On this day of Saturday, despite having in full exposure of witnesses been forewarned that This May Not Be A Good Idea, I'd like to discuss 'FNORD.' This is my idea of what 'FNORD' is, what the related terminology means, and so on and so forth. I'm interested in other imaginations on this subject -- until these boards, the dozen or two other humourously-serious Discordians I'd met had basically the same sense of the term as myself. Shit diversity bang flame.
This article isn't going to be funny. I'm basically aneristic.
My original exposure to the Principia was as plaintext. The rewriter of that edition transcribed some, but not all, of the more important diagrams/commentary/graffiti from the original Principia Discordia into the text... there was some surrounding context for the Principia, and that's where I first heard the term fnord, largely as a nonsense word used to indicate "something." Sometimes enlightenment.
Nigel, people who aren't Nigel but also already know the background, feel free to skip this next paragraph. It's a recap.
So it was just a goofy word to me until I read Illuminatus! sometime rather later, in which 'FNORD' was a much more-referenced concept. The main character is taught how to 'see the FNORDs,' and shown a room of children being brainwashed to ignore them with the phrase 'if don't see the FNORD it can't eat you.' The character then, suddenly, starts seeing FNORD interposed into text -- they're in newspapers, on TV, everywhere there's media/religion/government/Authority.
But I've never thought of FNORD as a literary convention, or something that purely indicates a word designed to inspire fear. That's kind of the lead-in we're given by Illuminatus!, but I feel like that's metaphorical (shocker, i know, a metaphor in R.A.W.). FNORD as a term refers to any situation in which the context/environment is being manipulated to induce a reaction of obedience or compliancy, especially to a course of action, in the 'reader.' I see it as a semiotic concept, a part of meta-language.
The best single example I could give of what I see as FNORD is Jack Chick, a subject I'm going to come back to in another post. Jack Chick is a master (if perhaps by fecundity and ferocity rather than outright skill) of the forced (false) dilemma, the strawman, the Big Lie... all the many tactics of FNORD. It's propaganda, yes, but there's another aspect to it.
See, as far as I can tell, Chick actually believes what he writes. There are implications here, things that seperate FNORD from simply being "propaganda techniques with heavy does of xenophobia and population control" Chick didn't originate his position, and he's not 'pushing' it out of some desire for personal wealth or power. Whether he or any one else who propagates FNORD does in fact gain those things, or even is consciously aware that they are likely to (Pat Robertson being another FNORDist who does so -- apologies, I'm not trying to target a specific religion here, this is just the big one in my home culture and thus the easiest for me to think of examples from), is kind of immaterial. They'd do it anyway. They picked up the FNORD from somebody else, they pass it on to others: they're basically just carriers. I believe they think this is really how the world works. They think that stretching the truth just a little to cover some of the gaps is the Only Way to keep out the Bad Stuff, that if they compromise even a tiny bit, the world is seriously going to fucking end, or at least their country/ideals/whatever are going to be fucked beyond all recovery. And they absolutely do not ever consider the implications of the past twenty generations or so of people 'stretching the truth just a little bit' as it's being transmitted to them.
I think that's why we get the analogy we do in Illuminatus! of a tired-looking schoolteacher brainwashing kids about FNORD. If a carrier or antecedent of a FNORD (an antecedent being one of these Authorities like the one Chick is in the body of) could literally teach children in school to have an instinctive fear of some concept, they'd do it, for the greater good. I mean, hell, people have literally tried that.
But rather than saying, "It's a propaganda technique kind of like the ones used by America during the cold war to spread fear of Communism, with the important element that it's picked up and carried by individuals in the environment to reinforce other individuals in the environment's receptivity to the fear or obedience that is being induced; and while it may not have any single originator, its originators probably wholeheartedly believed the prototypical form of the beliefs it is intended to inspire in others, and also there's some other stuff to it," R.A.W. et al (probably wisely, because that way they don't ever have to rely on a single definition) gave us a literary allusion and called it FNORD.
I have no reason to think this is a particularly revolutionary view or explanation. Hell, I didn't think it was even substantially disputed until last night. I'm posting because it was suggested to me to do so and I'd like to see where the discussion goes. And that is all.
I think you're kind of stating the obvious.
I for one never heard of Fnord
or the Principia Discordia
is some kind of web page?
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on June 07, 2009, 04:07:13 AM
I for one never heard of Fnord
or the Principia Discordia
is some kind of web page?
Is this crazy new fad. All the cool cats are doing it.
This is fucking amazing. You've identified exactly what I've been trying to say this whole time. Fuck, I've been on this board for YEARS, and you're the first one who's gotten it.
Thankfully, I am no longer alone.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on June 07, 2009, 03:41:18 AM
I think you're kind of stating the obvious.
That's what I thought, too. Then everyone was all like, "NO MAN YOU CAN'T TALK ABOUT FNORDS THAT WAY." And I was all like, "Well, fine. What are they, yo mamma?"
And then we had cake.
Quote from: Arafelis on June 07, 2009, 06:08:20 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on June 07, 2009, 03:41:18 AM
I think you're kind of stating the obvious.
That's what I thought, too. Then everyone one guy was all like, "NO MAN YOU CAN'T TALK ABOUT FNORDS THAT WAY." And I was all like, "Well, fine. What are they, yo mamma?"
And then we had cake.
fixed.
Cmon Nigel. Take it easy on the guy. He knows what he's talking about.
Quote from: LMNO on June 07, 2009, 06:14:30 AM
Cmon Nigel. Take it easy on the guy. He knows what he's talking about.
I absolutely know my cake. And I know it is real, although I have never seen it. This is because I've got faith. Faith means knowing things that you can't see.
Yup. You & me, same page.
You are killing me.
Let's keep it up, LMNO! Soon, we'll have the Wicked Nigel of the West reduced to a puddle!
I actually kind of liked DK. Can we have him back?
Quote from: Arafelis on June 07, 2009, 03:00:38 AM...didn't read...
So it was just a goofy word to me until I read Illuminatus!
...didn't read...
I TAKE OFFENSE! :crankey: It is not my word!
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on June 07, 2009, 04:07:13 AM
I for one never heard of Fnord
or the Principia Discordia
is some kind of web page?
I havn't read any of it... I am just kinda here like gum on a shoe!
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on June 07, 2009, 03:41:18 AM
I think you're kind of stating the obvious.
