It's mah birfday...

[Captain Utopia]

No, I was simply asking you a question of where you draw the line with regards content you would remove if a contributor added it and you had a problem with it (e.g. child porn). You said you'd censor nothing, and refused to comment on how you would approach the examples I proposed. Your right. I didn't demand that you answer the question, and in fact said that you're welcome to ignore it, but I did point out when you avoided it entirely. Which you are still doing.

How am I trying to impose a grid upon you? You're free to ignore me and my questions.

maybe its a stupid question,

for example it would be a stupid question to ask if ... he drew the line at the same point as everyone who has a website and supports free speech draws it "no posting things that can get the owner in legal trouble"

or a stupid question if he doesn't care if the law gets broken and he isn't going to admit it because KYFMS and he doesn't want to get caught..

its still a stupid question friction puss - if he has a free speech zone then the law is the line
- if he is an outlaw he knows to keep his fucking mouth shut.
end of story

If it is that simple then why was this not addressed by either of you when I brought the free speech/legal issue up back on page 2?

If he is an outlaw, then why doesn't he just lie and claim option #1? Would seem like the perfect cover.

[Dimocritus]

No, I was simply asking you a question of where you draw the line with regards content you would remove if a contributor added it and you had a problem with it (e.g. child porn). You said you'd censor nothing, and refused to comment on how you would approach the examples I proposed. Your right. I didn't demand that you answer the question, and in fact said that you're welcome to ignore it, but I did point out when you avoided it entirely. Which you are still doing.

How am I trying to impose a grid upon you? You're free to ignore me and my questions.

maybe its a stupid question,

for example it would be a stupid question to ask if ... he drew the line at the same point as everyone who has a website and supports free speech draws it "no posting things that can get the owner in legal trouble"

or a stupid question if he doesn't care if the law gets broken and he isn't going to admit it because KYFMS and he doesn't want to get caught..

its still a stupid question friction puss - if he has a free speech zone then the law is the line
- if he is an outlaw he knows to keep his fucking mouth shut.
end of story

If it is that simple then why was this not addressed by either of you when I brought the free speech/legal issue up back on page 2?

If he is an outlaw, then why doesn't he just lie and claim option #1? Would seem like the perfect cover.

Well, for one: I figured a good portion of that would be considered COMMON SENSE around here. You have taught me a valuable lesson: never assume that anyone on a Discordian website knows what the fuck is going on.

Meanwhile, can someone please talk some shit about the stuff that I wrote???

[Captain Utopia]

Troll not ruint.

I've read the Principia and the Illuminatus! and I'm pretty sure I understand the meanings of most of it.

You're one ahead of me then, I'm only half-way through both.

You are attempting to oppose your own grid on what me and my associates are doing. That is bull-shit, and no matter how right or wrong you may be, I will never accept any imposition. You want to know my stance? Well figure it the fuck out,

No, I was simply asking you a question of where you draw the line with regards content you would remove if a contributor added it and you had a problem with it (e.g. child porn). You said you'd censor nothing, and refused to comment on how you would approach the examples I proposed. Your right. I didn't demand that you answer the question, and in fact said that you're welcome to ignore it, but I did point out when you avoided it entirely. Which you are still doing.

How am I trying to impose a grid upon you? You're free to ignore me and my questions.

Ok then, in that case, the answer to your question is Smoked Haddock Galoshes. 

Lampshade will likely be in touch shortly.

[Captain Utopia]

Well, for one: I figured a good portion of that would be considered COMMON SENSE around here. You have taught me a valuable lesson: never assume that anyone on a Discordian website knows what the fuck is going on.

You're welcome

[fomenter]

If it is that simple then why was this not addressed by either of you when I brought the free speech/legal issue up back on page 2?

If he is an outlaw, then why doesn't he just lie and claim option #1? Would seem like the perfect cover.

i cant correct them all

[Captain Utopia]

If it is that simple then why was this not addressed by either of you when I brought the free speech/legal issue up back on page 2?

If he is an outlaw, then why doesn't he just lie and claim option #1? Would seem like the perfect cover.

i cant correct them all

You could start by pointing out exactly what you think you see is dumb.

[Roaring Biscuit!]

in response to the OP, and dimo's most recent attempt to re-rail the thread:

I do like your crazy ranting style, but I'd say, from someone who classes themselves discordian, lay off the use of second person.  people tend to switch off if you are too aggressive in the writing style.  If you're making blind accusations/generalisations, you can expect a lot of people to say, "actually I'm not like that at all, this guy's an idiot etc."  Even if they are exactly like that and you're not.

Maybe you could try, for a fun self-mindfuck, to act according to your ideals as they are now, but preach the opposite.  Might be interesting.

To clarify:

Current ideal:  smoking is bad      Hypocratic action:  smoking.

New ideal:  Smoking is good        Hypocratic action: not smoking.

Thats just a basic example, but I'm sure you could apply it a lot of your current philosophies, and maybe you'd find out something interesting.

God I talk a lot of shit.

[Captain Utopia]

FYI fiction puss is also a noob and an ass,  he is testing his claws on you, he posted a bunch of dumb shit and got called on it when he showed up, and is trying to do the same to you (poorly)

Is that a reason not to let my troll roll? I annoyed you at some point?

