News:

I hate both of you because your conversation is both navel-gazing and puerile

Main Menu
Menu

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Messages - lexi

#46
Quote from: Cainad (dec.) on August 11, 2009, 06:05:53 PM
Quote from: fictionpuss on August 11, 2009, 06:02:19 PM
You're an asshole.

And you're a moron who likes the sound of his own thinking too much.

They were both right  :lulz:
#47
Apple Talk / Re: Spagbook
March 17, 2022, 09:34:11 PM
Quote from: altered on March 17, 2022, 01:10:17 AM
I'm fine for now. I think I've burned a lot of bridges and lost most of my friends for good because I'm not whole and healthy right now,
Relatable feels. Sometimes it's true, sometimes it's not, and I have been pleasantly undeservedly surprised in the past, but carrying the "maybe" over time gets heavy.


Quote from: altered on March 17, 2022, 01:10:17 AMbut I'm alive.

Yay!


Quote from: altered on March 17, 2022, 01:10:17 AM
I don't "need" anything, not really anyway.

I have passing desires, but they're expensive and pointless. They'd be nothing more than a golden bandaid over a festering gut wound. I'm fine. I appreciate it though.

Gotcha.


Quote from: altered on March 17, 2022, 01:10:17 AM
As for sharing, well. I don't feel any special attachment to them. I just thought those two showed my face well in unusual lighting and angles. The others either don't show my face at all or aren't stuff to share with just anyone, for that person's sake more than my own. One, the new part 6, is both.

Now i'm curious, but I don't have anything similar yet to offer in return.

Thanks for reminding me that the purpose of this thread is to show my face :)


Taken after surviving 6 months of construction and the fires caused by and as contractors
ripped off my landlord installing ridiculously over the top levels of fire-safety lights and alarms in this
unstable tinderbox of prime downtown Hamilton real estate
#48
Or Kill Me / Derealing
March 17, 2022, 02:23:49 PM

prey have you ever stood the tracks stormed on summer nights, hazey something on or other, playing chicken oncoming train!
-- munkitt<3n

well actually the simplest answer is just obviously to imagine a world without tracks!
-- Captain Utopia

A friend once told me about her two brothers who had failed the ultimate barstool test with the Toronto Subway. I responded with a great wave of empathy and tried to reassure her that I'd be extra sensitive around her and never joke about suicide again. She shrugged and laughed - "I don't care.. as long as it's funny.." - we walked on a little further. The last joke was on her though. Or rather; I saw the punchline coming - ducked - and she got hit.

At home and at work, this past week has felt like noting the times of passing trains, working the schedule out backwards from observation, and choosing my moments for a confrontation even more unwise than my opening line.

Have you ever stood on the tracks as the speeding train you're staring down comes hurtling predictably towards you with no intention or self-ability to change course, and yet you manage to remain firmly within your center of balance, and derail the trends events were following while trying to minimise hurt while probably maintaining your integrity? I mean - probably you have - but this is a new experience for me.

It feels like I've had two trains bounce off me such in the last week, another one coming up with family, and I think everyone involved is doing okay. Problems avoidable through open communication are frustrating and draining to me, though maintaining status quo can often be moreso.

feeling a little beat up, but finding myself slowly through intentful processes




Not a real word, so i'm stealing it :P
#49
Bring and Brag / They weren't wrong.
March 16, 2022, 12:55:32 PM
Briefly fulfilled my acting career ambition inspired initially by a childhood crush on David Hasselhoff, by helping a friend with her short films before killing her.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5vqHJxuX-I
#50
Apple Talk / Re: Spagbook
March 16, 2022, 12:38:14 PM
Quote from: altered on March 15, 2022, 01:14:38 PM
More like it's working on me, but yeah.

I'm worse than I've ever been these days, and "worse than I've ever been" when housed and with enough money to eat and smoke cigarettes by my standards is fucking abysmal.