To be fair, I kind of asked him to write this. Since he went on about how there are fnords in some of the articles in the BIP Pamphlet.
So I asked him to explain what fnords mean to him, hopefully getting a littlebit of a less ambiguous and vague explanation. Cause if you go by "what [discordian] people generally understand as fnord" you get a very, very wide definition.
Actually I think he wrote this straight from the post form, without really mulling over much about what exactly he was trying to say. So after getting his thoughts together for the largest part of the post, unfortunately writing it all down (no we don't want to read every single thought in your head*), in the end he kind of gets it together and summarizes it here:
Quote"It's a propaganda technique kind of like the ones used by America during the cold war to spread fear of Communism, with the important element that it's picked up and carried by individuals in the environment to reinforce other individuals in the environment's receptivity to the fear or obedience that is being induced; and while it may not have any single originator, its originators probably wholeheartedly believed the prototypical form of the beliefs it is intended to inspire in others, and also there's some other stuff to it," R.A.W. et al (probably wisely, because that way they don't ever have to rely on a single definition) gave us a literary allusion and called it FNORD.
whether this is the one proper definition, no, but it is his. it would have been useful if he could have just said this when asked in his critique of the BIP thread. but there he had only a vague notion what he was talking about, now he knows (a bit more).
* unless your name is Sepia of course.
Quote from: Nigel on June 07, 2009, 06:35:36 AM
I actually kind of liked DK. Can we have him back?
Im told it would require an offering of a whole pig (APPLE in its mouth and all) and even them maybe not
o and acceptance of food rations, even if you only really eat once a day.
Quote from: Nigel on June 07, 2009, 06:35:36 AM
I actually kind of liked DK. Can we have him back?
has a history of stalking women,
tries to justify rape
I hope we dont get him back
as much fun as he was to mess with, i agree we dont need him back..
Quote from: LMNO on June 07, 2009, 06:14:30 AM
Cmon Nigel. Take it easy on the guy. He knows what he's talking about.
He's an asshole. End of story. You might know something AMAZING, but if you deliberately piss off the people you are trying to tell it to, you may as well not have bothered.
Fuck him. He came in trolling, he can leave the same way, as far as I am concerned.
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on June 07, 2009, 05:46:25 PM
Quote from: Nigel on June 07, 2009, 06:35:36 AM
I actually kind of liked DK. Can we have him back?
has a history of stalking women,
tries to justify rape
I hope we dont get him back
Ah yeah I almost forgot that, fuck that guy.
In the PD, "fnord" had no meaning, and THAT was the point of it.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on June 07, 2009, 06:07:35 PM
You might know something AMAZING, but if you deliberately piss off the people you are trying to tell it to, you may as well not have bothered.
Funny, but that was the point I was trying to make with my critique of Welcome to Prison.
I don't want you to be angry, but I also probably don't care if you are.
From my point of view, which I'm sure you're deeply concerned with (see above), I took the first punch. I replied evenly to Nasturtiums, and this whole "fuck you for trying to tell us what fnords are" meme that's getting passed around is a direct result of the questions they asked and what I gaged to be holes in
their knowledge,
after fucking asking them.
I will, as I think I've shown, respond evenly to reasonable points made. This isn't an invitation with an expiration date: whenever you want to start over without jumping to the conclusions that appeal to your rage and boredom, I'd welcome it. In the meantime, I will respond in the tone I am addressed in. You don't need to be a bubblegum witch to see where that road leads.
I still don't get what a fnord is
can you explain again?
Absolutely. (http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0042/0042_01.asp)
(Edit: Fixed it.)
Quote from: Arafelis on June 07, 2009, 08:24:53 PM
Absolutely. (http://"http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0042/0042_01.asp")
Page load error. :(
FRONDS??
(http://www.reddirtroad.net/Gallery/Green/Fern-Fronds.jpg)
Quote from: Kai on June 07, 2009, 09:34:23 PM
FRONDS??
(http://www.reddirtroad.net/Gallery/Green/Fern-Fronds.jpg)
Yay, fronds! :)
everytime I see the word FNORD I'm now going to think of FERNS.
Yes, very good plan Kai, very good.
Quote from: Kai on June 07, 2009, 09:51:46 PM
everytime I see the word FNORD I'm now going to think of FERNS.
Yes, very good plan Kai, very good.
Fernord?
Fronds are very pretty:
(http://www.auburn.edu/projects/sustainability/newsletter/fern%20frond.jpg)
nope its spelled
frodn
http://www.warcraftrealms.com/char/69925402
NOOOOOOOO, frond!
(http://www.nzmustsee.co.nz/images/Punga%20Frond.jpg)
that is a fucking awesome plant thing.
This is what ferns look like where I come from, bizatches:
Hapu'u (Hawaiian Tree Fern):
(http://www.ctahr.hawaii.edu/NREM/courtyard/hapuu.jpg)
You mean the dyslectic discordian thinks a fern is an illuminati plant?
JACK CHICK IS A FROND??!?
Now THAT, explains everything.
Also, notice the use of absurdism in the last page. Shows that you don't need to be a pinealist to partake, and it can even be FUNNY.
Arafelis, I believe instead of the Illuminatus! Trilogy or the PD you should be reading the Book of Palms (http://www.palms.org/).
There isn't enough serious discussion here, this is a frondulent discussion on the topic of FNORDS.
Fnords are an endangered species, just as scared of you as you are of them. It's only because of human encroachment upon their usual territorial lands that they have become a problem. You see they had to survive, so they adapted and evolved a camouflage. It worked quite well until those old farts Bob Wilson and Bob Shea told people about their tiny sanctuaries. Now, humans and cabbages are regularly turning up fnords and ruining their habitats.
Please, the next time you are about to dissect a piece of propaganda, pause for a moment and think of the fnords.
(http://i531.photobucket.com/albums/dd359/Discoblastula/plants.jpg)
Lovely fronds!
Quote from: Arafelis on June 07, 2009, 07:50:35 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on June 07, 2009, 06:07:35 PM
You might know something AMAZING, but if you deliberately piss off the people you are trying to tell it to, you may as well not have bothered.
Funny, but that was the point I was trying to make with my critique of Welcome to Prison.
I don't want you to be angry, but I also probably don't care if you are.
