Messages

https://millennialmoney.com/live-rent-free/

ass bum poo fart

https://twitter.com/kanyewest/status/987737044263682050?s=19

Hey guys.

I'm here because Rog left a pretty intense message on my personal Facebook, and I think the whole thing's pretty dumb but wanted to address it.

So anyway.

1. I interviewed 'Uncle BadTouch' online but am not planning to use the interview.
2. I was going to meet someone who I am pretty sure was a Uncle BadTouch alt but they bailed.

That's the extent of my connection with Uncle BadTouch. If you want to carry on with this paranoid theory that I joined the Uncle BadTouch brotherhood and have been tasked with going after you personally or whatever the  current theory you indulge is, I guess carry on like a pork chop here. But while I'm sorry that something I'm honestly not entirely clear on (I'm not so familiar with the figures of CoS) has happened that has hurt people you care about, I don't really have interest in being chased around the internet being blamed for it.

You often would say things like 'how do these people find me' when you attracted viscous, obsessive 'fans' on this forum, who wouldn't leave you alone. I would like you to consider the possibility that you are doing the same to me.

Take care.

I feel like that's possibly discussed in more detail in the Kerry Thornley introduction in the Illuminet press edition (Purple).

http://thewebfairy.com/chaos/

There's also a PDF of it put together by Pope Tim on the reading materials page of this site.

What's up with the kopyleft but don't put it in a book?

Beats me.

If it was reverse psychology, it's worked at least twice St Syn and Pope Tim have both disobeyed flagrently.

http://thewebfairy.com/chaos/

There's also a PDF of it put together by Pope Tim on the reading materials page of this site.

Perhaps try Pages from the Book of Life.

I've had the Bob Black thing confirmed from another source; he was an anarchist (still is) who was involved with COTSG and was sent a mailbomb from a member of the COTSG after that relationship soured.

But of course, as mentioned in thread Stang was in no way involved (other than I believe he knew of and had collaborated with Black).

And the poster above probably wasn't Black himself who doesn't really interact through the Internet, but anything's possible.

Wouldn't the cheap shit just cost more, and everything the cost of everything else scales up from there?

I'm not sure on how well regarded he is these days, but I believe that Adam Smith would  say that the cost of everything rises, but the cost of essentials (Bread and milk etc) stays the same.

I don't really care what happens on Facebook, but I think some of you may have blocked the 'Skeletin' character. From what I saw, she threw off at DOUR and Cram responded to her. Just in case that's the misunderstanding in place.

If it's not, please jsut disregard this comment.

There is a (second) Polish one on the way, and I've also come across a French one on the internets and a Portuguese one availible on Lulu.

Good job, Ricoh!

Q: Do you think that including LS content could possibly increase the appeal to publishers or increase sales of the published book? 

A: Short answer is no. Longer answer is that I didn't really consider it strongly one way or the other. 

A: Suppose a publisher said they'd print your work but only if you edit it to include more emphasis on LS and people's various reactions to his opinions. Would you edit it to appease the publisher? Or suppose a publisher said they looked up LS and said there is no way they're publishing the book if you include his interview? 

A: While being pretty hesitant to go too far down the path of hypotheticals, I will say a few things about this. First is that yes, the publisher does get to make suggestions that other participants do not. I am pretty sure I've alluded to that before.
Also, I have a potential publisher, who I won't name just yet out of avoiding presumption*, but they are someone I feel secure in being able to work with. As I've said before I do still regard myself as Discordian, and have a vested interest in displaying Discordia fairly and accurately, so while it's plausible that a publisher could ask me to make choices that would not meet this goal, the publisher I've spoken with is involved in Discordia, and I do trust them not to ask me to make choices that damage the integrity of the work. If it falls through with the current publisher and I work with someone else, naturally I will evaluate suggestions and if it takes things in a direction I'm uncomfortable with I'm willing to look at alternative options. 

Q: How important is it to you that these interviews are published? 