[Dimocritus]

in response to the OP, and dimo's most recent attempt to re-rail the thread:

I do like your crazy ranting style, but I'd say, from someone who classes themselves discordian, lay off the use of second person.  people tend to switch off if you are too aggressive in the writing style.  If you're making blind accusations/generalisations, you can expect a lot of people to say, "actually I'm not like that at all, this guy's an idiot etc."  Even if they are exactly like that and you're not.

Maybe you could try, for a fun self-mindfuck, to act according to your ideals as they are now, but preach the opposite.  Might be interesting.

To clarify:

Current ideal:  smoking is bad      Hypocratic action:  smoking.

New ideal:  Smoking is good        Hypocratic action: not smoking.

Thats just a basic example, but I'm sure you could apply it a lot of your current philosophies, and maybe you'd find out something interesting.

God I talk a lot of shit.

Ahh, thank you so much. You're an all right guy. For some reason, I find it's really difficult for me to get solid constructive criticism, so this is much appreciated. Although, I like the blind accusations/generalizations. I think they're funny. And I also think it's funny if any one was ever all like "OMG, I am sooooo not like that *snarfs cheese-burger*, but you are probably right in saying that. As far as the self mind fuck, I've done it in the past. It can get really confusing when you already have an identity crisis (I like the word "identity" because it's got a tity). Just curious, did you just read the bit about smoking, or have you read the other stuff, too? There is some more free-form/trippy shit in there, too.

[fomenter]

You could start by pointing out exactly what you think you see is dumb.

i cant believe i am bored enough to do this

I told you, I can't (and won't) control or censor the contributors of my site, so if you want to go on a tirade find the guy who posted that and get emotional with him. Welcome to the internet, things may get offensive. Now that that's done, it is also nice to meet you.

1st dumb - he confused what he allows to be put up on his site with his endorsement of the pic through xposting here

And if a contributor advocates for a change in law with regards abolishing the age of consent while making it clear that they don't respect that law in their personal life?
You can play the "free speech" and "internet" cards if you wish, but if you don't make your personal stand clear than people will assume the worst from whom you choose to associate with.
You're also not going to allow something to be published which is going to get you in trouble with National Security services, because shits'n'giggles isn't worth it, and I can repost something from wikileaks if you want to test that theory.

You have a line that you will draw, so where is that line?

dumb x2 you continue his mistake and try to turn it into a pointless argument about freedom of speech

and pretty much everything in this thread after that point including you not understanding what freedom of speech means and him not being able to explain it to you


and now re jack back to....

[Dimocritus]

For the record, I did not x-post that picture. Someone else did and I wish they hadn't. I wanted constructive critisicm of my writing (it's hard to find with the people I know, and you guys seem extra critical), not an all-out shit flinging contest.

[Roaring Biscuit!]

I also skimmed through the bit about rubbish movies, and the one about crazy thoughts and chemicals, which I found interesting, but I'm a bit sleepy so I don't really have a proper opinion on it yet... maybe ill re-read properly tomorrow

[Kai]

FYI fiction puss is also a noob and an ass,  he is testing his claws on you, he posted a bunch of dumb shit and got called on it when he showed up, and is trying to do the same to you (poorly)

Is that a reason not to let my troll roll? I annoyed you at some point?

You seem to think that trolling discordians is a totally original idea, that it's never been done before.

It's not new, and unless you've established yourself it is STUPID.

As much as we think for ourselves, there is still a group sociality here based in democratic meritocracy. If you don't have merit established by actually contributing (or doing something funny or entertaining), or have negative merit from doing something stupid, you aren't accepted when you play "poke the n00b".

[fomenter]

For the record, I did not x-post that picture. Someone else did and I wish they hadn't. I wanted constructive critisicm of my writing (it's hard to find with the people I know, and you guys seem extra critical), not an all-out shit flinging contest.

ok i didnt see that it changes it a bit (i came in to this thread late)   just ignore the 1st dumb  part of my last post..

[Captain Utopia]

I told you, I can't (and won't) control or censor the contributors of my site, so if you want to go on a tirade find the guy who posted that and get emotional with him. Welcome to the internet, things may get offensive. Now that that's done, it is also nice to meet you.

1st dumb - he confused what he allows to be put up on his site with his endorsement of the pic through xposting here

No I didn't. I take his endorsement of the picture to be implied by the fact the picture is on his website. It's a magazine with contributors, not to be confused with a forum.

And if a contributor advocates for a change in law with regards abolishing the age of consent while making it clear that they don't respect that law in their personal life?
You can play the "free speech" and "internet" cards if you wish, but if you don't make your personal stand clear than people will assume the worst from whom you choose to associate with.
You're also not going to allow something to be published which is going to get you in trouble with National Security services, because shits'n'giggles isn't worth it, and I can repost something from wikileaks if you want to test that theory.

You have a line that you will draw, so where is that line?

dumb x2 you continue his mistake and try to turn it into a pointless argument about freedom of speech

and pretty much everything in this thread after that point including you not understanding what freedom of speech means and him not being able to explain it to you

I understand freedom of speech quite clearly. I didn't bring up freedom of speech. Would he allow Rev Lampshade as a contributor? From what I can tell so far - yes.

I simply wanted to know what his rough boundaries and motivations were before deciding whether I wanted to spend more time going through his writing and giving him a critique.