From my point of view, which I'm sure you're deeply concerned with (see above), I took the first punch. I replied evenly to Nasturtiums, and this whole "fuck you for trying to tell us what fnords are" meme that's getting passed around is a direct result of the questions they asked and what I gaged to be holes in their knowledge, after fucking asking them.
I will, as I think I've shown, respond evenly to reasonable points made. This isn't an invitation with an expiration date: whenever you want to start over without jumping to the conclusions that appeal to your rage and boredom, I'd welcome it. In the meantime, I will respond in the tone I am addressed in. You don't need to be a bubblegum witch to see where that road leads.
No, no I don't. We've been down this road a time or two. So you started off with insults, and now you're graciously willing to be reasonable when other people are? How very nice.
Eat a dick.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on June 08, 2009, 12:31:18 AM
Eat a dick (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=83).
Absolutely.
Quote from: Arafelis on June 08, 2009, 01:43:40 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on June 08, 2009, 12:31:18 AM
Eat a dick (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=83).
Absolutely.
I'm comfortable with that.
Ooh Roger and Arafelis are gonna have hot hate sex! Either that or there is some cannibalism about to commence.
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on June 08, 2009, 05:47:15 AM
Ooh Roger and Arafelis are gonna have hot hate sex! Either that or there is some cannibalism about to commence.
:fap: :fap: :fap:
On second reading, the OP's argument seems like some mixture of ad hominem and straw men.
Quote from: Kai on June 09, 2009, 12:30:40 AM
On second reading, the OP's argument seems like some mixture of ad hominem and straw men.
How so?
The ad hominem is "the BIP is dark and uninviting". Rather than criticising the philosophical content of the work, you're wailing over your emotional reaction to it. You haven't argued that the points are wrong, rather, you've come to the conclusion that they're not incorrect, you just /don't like the conclusion/. Thus, ad hominems.
The strawman in this case is fnords. There's no talk about fnords in the BIP. Theres even very little to no talk at all about fnords, the concept of fnords and the use of fnords in propaganda in the Principia Discordia. Fnord is irrelevant to the discussion, thus a strawman.
I never mention the BIP in the post, much less discuss its textual treatment of my subject.
Pedantic note: That's an Ignoratio elenchi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignoratio_elenchi), not a strawman. For that, I'd need to build some case about the BIP (or whatever) in which I deliberately weaken the thing in such a way as to play into my argument.
Hmm, come to think of it, I should probably check the discordia wiki about strawmen. That's probably the most mis-cited (and often mis-understood) fallacy I've seen on the Web.
Quote from: Arafelis on June 09, 2009, 12:54:33 AM
I never mention the BIP in the post, much less discuss its textual treatment of my subject.
Pedantic note: That's an Ignoratio elenchi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignoratio_elenchi), not a strawman. For that, I'd need to build some case about the BIP (or whatever) in which I deliberately weaken the thing in such a way as to play into my argument.
Hmm, come to think of it, I should probably check the Discordia wiki about strawmen. That's probably the most mis-cited (and often mis-understood) fallacy I've seen on the Web.
Both you and everyone in your audience understand that this thread is the continuation of the argument you made in the BIP thread. I decided I'd post it here instead of derailing the other thread even more.
Thanks for continuing to be the really real Discordian for realness we all "know and love".
And no, its a digression, or red herring, but thanks for eluding you were performing it.
QuoteBoth you and everyone in your audience understand that this thread is the continuation of the argument you made in the BIP thread. I decided I'd post it here instead of derailing the other thread even more.
I'd hope so! However, you've characterized points that aren't in anything I've said anywhere. I'm actually outright perplexed that you think I haven't offered any philosophical critique of the BIP... Given that my original criticism of the BIP was that it was FNORDish and that FNORDishness is metaphysically dangerous ground for a Discordian work, then
made this entire post to describe what I meant by FNORD, I think you and I must have very different standards for what 'philosophy' entails.
QuoteAnd no, its a digression, or red herring, but thanks for eluding you were performing it.
Alluding. I wouldn't correct it except 'eluding' is actually a different word that means something else, and I don't think you meant to use it.
What makes you think it's a red herring instead of an ignoratio elenchi? It seems you were accusing me of inserting an irrelevant thesis into the argument -- that is, that I somewhere said that the BIP discussed fnords and that it did so badly.
It's a red herring because you aren't willing to address that, although you find the BIP /uncomfortable/, you don't actually disagree with the conclusions, you just dislike them.
If I understand correctly, you define fnord as a meta-term which elicits obedience and complacency in the audience; if that is right then at least we have come to terms on that.
You have not yet convincingly shown that A) The BIP contains fnords, or B) that this is dangerous ground metaphysically for a Discordian work.
QuoteIf I understand correctly, you define fnord as a meta-term which elicits obedience and complacency in the audience; if that is right then at least we have come to terms on that.
That sounds about right. If it seems like our communication is breaking down later on, we can revisit that.
QuoteIt's a red herring because you aren't willing to address that, although you find the BIP /uncomfortable/, you don't actually disagree with the conclusions, you just dislike them.
Alright, this is the meat of the case, and it's going to take several points to address.
I don't think I dislike what conclusions I do see the BIP making, although I am somewhat uncomfortable with the idea of it making any. I comment on that a few times in my critique of the work by chapter. I think it would often be more in keeping with the spirit of Discordianism to present guided (or unguided!) puzzles/challenges to the reader than to present conclusions that the author arrived at.
I understand that having a sense of the 'spirit of Discordianism' and expecting or encouraging others to share it may make me a Really Real Discordian. I'm not terribly upset by that. However, whether or not you consider me to be one, I'd be curious if your sense of Discordianism is terribly different from the one I presented above.
But that's kind of a walk-around. I'm sharing it with you because I think it's relevant, but it's not what I had in mind when I offered a criticism of the BIP re FNORD.
What I am criticizing in the
original original post that started this whole thread was, yes, that I was uncomfortable with the BIP's
presentation, not its points. There are two components to that objection: First, that parts of the BIP are trying to play on their reader's insecurities with rhetorical techniques that are the exact same ones many Discordian works are written to expose and counteract. I'm not concerned with that necessarily because it's hypocritical, but because it seems to entrench those qualities in the reader (and because to me it suggests those qualities may be entrenched in the authors).