Yikes. I'm sorry to hear that. You still have basic needs not met though? Feel free to send me a message.


Quote from: altered on March 15, 2022, 01:14:38 PM
So ... the photo series. The only outlet I have that is ... safe, for some values of safe.

Then thank you so much for sharing.

I don't expect the parts which are hurting to start healing until they feel they are understood and accepted.
#51
Apple Talk / Re: Spagbook
March 15, 2022, 01:00:43 PM
Cute! You're working on a Bloody dissociation series?
#52
Apple Talk / Re: Spagbook
March 14, 2022, 05:04:06 PM
First time braving the splash pad last year.

#53
I found this a very heart-warming example of platonic male love, and captured in such a unique way - a compilation of otherwise lost moments which are just adorable in context:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGljsJzymrs

#54
Aneristic Illusions / Re: E-Democracy
March 12, 2022, 03:18:05 PM
Quote from: POFP on March 10, 2022, 07:27:04 PM
Quote from: purpleXi on March 10, 2022, 01:26:43 AM
Quote from: POFP on May 24, 2021, 05:09:17 AM
I would like to say, I'm intrigued by the Proxy Voting System, not as a primary form of voting, but maybe as an extremely transient and optional feature when looking to vote in Elections, and more supported when voting on actual Legislation.

If it it were more supported on actual legislative issues, and you could interact as much or little as wanted - why would we need voting?


That's a fair point.

Don't threaten me with a good time :kingmeh:

I only come back here when things are rough and unclear and I need my ideas and conclusions thoroughly ridiculed, spanked and abused :evilmad: Just.. be a bit rougher next time.. please?

Kids these days. What happened to the old PD.com:argh!:


Quote from: POFP on March 10, 2022, 07:27:04 PM
I guess my main argument is that there needs to be some form of collective consent on both Legislation AND Representation, regardless of how involved everyone is. I would say the Proxy Voting System would have the same constraints as everything else I mentioned though, via Jurisdiction/Scoping rules. Whatever we'd be Proxy Voting on, it would only apply for items and groups within the Scope/Jurisdiction of that Council.

Yes, I agre... damn. This is not going as meticulously planned.

Clearly defined boundaries are essential.


Quote from: POFP on March 10, 2022, 07:27:04 PM
To be honest, this is more of a post-reading interpretation, as I actually forgot some of the mental context since writing this. Probably all the weed.

To be blunt - probably.

You got a plan for that?

No judgement, just care.


Quote from: POFP on March 10, 2022, 07:27:04 PM
Quote from: purpleXi on March 10, 2022, 01:26:43 AM
Quote from: POFP on May 24, 2021, 05:09:17 AM
The main concern I have with this being used in Elections (Where votes should be Anonymous),

But why? What is the maximum size of a conspiracy? How many evil power-hungry factory owners do we imagine are going to risk jail time by coercing the hundreds/thousands of people required to make a difference in the outcome? Why shouldn't the public at large be held accountable for our dumb collective decisions? Would you check out your boss' voting record before going in for an interview?

Honestly? Most of them. When people are put into a position of Power, whether their intentions are "Collective" or "Selfish"-driven, it's within their best interest to maintain that Power ("If I'm a good guy, I should keep my Power to ensure that it doesn't get into the wrong hands." (The reverse scenario for Selfish individuals is more obvious.)).

seems like a work of fiction might help here - i've run many of those abuse-scenarios out in my head to quite far depths, and I can't come up with a convincing plot line where the person in power retains it after forcing thousands of people into silence


Quote from: POFP on March 10, 2022, 07:27:04 PM
We can't make any assumptions about the percentage of people that will do things safely - We can only create a System that implements checks and balances that prevent non-safe results, or at least make them obvious and reversible by those that are affected by those results.

I remember reading about a document somewhere that tried to make its rules flexible and adaptable, but people forgot about the order to face the fear of disorder or something.

But yeah - I think any system that isn't self-correcting cannot be trusted.


