, humor...or a reference to some text or to some famous name.

He delivers himself on a platter.

Fascinating specimen.

Ta, Ta,

And it continues and will continue, even when this is all pointed out.

Quote :

toss in some psychological hypotheses

Baby.... All I can do is draw analysis out of the little material that's provided.

Quote :

expressed as certainties.

How else would one go about checking if its true or not?

Quote :

Here at KTS we tell our children not to pay any attention to people like Smears

But that would put them at least one level above you right? Because it like;

"There is a level of cowardice lower than that of the conformist: the fashionable non-conformist."

Funny...Satyr is narcissistic and, at the very same time, obsessed with another = a split obsessiveness theme going on here where self and other are equally symptoms of mental illness.
The only thing left to facilitate the "healthy" empty staring into the void, like the Morono(oh) advocates, is to include as an unhealthy interest, inanimate objects.
Then any focus on the particular can be avoided and we can all rejoice about rejoining "humanity."

You see, something negative must be said about all this attention and interest, to diminish its effect.
Satyr, referring to himself in the third person is a bad sign.
 
Next week he, Satyr, will be frustrated, and mad...perhaps a bit paranoid.
Some psychological term, acting like a verbal slap.
The week after a bit of a sexual complex, and a touch of compensating schizophrenia.
The week after a guru complex, attention whoring...something vile, like that.

After that we'll have to play it by ear and come up with something degrading about him, but not his views, while at the same time flattering to ourselves, in that we are not him, or like him...because we are healthy.

A look around ILP will help you come into contact with that ubiquitous form of "health" we call "normal".
And if that's what health is, then let me be sick.  

The defenders of the herd try to use shame to stop the feeding.
Might as well accuse a wolf of obsessing over sheep, or an eagle of obsessing over a rabbit.
By doing so they show what they are, despite themselves.
It's interesting that of everything written that piece draws the Moron(oh) out to bark.
*woof
He's fighting a defensive war using emotions.
I like it.
As if, someone studying cows, observing a cow, could be accused of being obsessed with that particular cow.

My son found a snail yesterday.
We brought it home and put it in a small bowl, with a leaf and some water.
He studied it and watched it, for hours, and asked a myriad questions about it.
He became...."obsessed" with it, in a very unhealthy way.
Or was he only interested in the species and not the particular snail?

Right now, as I type, he's become "obsessed" with experimentation.
He found some vinegar, and baking powder, and is mixing in some paint colors...trying to concoct something interesting from everyday materials.
The child is showing symptoms of child-abuse....he is ill, I tell you - ILL!!!

Every hunt begins by isolating the weakest, or most daring, careless, member of the group; the one who is split off the throng, not because it is fascinating...but because its demeanor has cut it off from the uniformity of bodies, and now unwanted eyes fall upon its heaving sides.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Ha!!!!

When you come across a douche-bag who only cares about his immediate gratification and whose life has no meaning beyond the birth/death events, then you will meet a Modern degenerate, who finds an end in the primal, and cannot see anything other than here, and now.
His only concern is to remain free to get his next high, because he has no other interest, and detaching distraction is the highest high of all, because then you can reinvent yourself with every new moon, and no feeling of integrity need go too far.

No past, no family, no children; all is a secondary effect.
His identity is encased within a time-box, and his only allegiances are built upon a shared superficiality, and a common "right" to remain as base as they possibly can.
They are the perfect "progressives", also called liberals, and he, this random encounter, is no more than the perfect modern, the ideal manimal.
Cynicism takes care of any ideal that reminds him of how shallow, and primitive, he is.

Negroes are not by accident the modern man's idea(l) man.

Within these confines even your offspring fall under the category of your personal pleasures, having no other reason to exist but to pass you on, much to your delight.

The average, and below average, Modern douche-bag, will approach, some topis, from a psychological perspectives, wanting to silence the source without having to deal with the topic itself.

Such a coward, and a hypocrite, will cast aspersions about the source of his discomfort, trying to shame him into silence, because he either has no clue what is being said and/or he cannot offer a response that would not expose him as what he is.

This provides for some fascinating word-plays.
Such a coward and a douche-bag, will find an insulting and degrading motive in the source of his discomfort, but will seek no such motive in himself and in his own type.