I, as a Discordian, don't want those qualities entrenched in people, and I have reason to believe (given much of the content of the BIP) that the authors do not either. That's what I mean by it being 'metaphysically dangerous.'
Second, that it does so poorly (in a literary, rhetorical sense) -- specifically that it does so in a way that alienates the reader and/or seems to weaken the points it is trying to make. Even if using those tools is felt to be acceptable, limiting the audience by encouraging many of the readers to drop the book is, I think, a mistake. One of my assumptions here is that the authors
want people to read and consider their work. I could be wrong; the whole BIP may be an exercise in "Eris May Not Want You." But I've tried to preface pretty much everything I've written with the premises I'm using here, and so far no one's objected to those.
Quote from: Arafelis on June 09, 2009, 02:46:41 AM
QuoteIf I understand correctly, you define fnord as a meta-term which elicits obedience and complacency in the audience; if that is right then at least we have come to terms on that.
That sounds about right. If it seems like our communication is breaking down later on, we can revisit that.
Good, then we've come to terms concerning this, and we are at equal understanding of fnord used in this context.
QuoteI don't think I dislike what conclusions I do see the BIP making, although I am somewhat uncomfortable with the idea of it making any. I comment on that a few times in my critique of the work by chapter. I think it would often be more in keeping with the spirit of Discordianism to present guided (or unguided!) puzzles/challenges to the reader than to present conclusions that the author arrived at.
Okay, so criticism 1) The BIP makes direct conclusions rather than presenting puzzles/challenges to the reader, the later being more in keeping with "the spirit of Discordianism" [definition?]
QuoteI understand that having a sense of the 'spirit of Discordianism' and expecting or encouraging others to share it may make me a Really Real Discordian. I'm not terribly upset by that. However, whether or not you consider me to be one, I'd be curious if your sense of Discordianism is terribly different from the one I presented above.
I think your sense of the spirit of Discordianism described above is far too truncated for me to decide whether I'm in agreement or dissagreement. What I see so far is that you think puzzles/challenges, rather than conclusions, are in keeping with your sense of it.
QuoteWhat I am criticizing in the original original post that started this whole thread was, yes, that I was uncomfortable with the BIP's presentation, not its points. There are two components to that objection: First, that parts of the BIP are trying to play on their reader's insecurities with rhetorical techniques that are the exact same ones many Discordian works are written to expose and counteract. I'm not concerned with that necessarily because it's hypocritical, but because it seems to entrench those qualities in the reader (and because to me it suggests those qualities may be entrenched in the authors). I, as a Discordian, don't want those qualities entrenched in people, and I have reason to believe (given much of the content of the BIP) that the authors do not either. That's what I mean by it being 'metaphysically dangerous.'
Criticism 2) The BIP plays on the audience's insecurities with rhetorical techniques [I'm assuming you mean use of fnord here] that are the same ones many [which? examples?] Discordian works are written to expose and counteract. You have yet to convincingly show how and where these rhetorical techniques are used in the BIP, however.
QuoteSecond, that it does so poorly (in a literary, rhetorical sense) -- specifically that it does so in a way that alienates the reader and/or seems to weaken the points it is trying to make. Even if using those tools is felt to be acceptable, limiting the audience by encouraging many of the readers to drop the book is, I think, a mistake. One of my assumptions here is that the authors want people to read and consider their work. I could be wrong; the whole BIP may be an exercise in "Eris May Not Want You." But I've tried to preface pretty much everything I've written with the premises I'm using here, and so far no one's objected to those.
Criticism 3) The BIP alienates the reader and weakens the point its trying to make [through fnord?], with the assumption that the BIP is not an excercise in "Eris May Not Want You".
Have I correctly summarized your criticisms? Please correct me concisely where I am wrong.
To address these (as far as I can, since I didn't participate in WRITING the BIP, so I'm just taking this from a readers perspective), I need concrete examples of how the BIP uses fnord (remember our definition) through A) playing on the audience's insecurities and B) alienating the reader. This is assuming of course, that the BIP does indeed do both A and B for some members of the audience.
Quote"the spirit of Discordianism" [definition?]
It's a placeholder term, used to convey a sense of something rather than an explicit list of properties. I use the term to refer to an internal sense of what characterizes the Discordian philosophy/religion/thing as unique from other things with overlapping areas of interest. If it's necessary that this become an explicit list of properties, I don't think this is a discussion we can meaningfully have.
I've taken some minor liberties editing the points you cite, so let me know if I've changed anything in such a way as to conflict with your intentions.
Quote1) Parts of the BIP make direct conclusions rather than presenting puzzles/challenges to the reader, the latter being more in keeping with "the spirit of Discordianism."
Accepted.
Quote2) Parts of the BIP play on the audience's insecurities [with the use of "fnordish" rhetorical techniques, which is what] many Discordian works are written to expose and counteract.
Accepted.
Quote3) The BIP alienates the reader and weakens the point it's trying to make, as long as the assumption that the BIP is not an excercise in "Eris May Not Want You".
Accepted. (Note the deleted reference to FNORD. I give the ways in which I feel especially the first section alienates the reader in my critique (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=21059.0).)
QuoteI need concrete examples of how the BIP uses fnord (remember our definition) through A) playing on the audience's insecurities and B) alienating the reader. This is assuming of course, that the BIP does indeed do both A and B for some members of the audience.
At least for now, I'm going to rely on my (above linked) critique to answer B).
I attempted to give some concrete examples of
where the BIP was using FNORD in my very first criticism by prefacing "FNORDish" terminology with... well, "FNORD." Giving concrete examples of
how it uses FNORD is a bit trickier, since FNORD is not a concrete thing.
I would say in general that the tone of the opening of the BIP attempts to inspire its reader with a feeling of claustrophobia, listlessness, and fear of death with the intention of leading the reader to associate these sensations with the 'every-day' circumstances of their life. It wants (I believe) to render the reader psychologically susceptible to offers of relief for this anxiety. As far as I'm aware, one of the characteristics of this technique is that the reader's susceptability is only
temporarily heightened -- like a mythological love potion, they are intended to cling to the next alternative they're presented with.
The ending of the BIP, which I see as another "FNORD-heavy" section of the book, does the opposite: It offers psychological reassurance in the form of the implication that there are others out there with similar beliefs, and generally suggests that the reader (presumed to have accepted the statements of the book) has chosen a course of action which will bring future benefits to their level of spiritual/mental fulfillment or state of being.