Quote from: POFP on March 10, 2022, 07:27:04 PM
Re: "Why shouldn't the public at large be held accountable for our dumb collective decisions?":

Sometimes, short-circuiting/preventing known, bad actions is more important than maintaining accountability for those bad actions. We could all have a stupid moment where we vote for an idiot or piece of shit, and details about their prior actions are only identified after the election.

It's funny.. Brexit excluded, we rarely vote in elections for politicians to do 99% of the disasters they come up with all on their own.


Quote from: POFP on March 10, 2022, 07:27:04 PM
The other side could easily make the case that everyone who voted for that turd-burglar knew of those actions, and should be held accountable. Personally, I know plenty of people that voted for Trump that wouldn't have under more humane circumstances, and if they weren't feeling exploited. Society is sometimes going to have situations where a significant portion of us make the same bad decisions at the same time. We shouldn't give a Bad Populist the ammunition they need to paint a portion of our population as "The Enemy." I would rather create a system that reduces the odds of those bad decisions being difficult to overturn, than focus on ousting the people who implemented them. Rehabilitation over Punishment, if you Will.

I like this. Not naming and shaming, but implementing future accountability and trusting them to make better decisions?


Quote from: POFP on March 10, 2022, 07:27:04 PM
Not that Proxy Voting is the answer in this case - I just thought it was an interesting idea/feature for those who might not feel knowledgeable enough to vote directly. Personally, there are some topics I'd rather defer my votes to better experts for.

Yeah, so in such a system say.. I could defer my decisions to you, on certain broad or narrow political issues for as long as I want, if I felt we were on the same page but I needed to focus on other things for a while.

One interesting outcome of that - I was heavily absorbing the daily news cycles from 2006-2020, and some things have happened that I'm kinda foggy on - it would be so nice to be able to check back on the issues that I had subscribed to and would have processed myself then but delegated to my proxy.


Quote from: POFP on March 10, 2022, 07:27:04 PM
Quote from: purpleXi on March 10, 2022, 01:26:43 AM
Quote from: POFP on May 24, 2021, 05:09:17 AM
however, is potential bad actors saying one thing to gain Proxy Votes in order to actually direct them at the exact opposite Nominee that the Proxiers expected. Destabilization of the structure would be extremely easy in this case. Proxying should be extremely restricted or not allowed for Elections. This is not an issue when voting on Legislation, however, since Legislation Votes should be Public, just as they are now

That problem is removed when proxy-voting isn't anoymous. I can't think of a non-tedious non-gamificationable solution otherwise.

That's also fair. I suppose

Hello Kitty is my soft stop safeword. I like the "i suppose," it adds an element of doubt.. and I appreciate you responding to my concerns and trying to match my needs here, but when I say go harder I mean, aim for 11 - this was about a 2 on my scale.

Ok, let's try again..


Quote from: POFP on March 10, 2022, 07:27:04 PM
the Proxy could act as a Broker, in that they could distribute votes between a set of choices, maybe in a sort of ranking, and those who had their votes proxied should be able to see where their votes actually went. But the Proxy/Broker's individual vote, that was their choice, could remain anonymous. I guess, some degree of accountability must be facilitated for Proxies/Brokers, since that comes with quite a degree of Power.

Good point here  :)

Gorn Wedding!!! :argh!: :evilmad:


Quote from: POFP on March 10, 2022, 07:27:04 PM
Quote from: purpleXi on March 10, 2022, 01:26:43 AM
Quote from: POFP on May 24, 2021, 05:09:17 AM
(When cast by Representatives of course - Not in the case of Direct Democracy, which I don't agree with for reasons Dok et al have already clarified.).

The difference between Direct Democracy and Proxy Voting is the difference between good dental hygiene and just chewing gum before a date.

If I recall, the Proxy Voting in my view was more of a Feature, and less the primary form of Voting.