So, when I say fear is the mother of all emotions, this confuses the average moron(o), because fear was his fall-back accusation.
This forces him towards narcissism, the extreme of love, which he is supposed to defend. But this time it is set as a dysfunction, even if it is a prerequisite for any self-respect, and self-knowledge.
The message is clear: you must love, other, indiscriminately...but not yourself. Yourself you must despise to make your transition towards "oneness" less problematic.
It's not love, per se, but a particular kind of love, the self-less kind, which is the typical imbecile's idea(l) of health.

We have it then...if fear cannot be used as a way to dismiss the other, pretending you are courageous when you are truly a coward denying fear in yourself, then love-why not ? - as a psychosis will be used.

So, hate, but only yourself, love, but not yourself...discriminate but not between human, which is now your new, grander, Self.

The average Moron(o) loves to focus on "fear", which he denies in his own thinking, because he cannot accept courage as being how one deals with fear, and not the absence of it.
He does so because he cannot deal with it in himself, and it overwhelms him, to an extent that he must deny self, and abstract it.

The average Mono(o) loves to point out the selfishness of the other, because he cannot accept it in himself, without contradicting his cowardly positions.

The average Moron(o) likes to use terms like "projecting," or to accuse the other of solipsism, when solipsisms is the beginning of understanding, and projection is the act of imagination.
He does so because his own projections and solipsism are detached from sensuality, and so he must accuse the other before this is discovered about him.

The average Moron(o) thinks love is only healthy when it is directed towards the idea of otherness...and only if the universal otherness, he now calls Humanity, is the focus, because he likes to also pretend to be over God, and he does so because he's brainwashed into the comforting idea that you must be special within otherness, and an "individual" within uniformity, and that ego is, automatically, an insult.  

The average Moron(o) thinks there is no higher narcissism than self-love, and so he cannot see how the idea that he is valuable within an abstraction, like God or Humanity, is the most narcissistic conception of all, because here the possibility of perceiving one's own faults is lost in the multiplicity of an ambiguous whole.
He is appalled by honest displays of self-acceptance, but sees nothing wrong with an imbecile, like himself, thinking he deserves eternal life, or that he is born with rights and/or that he deserves respect, and love, and care.

The average Moron(o) prefers to see pretense in others, but not in himself, where he is now convinced that the bullshit he pretends to be, and that he now considers "true," is an honest assessment of the world.
He thinks he is being "himself" because he can parrot the common spiel, by heart, without batting an eye...and he recalls no other perception to trouble his shallow soul.  

The average Moron(o) is average, and this is why he is a moron.

Heisman, Mitchell wrote:

Judaism began with a belief in the power of nurture to overcome nature, a belief in mind over matter. It is the belief that the sociobiological logic represented by ancient Egypt is not the only way, and that by learning a people can survive otherwise. Gods, such as the sun god, rooted in observable nature, represent extensions of probable beliefs.
God, superior to the laws of nature, represents the utmost possibilities of belief.
Unity with God could transcend pagan unity with nature. When one follows God‘s laws over man‘s (biologically ground) laws, one is literally overriding one‘s own biological nature, and hence performing a perfectly ―secular miracle of non-biology transcending biological nature.

This particular specimen has spent over a decade sucking on Nietzsche's dick, and is now advancing towards the next stage of his intellectual progressiveness, by attacking himself to a Jewish translation, with all the trappings of a comfortable finality.

Heisman, Mitchell wrote:

When Jews acquired power after historic powerlessness, the original conditions of Judaism unraveled. To empower the powerless or marginalized is self-empowering while Jews themselves are powerless. But when the Jewish cause becomes victorious, this strategy backfires and Jewish principles deconstruct themselves, inverting the inverters. For the Zionist state to consistently empower the disempowered Palestinians at their own expense would be political suicide. Being Goliath is a problem when the moral of the story is that David ultimately wins.

The internationalism of Christianity laid the common ground for a world that has a place for the nationalism of the Jews. Just as Roman conquerors penetrated the territorial-sociobiological boundaries of the ancient Jewish state, the Jewish-based God memes of Christianity penetrated the ancient Roman world. Christianity began a process of blunting and mollifying the deepest ethical-cultural gulfs between Jew and gentile. The penetration of Jewish genes into the modern gentile West is only a continuation of the anti-kin selective logic that began with Christianity. In other words, Jewish assimilation as individuals in the modernistic West is only a continuation of gentile assimilation to the sociobiological impact of Christianity. Both as individuals and as a Zionist state, Western assimilation of Jewish bodies was founded upon Western assimilation of a Jewish ―spirit.