These things are far more often accomplished by tone, flow, and the use of contrast than by individual word choice, although I do use "FNORD" to highlight individual words in my opening post.
Quotethat are the same ones many [which? examples?] Discordian works are written to expose and counteract
I'd interpret Think For Yourself, Schmuck! to be an exhortation to the reader to ignore FNORDism, since the concepts are directly antithetical. I can't think of any works by R.A.W. or Thornley that
don't contain some version of this imperative, so I'd submit their entire bibliographies. Plus, you know, the BIP itself.
I'm specifically interested in this "fnordish terminology". When I read the placement of "fnord" in the critique you are referring to, I see nothing fnord-like about those words. I'm hoping you aren't suggesting that superlatives and negatives are fnord.
Edit: or adjectives and other descriptors.
Case 1: "You think you just woke up here one day, right? FNORD Think again."
Restatement: "You believe X? You're wrong."
Explanation: The FNORD is in the deliberate use of contrast to produce anxiety.
Case 2: "You look through those bars..."
Restatement: "You are trapped/imprisoned."
Explanation: Feeling imprisoned leads to feelings of claustrophobia. One important aspect of this is that the language is both definite and casual, possibly suggesting something like "of
course you're imprisoned, where else would you be?"
Case 3: (some context removed) "Some even say that this is what death feels like..."
Restatement: "Your life is basically the same thing as being dead."
Explanation: Fear of pointlessness and/or fear of death.
Case 4: "Look at these cold, black bars. The colorless ceiling. The hard ground."
Restatement: "Your environment is dull, uncomfortable, and uninteresting."
Explanation: Suggests that the reader's life should be different than what it is, and that the other thing that it could be is in comparison bright, comforting, and exciting.
If you think these are not a particularly novel or exciting analysis of the language being used, I agree. Similarly, if you think I've stripped away a lot of the mitigating text (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_words), I also agree. Most of the other uses of FNORD are to reinforce these positions.
I also suspect I will need to stress the case that I am not identifying text as "FNORDish" because of a few cases of illustrative rhetoric, but because of the overall tone and approach of the piece.
QuoteI'm hoping you aren't suggesting that superlatives and negatives are fnord.
Edit: or adjectives and other descriptors.
I'm suggesting that superlatives, adjectives, etc are typically rhetorical, and in this case the type of rhetoric they are is FNORDish.
QuoteI'm suggesting that superlatives, adjectives, etc are typically rhetorical
I just want you to know that it is very hard for me to not respond with an
ad hominem to that statement, to ridicule it.
Edit: or an argument
ad absurdum
So you think there's something weak about my argument, but you're not willing to tell me what it is?
Well fuck you too.
Quote from: Arafelis on June 09, 2009, 04:59:53 AM
So you think there's something weak about my argument, but you're not willing to tell me what it is?
Well fuck you too.
More like, you just brought a whole new argument into this mess, that A) descriptors are rhetorical, and that B) that seems be a negative thing (not that I could call it negative cause that would be
rhetoric). It just sorta pisses me off, makes me want to take it
ad absurdum to eliminate all descriptors from our language till our conversations are bland uninteresting piles of blah. Might as well take all meaning out of language as well.
Take a look at the page I wrote (http://"http://discordia.wikia.com/wiki/Fallacies#When_A_Fallacy_Is_Only_Kind_Of_A_Fallacy") tonight and reconsider, please.
Quote from: Arafelis on June 09, 2009, 05:07:20 AM
Take a look at the page I wrote (http://"http://discordia.wikia.com/wiki/Fallacies#When_A_Fallacy_Is_Only_Kind_Of_A_Fallacy") tonight and reconsider, please.
No, see, I get you're argument now. You think that persuasion is against the spirit of discordianism, and because the BIP is meant to be persuasive, you say its not a discordian document.
Or perhaps you just don't like it when people come out and say what they really mean instead of walking you round and round in circles (ie puzzles), which frankly is just another game of "Eris May Not Want You" (aka the Parable of the Sacred Bull).
Persuasion is an inescapable fact of human existence, just as the use of power (Cf. Foucault, Green's Laws of Power), its a part of language. Calling something not discordian because it uses descriptors and persuasive language is irrelevant. You might as well call a church service non-christian because they meet outdoors for service.
QuoteYou think that persuasion is against the spirit of discordianism, and because the BIP is meant to be persuasive, you say its not a discordian document.
I explained what I meant, and that's not what I said.
Also on that page is a description of what does and does not constitute a straw man. Peruse at your leisure.
Quote from: Arafelis on June 09, 2009, 05:24:13 AM
QuoteYou think that persuasion is against the spirit of discordianism, and because the BIP is meant to be persuasive, you say its not a discordian document.
I explained what I meant, and that's not what I said.
Also on that page is a description of what does and does not constitute a straw man. Peruse at your leisure.
I simplified your argument because frankly its so damn convoluted that its a wonder I took the time to understand it at all. Rhetoric is just a fancy term for persuasive language. Fnord is just rhetoric which is intended to create obedience and complacency in the audience. Simplified, you have a problem with persuasive language, particularly that which is powerful.
It's official.
(http://cache.gizmodo.com/assets/resources/2007/04/toolbox_fridge.jpg) <--- This thread.
BTW, poor cohesion and structure of argument is a valid criticism, one I'm using with you now.
If I still don't understand, then the cards are on you to figure out where you went wrong.
QuoteFnord is just rhetoric which is intended to create obedience and complacency in the audience.
No.
QuoteFnord [is] a meta-term [for that] which elicits obedience and complacency in the audience.
QuoteFnord can be rhetoric which is intended to create obedience and complacency in the audience.
Yes.
QuoteSimplified, you have a problem with persuasive language, particularly that which is powerful.
No.
QuoteSimplified, you have a problem with some instances of persuasive language, particularly that which is powerful.
Yes.
QuoteAnd this is in conflict with any of the three points which we established earlier in this long discussion.
No.
QuoteThis has any substantive bearing on points 1) or 3) at all.
No.