Oh crap - are you referring to the OP from 10 years ago? Ah - yeah - no - there's no way I'm consenting to read that pretentious wall-of-text-generator man-explaining at me what I already know.

Mind if we continue just from the first principles we're establishing here?

#55
Aneristic Illusions / Re: E-Democracy
March 10, 2022, 01:26:43 AM
Quote from: POFP on May 24, 2021, 05:09:17 AM
Considering voting, and much more sensitive communication-based Structures in government now rely on the Internet and various Software-based technologies anyways, I don't see any issues with Democracy (Representative) existing on a more instantaneous medium like the Internet. There are plenty of standard security practices that are effective enough at that scale, it's not that big of a deal. With the right Software design, it could even make the governmental Architecture easier to understand for the layman.

Certainly - the 24 hour cable news cycle is not the best way to learn how governments function, and we haven't built a viable alternative yet for most.


Quote from: POFP on May 24, 2021, 05:09:17 AM
I would like to say, I'm intrigued by the Proxy Voting System, not as a primary form of voting, but maybe as an extremely transient and optional feature when looking to vote in Elections, and more supported when voting on actual Legislation.

If it it were more supported on actual legislative issues, and you could interact as much or little as wanted - why would we need voting?



Quote from: POFP on May 24, 2021, 05:09:17 AM
The main concern I have with this being used in Elections (Where votes should be Anonymous),

But why? What is the maximum size of a conspiracy? How many evil power-hungry factory owners do we imagine are going to risk jail time by coercing the hundreds/thousands of people required to make a difference in the outcome? Why shouldn't the public at large be held accountable for our dumb collective decisions? Would you check out your boss' voting record before going in for an interview?


Quote from: POFP on May 24, 2021, 05:09:17 AM
however, is potential bad actors saying one thing to gain Proxy Votes in order to actually direct them at the exact opposite Nominee that the Proxiers expected. Destabilization of the structure would be extremely easy in this case. Proxying should be extremely restricted or not allowed for Elections. This is not an issue when voting on Legislation, however, since Legislation Votes should be Public, just as they are now

That problem is removed when proxy-voting isn't anoymous. I can't think of a non-tedious non-gamificationable solution otherwise.


Quote from: POFP on May 24, 2021, 05:09:17 AM
(When cast by Representatives of course - Not in the case of Direct Democracy, which I don't agree with for reasons Dok et al have already clarified.).

The difference between Direct Democracy and Proxy Voting is the difference between good dental hygiene and just chewing gum before a date.


Quote from: POFP on May 24, 2021, 05:09:17 AM
Personally, I think this thread has been looking at the Voting and Legislative process problems from the wrong angle (To be fair, I only read the first few pages, some pages in the middle, and the last few pages, so some of this may have been brought up here or other places already.). The problems in today's society are generally caused by Legal/Late Stage Capitalism's (Different from Free Market Capitalism, in that the State has formalized and blessed its natural failures and Monopolies.) natural support for Hierarchical, Bureaucratic Organizational Structures through:

- Overcomplication of legal and business processes

Those legal and business processes require it to maintain their continued existence though, so they have their own sentience.


Quote from: POFP on May 24, 2021, 05:09:17 AM

- Hoarding/Gatekeeping of knowledge of these processes within highly specialized Domains of the Private Sector

It's a boys club mostly, though more and more non-men are learning to play the same game each year - yay progress!


Quote from: POFP on May 24, 2021, 05:09:17 AM
We solve these problems by enforcing simplification of Legislation through standardization of its
language,  and through the use of Encapsulation (Often used in Programming and other linguistics
fields to establish intuitive Abstraction Layers within written Instruction that allow you to reference
groups of smaller instructions with simpler high-level instructions.).

That might be too big to fit on a billboard - how do we gain mass support for this concept?


Quote from: POFP on May 24, 2021, 05:09:17 AM
Basically, if you can't represent your legislation in a recursive drop-down tree of standardized, reusable instructions, conditions, and ideas, it's not structured enough to be acceptable. Object/Domain-orientation can also be applied for further high-level organization.