The mind is so addicted to abstractions, to unities, hat it must project itself "outside" reality, in the "unreal", to complete its own constructs.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Thusly the world is made into a Thing...and a God.

Parmenidean metaphysics has become part of the Modern culture, and integrated into nihilistic dogmas.
This was a necessary preliminary step toward the dominance of the logos, over the mythos, the Apollonian over the Dionysian, the Alexandrian over the Heroic.

The seductive power of this mindset is evident in how it attracts the human feminine side, offering it a sense of belonging, completion, inclusion.
It is the psychology of the nil, a sit negates the essence of existence as Flux.  
Once seduced the mind can invert reality, at will, settling for the easier rather than the harder, the certain rather than the uncertain, the intuitive, noumenon, rather than the counter-intuitive (entropic) phenomenon.
This stage has now been associated with the Judaic religions of Judaism/Christianity /Islam, which are the only religions proper, and are the foundation of what we call Modernity.

Heisman, Mitchell wrote:

The Jewish kinship paradox meant that this entire model was utterly improbable, if not impossible, for Jews. The Jewish kinship paradox meant that pure sociobiological naturalism was self-defeating. To survive, Jews could only rest their faith in the post-biological corrective of Mosaic Law.

To survive, Jews could only look forward from the premise of the goodness of overcoming pure biological naturalism. There was no going back to nature, and this led the evolution of the Bible towards prophetic speculations about the full implications of overcoming biology in God. The modern Western political left evolved as a direct extension of this original Biblical revolt against biology......

In ancient times, writing was the most advanced form of non-biological symbol-information preservation. The written word represented the cutting edge of ancient media technology. In consequence, the Jews, ―the people of the book, were really the people of the media. This media preserved the Jews and the Jews preserved this media. The word propaganda is a variation of the word propagation, i.e. meme propagation.

Biblical memes helped propagate Jewish genes and Jewish genes helped propagate Biblical memes. This self-reinforcing, symbiotic relationship is a prime evolutionary origin of the relatively recent radiation of Jews into prominent positions in various fields of modern media.......



Although I firmly believe,' wrote Albert Einstein, 'that the chasm between Jewish theology and Spinozism can never be bridged, I am not less convinced that Spinoza‘s contemplation of the world (―Weltanschauung) was thoroughly imbued with the principles and sentiments that characterize so many Jewish intellectuals. I feel I would never have come so near to Spinoza had I not myself been of Jewish extraction and grown up in a Jewish milieu.' I find this rather ironic. Spinoza, author of one of the most radical attempts to overcome Jewish
particularity in the name of human universalism, could be considered one of the inventors of ―modernity. Yet, somehow, modernity itself is in some way Jewish. Einstein seems to have felt, contra Spinoza himself, that Jewish-influenced ―principles and sentiments‖ somehow drew him closer to Spinoza‘s modern universalism.

Once words replace actions, as the measure of the real, the world submits to human contrivances, and all is turned on its head: nihilism, as the absence of universal, morals, meaning, purposes, is now proposed as a negative when it represents the positive aspect of Becoming.

But the methodology proceeds further in its seductive manipulations.
It positions itself, noetically, on both sides of the dialectic, offering two versions of itself: absolute nil (0), and absolute one (1).
It extricates the true negation of its premises the fluid space/time in between these human projections, and dominates human thinking.

See Atzmon on the same tactic being used in on the world stage by Judaism.

Weininger, Otto wrote:

The Jews, then, do not live as free, autonomous individuals who choose between virtue and vice, as do the Aryans. The Aryans are automatically pictured by everybody as an assembly of individual men, the Jews as a coherent plasmodium spread over a wide area. Antisemitism has wrongly turned the latter into a stubborn, conscious closing of ranks and called it ―Jewish solidarity.‖ This is an understandable confusion of different things. If some accusation is leveled against an individual who belongs to the Jewish race and all the Jews, without actually knowing him, inwardly support him, wishing, hoping, and trying to prove him innocent, it must on no account be believed that he interests them in any way as a Jewish individual and that his fate, because it is the fate of a Jew, will arouse more pity in them than that of any Aryan who is unjustly persecuted. This certainly is not the case. It is only the threat to Judaism, the fear that a shameful shadow might fall on Jewry as a collective, or, more accurately on anything Jewish as such, on the idea of Judaism, that produces those symptoms of involuntary partisanship.