A: I suspect everything will be published at some point, as stand alone interviews or in the book. But how important is it that any given interview is published in the book? Not especially. It's important that I have the best final product possible and for that reason I have some favourites, but I'm prepared for the brutality of judgement that comes with the cut and burn of the editing process (the horror! The horror!)

Q: How important is it that you recoup costs? How important is it that you make a profit? And how do these interests relate to your editorial decisions?

A: This project, on paper, makes no sense. The short answer to the first two questions is that I don't realistically have any expectation of recouping costs and therefore have less expectation of making a profit. From a financial standpoint this project is a weird thing to do. From the standpoint of being in a bit of a rut, in a small town I'd grown frustrated by and a desire to produce something creative, it makes more sense. My main hope with this is that I produce something interesting and high quality enough that I can start to open up creative opportunities for myself that I didn't have access to previously.







*not Anaphora, before the conspiracy theory starts forming.

Dingo's recent actions positively REEK of Captain Utopia. Especially the part where he thinks he's being reasonable in spite of it being totally obvious to everyone else how utterly fucked up his words and actions are.

Dingo, there's no reason for me to ban you from PD (personal feelings aside) but I will have to absolutely insist that the Chasing Eris project and any future projects you might look to publish are not in any way connected to PD.com. I don't even want this site, any of the content in this site, or any of the usernames on this site mentioned at all, not even in passing.

Post seen.

Also, bump.

Talk to ECH re: this. I have contacted him regarding concerns, and he has said he will get back to me.

I'm not sure when or how you contacted me and what you're waiting for me to get back to you on. I already made my wishes clear.

Facebook messages 18/11/2012 (or 19th depending on how tomezones affect message date stamps), my message and your reply.
If you wish I can bump the conversation for you, or if you like I can disregard it and understand that the quote in this thread remains your full and only position.

It seems very much like you want to be a journalist, Dingo, so I'm curious about whether you have experience in the field. What have you reported on? What are your most important principles in producing a piece of journalism?

Could you give an example of a journalist, documentarian, or a particular piece of work that you hold in high esteem? What special considerations, if any, do you keep in mind in terms of writing about a culture that 1) you're an active participant in, 2) has nearly zero awareness among the broader public, and 3) that you have a vested interest in?

Hey Net,

No, I'm not a journalist by any stretch of the imagination. I am starting a journalism course. I haven't been flattering myself that anything I do now is seriously 'journalism.'

Principles I have taken though, in my first course, I was introduced to the idea of objectivity as a process. This meant you didn't have to make work that is completely unopinionated, but you do have to essentially give your readers enough information that if they think you're full of it, they can check your claims easily. From memory this meant

- if you know something, explain where you know it from.
- if you can't say where you know it from, say why you can't tell us (why was this source so important you were willing to take them off the record)
- if you make or report a criticism, you give the subject the right of response
- if you have a conflict of interest, announce it.

I love John Pilger very dearly. He exemplifies the above. Pretty much a card carrying lefty, he gives detailed investigation into complex world issues and has been given interviews with pretty major figures. Also the Aussie investigation into asbestos interests me.

In terms of influence, Jon Ronson and Louis Theuroux both have a detached, objective and non judgemental style I admire.

For one and three; me being active in and having a vested interest in Discordia I've done three things. I've been honest about my involvement, I've attempted to consciously step away from my own biases to let people define Discordia for themselves, and I've made mention of my own views, when occasionally relevant. Of course that last one will stay or go in the editing.

In case of 2 that it has nearly zero public awareness, at present I am explaining the origins of Discordia, then kind of building up a slow map of the Discordian egragore through the people I meet; someone says greyface, I explain what that means, etc. The main thing I'm doing is avoiding giving an explicit estimation of what Discordia IS, but emphasising the variation in interpretations. And of course while all this in what's happening in the writing process, if there's any problems left in place, the editing will aim to resolve them.