Agreed.


Quote from: POFP on May 24, 2021, 05:09:17 AM
Why treat legislation like Software? Because Legislation is a formal, syntactically specific form of instruction, and because States all over are already starting to do this (kind of) as they've begun transcribing legislation and legal codes into websites. Recursive linking is already implemented through the Article, Section, etc. Structure. This should be extrapolated out into the fundamental syntax of legal language. The establishment of a structured syntax standard that specializes in Object/Domain Orientation and Encapsulation would make it easier for the Layman to understand the Legislation being voted on without requiring a Law Degree or special training. It also increases re-usability of Legislation Components in the same way it makes Software Modules reusable. It would facilitate the average Citizen's ability to drag and drop high-level Legislative snippets and ideas into a proposed bill as high-level components (That still contain all the low-level, expanded legalese that make up those components) and submit the full proposals in almost no time at all, even using popular/preferres components from existing and successful pieces of Legislation. If done properly, it should be possible for someone in the Electorate to identify a problem and submit fully functional, repeatable Legislation in a day that can be quickly assessed and amended by the Legislature before going to a vote.

I see what you mean, totally - the fact that the public can't do this right now means that skill is not being developed.


Quote from: POFP on May 24, 2021, 05:09:17 AM
This Architecture, of course, would require collaboration between teams of Linguistics experts, Software Architects and Engineers, Lawyers, Teachers, and Community Organizers to ensure that current Local, State, and National Legislation is properly transcribed ("Properly" meaning, it meets the suggested criteria of being modular, while also being linguistically inclusive of the layman and internationalized with accurate translations to other languages.), and we would need to standardize the Software Solution and open the Source for transparency and Community-based Hardening. But it wouldn't be as expensive or time consuming to implement as you might think.

It would need to be living software, yes.


Quote from: POFP on May 24, 2021, 05:09:17 AM
The next problem, after you've made Legislation uniform and accessible, is the distribution of Democratic Power, and destruction of unnecessary Bureaucracy. No more of this City Manager + City Council + Cabinet + Department Head Appointee, stretch each layer of Hierarchy between elected positions upward as much as possible bullshit. If we want a Meritocracy, we need to structure the Democracy in the same way that Meritocratic Domain Specialization naturally occurs, and we need to make sure each layer in the Hierarchy is subject to Democratic oversight by the layer below AND the layer above (Above -> Merely by representation instead of Direct Democracy; Below -> By Election/Delegation of Members and Intent upwards to fill higher levels/tiers).

I like the direction you're thinking. Accountability is required to ensure the layer "below" can enact oversight.


Quote from: POFP on May 24, 2021, 05:09:17 AM
I recommend a modified form of Participatory Politics, where Democratic Hierarchies in all branches of government are formed as needed from the ground up through Community organization around Governing Domains (Hierarchies of Categorization of Legislation topics, as well as governing jurisdiction by population density and location.). My primary concern with it's suggested implementation on Wikipedia is that everyone is required to participate as a council member at the bottom rung, at least. I think we could easily replace the structure of the current State's major components with something that resembles their proposed "Parpolity" structure without replacing it entirely with a system where every single person is directly involved, since a significant number of people won't care to be involved in government and their involvement will likely impede those who do care. Besides, I think the assumption in their proposed implementation was that anyone who wasn't involved was simply ignored by the system, either defaulting non-participants to Anarchism or surrounding State Rule, which is hilariously unrealistic. As long as the Electoral and Legislative Proposal processes are open to all citizens that fall under corresponding Jurisdictions, Agencies, Legislatures, and Courts, I think we're okay with actual Council participation being optional, but immediately accessible by the individual, if preferred. It's also important not to lose the current Organizations and Infrastructure that currently exist by rebuilding each Agency/Legislature/Court from the ground up again. It's possible to transition existing Organizations to the new Structure and re-adjust the scale afterwards as needed using the new system's predefined processes.