It is exactly the same as when women are delighted to hear every individual member of their sex being disparaged, and indeed help to belittle her, so long as Woman herself is not shown in a bad light, no man is deterred from desiring women in general, nobody loses faith in ―love,‖ but marriages continue to take place and the number of old bachelors does not increase. What is defended is only the species, what is protected is only the sex or the race, not the individuals, who are considered only insofar as they are members
of the group.
Both the genuine Jew and the genuine Woman live only in the species, not as individualities. This explains why the family (as a biological, not a legal, unit) is of greater importance to the Jews than to any other people in the world, with the English, who are the Jews‘ distant relatives, following next.
The family in this sense has a female, maternal origin and has nothing to do with the state or the formation of society. A sense of belonging together that unites the members of a family, although it is only the result of a shared atmosphere, is strongest among Jews. The principle of any aristocratism is the strictest observation of all boundaries between human beings, but the Jew is the born communist and always wants community. The informality of the Jew in company and his lack of social tact are the results of this. Manners are nothing but a subtle way of emphasizing and protecting the boundaries of the personal monads, but the Jew is no monadologist.

Once the dialogue has been contained within the nihilistic paradigm "free-speech" can be permitted, as an expression of its own arrogant principles.
The practice of nihilistic mind-control works on multiple fronts:

---It manipulates ingrained human existential anxieties, offering a comforting way out of the uncertainty and indifference of the world.

---It replaces the word as the standard for deciding what is more or less probable, detaching the word, as static symbol (abstraction), from the phenomenon, as the dynamic, mysterious, unknowable.

---It dominates human discourse, in the way I explained above, creating a no-thinking-zone, within which masses of men can be controlled and exploited, free to be whatever they think they want.

---It castrates/detaches man from his own identity, his nature/past, making him willing and vulnerable to the first identifiers that will be provided for him. This is sold to him as a liberation from responsibility, from determinism, from an indifferent world.

The tactic is a sophisticated mind-controlling mechanism, where the slave is convinced of his freedom and wills his own chains - the epitome of human husbandry where no force is required because ti has been internalized as guilt, shame, political-correctness, civility, culture, social etiquette, and so on.

Weininger, Otto wrote:

But first I want to define exactly what I mean by Jewishness.
One is not dealing with a race or a people, and even less with legally acknowledged profession. One can only define it as a spiritual attitude, a psychic constitution, which offers an OPPORTUNITY for ALL men and which merely found its grandiose REALIZATION in historical Jewery. Nothing proves the veracity of this statement more than anti-Semitism.
The truest, most Aryan or Aryans, certain of their Aryaness, are no anti-Semites; they cannot even fathom hostile anti-Semitism;…on the other hand, one can always detect certain Jewish traits in aggressive anti-Semites…

It would be impossible for this to be any other way. As one LOVES only those traits in the other which one would wholeheartedly embrace oneself, yet can never fully attain, so one HATES in the other only that which one never wants to be, yet which one partially retains. One does not hate something with which one has nothing in common.

Is it coincidental that the shit-Smear hasn't posted on ILP ever since he became aware of my comments via the Hesperus mask?
I prefer to think not.
But he might be somewhere taking pictures of himself with some random whore, trying to convince himself he's living the "good life"....like any Whigger would.

But now we have the Turden, a.k.a. Torn-Annus, doing what he does best: flooding a forum with inanities.
I would have hoped he and shit-Stain, in conjunction, could have made that forum what it always has been.

Yeup...ILP is now officially in the toilet.
Who will flush?
Or, is it possible, that some brave new plumber will appear, like a Jesus, to clean it all up?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

What's two-faced about this moron Moreno, is how he comes here accusing Satyr and others of "Narcissism" for not individually addressing people, and on ILP he goes stating how there's no need at all for any individual distinction of those here.

How convenient.

How hypocritical.

How cowardly.

Individualism for Morono has to be made of simple, easily recognizable traits, so that the modern mind is not over burdened with having to work. Like the guy who brags about whoring and drug taking, the simpleton that lives on a farm, raises animals and speaks in matronly cliches, a brown cow that only talks about its wonderful social life and the celebrities it mixes with and claims to be borderline genius, the abused child that tortured animals, the Marxist twit for whom no distortion of logic is too great as long as it maintains his deluded belief system.