We were very drunk but we were filled with the best drugs our money could buy as we sat in the park and drank the cheap beer and saw the sky change colour, saw the women leap over to us as we daydreamed we were still working nine to five but the truth was there, here, in our face. We were seeing everything in spidervision. Extremely high resolution and highly detailed but the colours were all wrong and we saw the tits we wanted to lick but we were cockblocked by their minds and souls as we felt it would be like digging up a grave, finding your own grandmother and fucking her to tenacious d. There was something in our souls and in our systems that forbade us to eat the frozen foie gras or fuck that little rabbit nostril, fuck, couldn't have been older than fifteen.
Then, we wake up from the drugs, we wake up from the alcohol and we wake up for the work. We see the heart of the world wrapping it around itself, we see the ancient beetle god down in old egypt, rolling a ball of shit across the desert as if it should have been the sun and we see our waiters and waitresses and even though the men usually have nice asses but flabby bellies and while the women usually have small tits, they also have quite perfect asses and their faces are not pretty but interesting. I've always loved my tits small so it's a good line of work for me. The first thing they told when I began doing the dishes was that you shouldn't shit where you eat but if there's something time has shown me is that you shouldn't eat where you shit. It's simple, banal and stupid, but doesn't it work? Isn't what you're doing shit? Don't you feel down and want an ego boost from somewhere?
We're all depressed here. This is another form of control. This is the black iron prison but this is also a place of power. When here, you're at the hand of the jailors of the black iron prison and you are that because you believe the same as they do, as we sometimes do. You believe the black iron prison to be true, like we do. We see the icons and we see the institutions and when we realize they're just people something in our childhood dies on the inside and we harden and we turn the lock and there's propaganda from left and right what to do when you're out, there's no going out man it's just a system within a system within it's like a caleidoscope man, you take enough of this acid and you'll see the world like it truly is, a caleidoscope
The one-eyed man is proclaimed a king to lead the blind, why? He is not at all like them.
Quote from: brennschluss on June 09, 2009, 05:46:45 AM
The one-eyed man is proclaimed a king to lead the blind, why? He is not at all like them.
In the version I heard, he was locked up. Kept saying he saw things.
I did see the other question. Yes. And also no.
Quote from: Arafelis on June 09, 2009, 05:50:22 AM
Quote from: brennschluss on June 09, 2009, 05:46:45 AM
The one-eyed man is proclaimed a king to lead the blind, why? He is not at all like them.
In the version I heard, he was locked up. Kept saying he saw things.
In the version I heard, they yanked his eye out and distributed it evenly among the masses.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on June 09, 2009, 05:32:04 AM
It's official.
(http://cache.gizmodo.com/assets/resources/2007/04/toolbox_fridge.jpg) <--- This thread.
You have 35,000+ posts, but I haven't found one worth reading. You seem to only come here for drama.
On the other hand, here's a guy with 83 posts, and almost every one I've read has been fresh, interesting, and intellectually provocative for the audience.
Thanks Arafelis.
Quote from: Dove on June 09, 2009, 10:58:28 AM
You have 35,000+ posts, but I haven't found one worth reading. You seem to only come here for drama.
On the other hand, here's a guy with 83 posts, and almost every one I've read has been fresh, interesting, and intellectually provocative for the audience.
Thanks Arafelis.
I won't pretend I'm not flattered. Thank you!
But the case could be made that I'm here for drama too.
As far as I can tell, TiGgeRR's never stopped asking folks to kill him. He's living by his word.
Quote from: Dove on June 09, 2009, 10:58:28 AM
You have 35,000+ posts, but I haven't found one worth reading.
:facepalm:
I know I shouldn't really come down hard on you, since you are brand new, but you might want to do some basic research before making such assertions. Because if you haven't found one worth reading from the person most people consider the best writer on this site, well then...
Quote from: Dove on June 09, 2009, 10:58:28 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on June 09, 2009, 05:32:04 AM
It's official.
(http://cache.gizmodo.com/assets/resources/2007/04/toolbox_fridge.jpg) <--- This thread.
You have 35,000+ posts, but I haven't found one worth reading. You seem to only come here for drama.
On the other hand, here's a guy with 83 posts, and almost every one I've read has been fresh, interesting, and intellectually provocative for the audience.
Thanks Arafelis.
I'm gonna go out on a limb and propose that Arafelis and Dove know each other IRL.
Nah. Just someone who didn't do the research. It happens.
(Of course, I may be wrong. I just don't think its necessarily the case).
I may also be wrong, just a hunch.
Quote from: Dove on June 09, 2009, 10:58:28 AMYou have 35,000+ posts, but I haven't found one worth reading. You seem to only come here for drama.
On the other hand, here's a guy with 83 posts, and almost every one I've read has been fresh, interesting, and intellectually provocative for the audience.
Wow. Way to make an entrance, "white dove" :lol:
Sure you picked the right avatar picture?
(http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/8485/424014015cca8c1a3d0.jpg)
And Arafelis, don't you have anything better to do than keep milking this subject? Cause all I see you do is complain, about the BIP, and trying really really hard to be right.
And as you may have noticed, you're not actually getting anywhere with being vague and pedantic like that.
And if one keeps doing what they're doing, they shall keep getting what they're getting.
Get it?
Quote from: Arafelis on June 09, 2009, 04:22:19 AM
Case 1: "You think you just woke up here one day, right? FNORD Think again."
Restatement: "You believe X? You're wrong."
Explanation: The FNORD is in the deliberate use of contrast to produce anxiety.
Case 2: "You look through those bars..."
Restatement: "You are trapped/imprisoned."
Explanation: Feeling imprisoned leads to feelings of claustrophobia. One important aspect of this is that the language is both definite and casual, possibly suggesting something like "of course you're imprisoned, where else would you be?"
Case 3: (some context removed) "Some even say that this is what death feels like..."
Restatement: "Your life is basically the same thing as being dead."
Explanation: Fear of pointlessness and/or fear of death.
Case 4: "Look at these cold, black bars. The colorless ceiling. The hard ground."
Restatement: "Your environment is dull, uncomfortable, and uninteresting."
Explanation: Suggests that the reader's life should be different than what it is, and that the other thing that it could be is in comparison bright, comforting, and exciting.
If you think these are not a particularly novel or exciting analysis of the language being used, I agree. Similarly, if you think I've stripped away a lot of the mitigating text (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_words), I also agree. Most of the other uses of FNORD are to reinforce these positions.
I also suspect I will need to stress the case that I am not identifying text as "FNORDish" because of a few cases of illustrative rhetoric, but because of the overall tone and approach of the piece.