Yeah, I think there may be more than one way it could be implemented though - the hard part is selling something that the public doesn't want because they don't understand why they would want it.


Quote from: POFP on May 24, 2021, 05:09:17 AM
The structure ultimately ensures:

- Cancellation of Mob Rule through Randomized Courts at each Council Tier, made up of individuals within the Scope of that Council's jurisdiction.

- Scope of Legislation is restricted to the Scope of the proposing Council (And all its corresponding and represented, but non-governing citizens in its jurisdiction) downward

- Hierarchy is established from the bottom up, instead of the top down, ensuring stratification is minimized to what is deemed necessary by the lower levels to ensure adequate domain specialization, representation, and specificity.

Love this.


Quote from: POFP on May 24, 2021, 05:09:17 AM
It's also suggested that Parecon (Participatory Economics) is paired with this to ensure similar Democratization of the Means of Production, but I have the same concerns with this structure that I had with the other. I think we've seen enough Democratic Workplace structures succeed (Like Co-Ops, and similar structures.) that we can come up with a mix that enforces Socialization of the Means of Production without resulting in a planned economy like they suggest. Market Socialism is probably ideal, and I think it would be best implemented using concepts from Parecon - Not the whole thing. Mostly just the decentralized organization of Democratic Labor, but with Personal and Shared Ownership of Property giving way to a fully featured Market that is less likely to leave its constituents starving or dependent on Slave Labor or Planetary destruction to survive.

Happy to talk specifics, either in this thread, or in another. This was a very high-level overview.

Looked into Sociocracy a little last year.. happy to see more and more worker co-ops coming into existence.
#56
Aneristic Illusions / Re: Picking Cain's Brains
March 09, 2022, 03:16:11 PM
If successful, Putin acting out in this way and seizing Ukraine may give him.. what.. another decade of power?

How long would he have had if he never followed through on his aging threat to invade?
#57
How did writing things out work for you? I've fallen out of that habit, but this thread reminded me how useful that tool can be. When I think about the times I felt trapped by looping thoughts, the inability to adequately express them was a root cause.

Quote from: Exoteric on December 07, 2020, 11:08:30 PM
I feel like there are always more ways for something to go wrong than to go right.

I agree with that if you take individual short-term situations and score them. I also feel there are more positive long term outcomes possible in the branching and merging of reality trees, which contain those negative knots, and couldn't exist without them.

#58
Quote from: Fujikoma on November 17, 2020, 04:22:55 AM
Can I just take back all the dirty gritty shit I just said?
That's an interesting question - can you? Like, does and should it make a difference whether:

  • it's something that still resonates with you but no longer seems practical to defend, or
  • it's something that resonated with you, but no longer feels right, or
  • it's something that didn't resonate with you, but sounded good "in-style," or
  • it's something less explicable?

Whether or not you succeed, you can try - and that alone has value, does it not?
#59
Quote from: Fujikoma on November 17, 2020, 04:00:59 AM
This is a world of force. We're edging away from that but it has always been about force. It will be about force for as long as we solve problems with ballistics. To argue otherwise is to be a victim, and who wants that? This world is hard, lonely, fucked up, and you take whatever you can get from it, because it only gets worse from here. One day, you're going to get older, and waste away and die. Nobody is going to remember Alexis the graceful soul but they will never forget Alexis the horrific savage.
I have to go wash my hair now, but if you expound upon this theory in a separate thread - I'll argue the fuck out of it later.
#60
Quote from: Fujikoma on November 17, 2020, 03:36:20 AM
But me and where I belong, it feels like wherever I get accepted I have to tear my way in with my teeth. It's definitely not something that's just a given, not something that happens overnight, but I really, actively have to force my personality on everyone until they get used to me,
Does it bother you that an approach where you force anything is by definition non-consensual - or am I misunderstanding you? Is this something you are aware of in the moment, or a post-event narrative?