What you have at ILP is a collection of caricatures, like those you'd find on a bad TV show.

They're not individuals at all... not even human. In fact, tear away the masks from these freakish cartoons and you are left looking into empty skulls, the mouths still chattering away, like a scene from a David Cronenburg horror movie.

Recidivist wrote:

Individualism for Morono has to be made of simple, easily recognizable traits, so that the modern mind is not over burdened with having to work.

Explains why he'd rather come to the defence of a Schmoe who smells of dementia, and real Narcissism if we are going to speak at all of that subject, and then come here accuse those like Satyr of being narcissists...

Morono shows himself and argues like a classic retard.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Read how Carleas, the hypocrite, lies about not banning people if they do not disturb and shit.

I posted there using other monikers, some of which remained civil and on-topic...and I was discovered, mostly when shit-Smears and others began crying "wolf, wolf! amongst us!!!".

Read what the douche-bag says, and wonder why ILP is as it is.

Carleas wrote:

Because starting a new account to circumvent a ban creates a strong presumption that the person is going to continue disrupting discussion.

One great indicator of reform is that a moderator can't tell that a person is who they say they are. Mods aren't checking every IP address of a new member, in order to be discovered, a person has to draw attention to him or herself. Generally, that means continuing to be abusive, disruptive, antisocial, etc. A person who earned a permaban came back and engaged civilly and in good faith would almost certainly not be discovered. Technically, they are violating board rules, so they might be banned anyway; obviously, a permaban is meant to be longer than any of the temporary bans, so someone who's discovered to have returned within a couple days after a permaban will probably be banned if discovered. But six months later, returning and participating civilly will probably go unnoticed, and if it is noticed it is unlikely to warrant an instant ban.

I can't say whether this happens in practice: people who are permabanned and returned are either discovered because they're continuing the mode of participation that got them permabanned in the first place, or they simply go unnoticed. I don't know of a case where someone has been permabanned, been absent for a significant period, returned and been a model user, and nonetheless been discovered as a formerly permabanned user. My guess is that there haven't been any that have so reformed, but it is possible that someone has reformed well enough to go unnoticed.

So you are banned again if you are both noticed and NOT noticed. Is he this dumb? Why not save himself the idiotic hypocrisy and simply say "i hate those who disrupt this forum and make me feel uncomfortable."

For someone who likes to believe in the basic goodness of humanity, he is one xenophobic idiot. Apparently, discoursing in "good faith" counts for shit in his humanitarian world view.

Watch Sauw. evading the pedophilia question:

Sauwelios wrote:

Quote :

If there is an organic relation between an entity and its physiology and genuineness demands self-interest, then isn't it logical that a pedophile would think and profess in the interest or the _hue_ of his pedophilia?

You mean, like supposing that truth is a _child_ rather than a woman? Are you suggesting Heraclitus was a pedophile philosopher?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


He's turned a religious absolutist coward. fantastic.

Banned...for being Satyr.

Banshii, my alter ego, that is.

This is what the hypocrite and coward Carleas said here...
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Care-Less wrote:

And it should be noted that a 'perma' ban is not really permanent. It is permanent as to a username, but this is the internet, and no one knows you're a dog once you stop talking about bones. That is to say, if a person were permabanned, reformed, and came back under a different user name, we wouldn't know. And if they engaged civilly, over a long period of time, we wouldn't care even if we found out. We're not interested in punishing people, we're interested in allowing for at least some robust philosophical discussion. We ban people to the extent necessary to allow that to happen, and sometimes a permaban is the only way to do so.

This is the reasoning the boy who pretends to be a stringent intellectual gave....
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Only_Retarded wrote:

Satyr can't even pretend to not be Satyr. Banned for inevitable trolling.

Now one can be banned under the premises that he will "inevitably" break the rules.
It's a preemptive judgment, third-world style "Guilty until proven otherwise"
Guilty upon arrival...in contradiction to the bullshit Carleas, the douche-bag says to defend the image that he's not a simpleton hypocrite.
It's always fun to expose a hypocrite for what he truly is, beneath the big words and the pretenses.
  

My crime?
Being Satyr.