QuoteI'm hoping you aren't suggesting that superlatives and negatives are fnord.
Edit: or adjectives and other descriptors.
I'm suggesting that superlatives, adjectives, etc are typically rhetorical, and in this case the type of rhetoric they are is FNORDish.
Ahem...
http://principiadiscordia.com/book/15.php
To make it abundantly clear, this is from the SOURCE MATERIAL of the Discordian Movement.
I have come to tell you that you are free.Restatement: You are not free.
Explanation: The FNORD is the declaration you are imprisoned.
Many ages ago, My consciousness left man, that he might develop himself. I return to find this development approaching completion, but hindered by fear and by misunderstanding.Restatement: You are afraid and ignorant since I left.
Explanation: The FNORD is both an implied authority/power, and the accusations of powerlessness. One important aspect of this is that the language is both definite and authoritarian, possibly suggesting something like "of course you're ignorant and afraid, where else would you be?"
You have built for yourselves psychic suits of armor, and clad in them, your vision is restricted, your movements are clumsy and painful, your skin is bruised, and your spirit is broiled in the sun.Restatement: You are trapped, blind, clumsy, in pain, and spiritually tortured.
Explanation: This is especially horrific, because it states that this is a self-imposed punishment.
I am chaos. I am the substance from which your artists and scientists build rhythms. I am the spirit with which your children and clowns laugh in happy anarchy. I am chaos. I am alive, and I tell you that you are free.Explanation: Suggests that the reader's life should be different than what it is, and that the other thing that it could be is in comparison bright, comforting, and exciting.
So, you may claim that the BIP is dark and full of coercive rhetoric: But so was the PD.
He simply dislikes the persuasive tone of the BIP, something we've heard before, something we'll hear again. There's nothing new here to contribute. As Anton said yesterday "So far, its trying to sell me something. Do not want."
Also, LMNO/nail/head.
/end thread
Quote from: Dove on June 09, 2009, 10:58:28 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on June 09, 2009, 05:32:04 AM
It's official.
http://cache.gizmodo.com/assets/resources/2007/04/toolbox_fridge.jpg <--- This thread.
You have 35,000+ posts, but I haven't found one worth reading. You seem to only come here for drama.
On the other hand, here's a guy with 83 posts, and almost every one I've read has been fresh, interesting, and intellectually provocative for the audience.
Thanks Arafelis.
Who's the more drama whore: The dramatist or the whore who comments on him?
You fail. Try again, lurk moar, etc. /usual when buckets of fail post
my machine that points in random directions and makes ridiculous assumptions has suddenly shifted position, and points at dove now.....
Quote from: Hoopla on June 09, 2009, 01:19:44 PM
Quote from: Dove on June 09, 2009, 10:58:28 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on June 09, 2009, 05:32:04 AM
It's official.
(http://cache.gizmodo.com/assets/resources/2007/04/toolbox_fridge.jpg) <--- This thread.
You have 35,000+ posts, but I haven't found one worth reading. You seem to only come here for drama.
On the other hand, here's a guy with 83 posts, and almost every one I've read has been fresh, interesting, and intellectually provocative for the audience.
Thanks Arafelis.
I'm gonna go out on a limb and propose that Arafelis and Dove know each other IRL.
Yep.
Dove also doesn't seem to know how to read anything but Apple Talk, because OKM is chock full of pure-awesome TGRR essays and rants.
Quote from: Dove on June 09, 2009, 10:58:28 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on June 09, 2009, 05:32:04 AM
It's official.
(http://cache.gizmodo.com/assets/resources/2007/04/toolbox_fridge.jpg) <--- This thread.
You have 35,000+ posts, but I haven't found one worth reading. You seem to only come here for drama.
On the other hand, here's a guy with 83 posts, and almost every one I've read has been fresh, interesting, and intellectually provocative for the audience.
Thanks Arafelis.
And you are? Oh, yes. Someone's alt.
Place yer bets, folks.
Quote from: Nigel on June 09, 2009, 07:03:03 PM
Quote from: Hoopla on June 09, 2009, 01:19:44 PM
Quote from: Dove on June 09, 2009, 10:58:28 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on June 09, 2009, 05:32:04 AM
It's official.
(http://cache.gizmodo.com/assets/resources/2007/04/toolbox_fridge.jpg) <--- This thread.
You have 35,000+ posts, but I haven't found one worth reading. You seem to only come here for drama.
On the other hand, here's a guy with 83 posts, and almost every one I've read has been fresh, interesting, and intellectually provocative for the audience.
Thanks Arafelis.
I'm gonna go out on a limb and propose that Arafelis and Dove know each other IRL.
Yep.
Dove also doesn't seem to know how to read anything but Apple Talk, because OKM is chock full of pure-awesome TGRR essays and rants.
My guess is "Dove" IS Arefellis or whatever the hell his name is.
Both have disposable emails.
White Dove regged at the perfect moment to support Arafellis, not long after Arafellis. IPs are different, but that doesn't mean much. I think a IP locator search would put them in the same area of the same city, if I could be bothered.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on June 09, 2009, 11:23:40 PM
My guess is "Dove" IS Arefellis or whatever the hell his name is.
Both have disposable emails.
White Dove regged at the perfect moment to support Arafellis, not long after Arafellis. IPs are different, but that doesn't mean much. I think a IP locator search would put them in the same area of the same city, if I could be bothered.
Missed this post over last night. Saw it when I was searching for Dove's posts.
I've been using this email address for years. Don't take my word for it; as far as I can tell, every reference (in English) to "noneuklid" with a k on the web is me. Google can tell my story. They pretty much all also use the same email address, although some might have fake email addresses registered.
I'm not sure how to feel about the proposition I'm cheerleading myself. On the one hand, it's funny. On the other hand, it kind of insults my capacity for subterfuge to do something so quickly and blatantly. On the prehensile tail, I feel like it would be best to give Dove the benefit of the doubt, since if he
isn't me, he'll be taking flak for something that's not his fault.
If he never posts again, go on thinking whatever. But if he posts something different, don't blame me for it. Or credit him with any of the stuff I've posted.
Quote from: Arafelis on June 09, 2009, 11:59:33 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on June 09, 2009, 11:23:40 PM
My guess is "Dove" IS Arefellis or whatever the hell his name is.
Both have disposable emails.