HA!!!!

It was fun, though, watching the shit-Stain swallowing nervously, trying to appear cool.
after being there for a few days, and interacting with the ILP barn-manimals, I can safely say that that place is as good as dead....DUI.
Brain-Dead.
Not even a hint of anything besides modern socializing, and emoting, and bragging, and posturing....and flirting.

It was fun, while it lasted.
Facing the shit-Smear and watching him squirm was a pleasure.
Now he will insult and threaten knowing he is safely caged within the ILP barnyard, where he can display his 160 I.Q. by discussing such profound matters as "how to put jelly on your toast".

Satyr wrote:

Banned...for being Satyr.

Banshii, my alter ego, that is.

This is what the hypocrite and coward Carleas said here...
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Care-Less wrote:

And it should be noted that a 'perma' ban is not really permanent. It is permanent as to a username, but this is the internet, and no one knows you're a dog once you stop talking about bones. That is to say, if a person were permabanned, reformed, and came back under a different user name, we wouldn't know. And if they engaged civilly, over a long period of time, we wouldn't care even if we found out. We're not interested in punishing people, we're interested in allowing for at least some robust philosophical discussion. We ban people to the extent necessary to allow that to happen, and sometimes a permaban is the only way to do so.

This is the reasoning the boy who pretends to be a stringent intellectual gave....
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Only_Retarded wrote:

Satyr can't even pretend to not be Satyr. Banned for inevitable trolling.

Now one can be banned under the premises that he will "inevitably" break the rules.
It's a preemptive judgment, third-world style "Guilty until proven otherwise"
Guilty upon arrival...in contradiction to the bullshit Carleas, the douche-bag says to defend the image that he's not a simpleton hypocrite.
It's always fun to expose a hypocrite for what he truly is, beneath the big words and the pretenses.
  

My crime?
Being Satyr.

HA!!!!

It was fun, though, watching the shit-Stain swallowing nervously, trying to appear cool.
after being there for a few days, and interacting with the ILP barn-manimals, I can safely say that that place is as good as dead....DUI.
Brain-Dead.
Not even a hint of anything besides modern socializing, and emoting, and bragging, and posturing....and flirting.

Humean is so vengeful. A spiteful hypocrite.

James Saint making a null remark like a retard with an empty "so what?" was not the troll apparently.

Apparently its the ones staying on topic.

Its enough to see what ILP has become.

A dishonest den using any excuse to ban the people they have personal issues with and cannot counter intellectually.

What will Carleas say?

Its breeding idiots and dishonest souls.

ILP is over.

I'm not an expert, but I think the douche-bag, hypocrite, Only_Humean is using his "stringent" reasoning to decide what will happen in the future.
He stands on the high ground of his own self-importance, in tranquility, as all around him trolling, ad hom, and blithe trivial commentary.
His intellectual stringency is blind when he is comforted by what is being said.
If he is disturbed, then a different standard applies.

Resentiment....?
Real time.

No, not censorship....it's called in Modern newspeak: civility.

ILP was over the moment a pseudo-intellectual, like Carleas, took it over.

You may be right.

I think what happened was the 'Dysgenics' thread that prompted the "inevitable trolling" ban by Humean; but if he had to say that on the dysgenics thread, it would have looked like he and his forum were censoring a sensitive topic and being PC. He wanted to stop any participation of others, happening on that dysgenics topic.

So the coward used the other thread to announce your ban.

Erik wrote:

I can be your mouth-piece over there if you desire, Satyr. I just created an account there again. Time to slaughter some sheep at the ILP barn.

I might take you up on that.
Maybe to post something I've already written.
You can even say it is your own, if you wish.
I do not mind.

I just like watching the sheeple scrambling for cover.

In the meantime just express our shared ideals, if we share any as m,embers of this forum, and do not let imbeciles get away with their stupidities, and their hypocrisies.
If you do that, then you would have done a great service to the human species, by contributing to the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Given the douche-bag's obsession over numbers I mention this:

At this moment, ILP has 9, out of their 6,000+ members on-line...and KT has 16 out of our 122.

And obsession is how the stupid try to comfort themselves...

Because the only reason Satyr could possibly be interested in ILP is sexual, and not the same interest a wolf would show towards a herd of sheep, packed into a stable.

ILP is brain-dead.
It's brain is Carleas.