White Dove regged at the perfect moment to support Arafellis, not long after Arafellis. IPs are different, but that doesn't mean much. I think a IP locator search would put them in the same area of the same city, if I could be bothered.
Missed this post over last night. Saw it when I was searching for Dove's posts.
That's good, because I only posted it a half hour ago.
Quote from: Arafelis on June 09, 2009, 11:59:33 PM
I've been using this email address for years. Don't take my word for it; as far as I can tell, every reference to "noneuklid" with a k on the web is me. Google can tell my story. They pretty much all also use the same email address, although some might have fake email addresses registered.
I'm not sure how to feel about the proposition I'm cheerleading myself. On the one hand, it's funny. On the other hand, it kind of insults my capacity for subterfuge to do something so quickly and blatantly. On the prehensile tail, I feel like it would be best to give Dove the benefit of the doubt, since if he isn't me, he'll be taking flak for something that's not his fault.
If he never posts again, go on thinking whatever. But if he posts something different, don't blame me for it. Or credit him with any of the stuff I've posted.
Actually, I think I might, because "Dove" came along just a little too conveniently, and only posted in threads in which you took a great interest.
So far, you've spent the last few days taking swings at me. That's fine, I like to brawl. But for fuck's sake don't be passive-aggressive about it. If you want a flamewar, just say so.
QuoteThat's good, because I only posted it a half hour ago.
Missed the extension of the thread, anyway.
QuoteActually, I think I might, because "Dove" came along just a little too conveniently, and only posted in threads in which you took a great interest.
This is true. But if you can think of any way of demonstrating that I don't use proxies, I'd be happy to go along with it.
QuoteSo far, you've spent the last few days taking swings at me. That's fine, I like to brawl. But for fuck's sake don't be passive-aggressive about it. If you want a flamewar, just say so.
From my point of view it's equally probable that you yourself registered Dove. He's expressed nothing of substance so far, and done nothing but (whether by accident or intent) present me in an unflattering light. You are one of the only people in a position to verify that he is
not in fact me or someone geographically close to me. The external view will be one of history versus history, which you flatly win here.
Eagerly waiting to see if "Dove" posts again.
Quote from: Arafelis on June 10, 2009, 12:16:40 AM
QuoteThat's good, because I only posted it a half hour ago.
Missed the extension of the thread, anyway.
QuoteActually, I think I might, because "Dove" came along just a little too conveniently, and only posted in threads in which you took a great interest.
This is true. But if you can think of any way of demonstrating that I don't use proxies, I'd be happy to go along with it.
QuoteSo far, you've spent the last few days taking swings at me. That's fine, I like to brawl. But for fuck's sake don't be passive-aggressive about it. If you want a flamewar, just say so.
From my point of view it's equally probable that you yourself registered Dove. He's expressed nothing of substance so far, and done nothing but (whether by accident or intent) present me in an unflattering light. You are one of the only people in a position to verify that he is not in fact me or someone geographically close to me. The external view will be one of history versus history, which you flatly win here.
Eagerly waiting to see if "Dove" posts again.
Your point of view has very little value, unfortunately.
However, I have done an IP locate on both of you, and Dove seems to be from Florida. And you seem to be from The Cellar. :lulz:
It's okay, though. If I was a Cellar Dwellar, I'd find a new board to post at, too.
Ugh. That explains the lack of quoting, and this filthy habit:
Quote from: Arafelis on June 10, 2009, 12:33:05 AM
Read all exciting twenty of his posts. If the criteria you're using to compare me to him and conclude that we're the same person is that you hate us and our IP addresses are both in the apartment section of a college town... Well. (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=48&chapter=5&verse=9&end_verse=11&version=31&context=context)
For some reason those cellar people seem to think that everyone wants to go chasing links all over hell. I guess it's easier than typing out something clever or interesting.
My guess is that Dove is also a cellar person, based on not quoting, sycophantic posting style, and overall stupidity.
Quote from: Nigel on June 10, 2009, 01:03:14 AM
Ugh. That explains the lack of quoting, and this filthy habit:
Quote from: Arafelis on June 10, 2009, 12:33:05 AM
Read all exciting twenty of his posts. If the criteria you're using to compare me to him and conclude that we're the same person is that you hate us and our IP addresses are both in the apartment section of a college town... Well. (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=48&chapter=5&verse=9&end_verse=11&version=31&context=context)
For some reason those cellar people seem to think that everyone wants to go chasing links all over hell. I guess it's easier than typing out something clever or interesting.
My guess is that Dove is also a cellar person, based on not quoting, sycophantic posting style, and overall stupidity.
Meh. Can you blame 'em? The Cellar is as dead as Falco.
I'm still not quite following the cellar metaphor. Is this a geographic region, another forum, a website, a lifestyle...?
Quote from: Nigel on June 10, 2009, 01:03:14 AM
Ugh. That explains the lack of quoting, and... For some reason those cellar people seem to think that everyone wants to go chasing links all over hell. I guess it's easier than typing out something clever or interesting.
Or we're not lazy fucks who can't follow a conversation or exert themselves enough to middle-click a link.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on June 10, 2009, 01:07:27 AM
Quote from: Nigel on June 10, 2009, 01:03:14 AM
Ugh. That explains the lack of quoting, and this filthy habit:
Quote from: Arafelis on June 10, 2009, 12:33:05 AM
Read all exciting twenty of his posts. If the criteria you're using to compare me to him and conclude that we're the same person is that you hate us and our IP addresses are both in the apartment section of a college town... Well. (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=48&chapter=5&verse=9&end_verse=11&version=31&context=context)
For some reason those cellar people seem to think that everyone wants to go chasing links all over hell. I guess it's easier than typing out something clever or interesting.
My guess is that Dove is also a cellar person, based on not quoting, sycophantic posting style, and overall stupidity.
Meh. Can you blame 'em? The Cellar is as dead as Falco.
Not really... I'd be looking for a new stomping ground too.
Quote from: Arafelis on June 10, 2009, 01:10:32 AM
I'm still not quite following the cellar metaphor. Is this a geographic region, another forum, a website, a lifestyle...?
Quote from: Nigel on June 10, 2009, 01:03:14 AM
Ugh. That explains the lack of quoting, and... For some reason those cellar people seem to think that everyone wants to go chasing links all over hell. I guess it's easier than typing out something clever or interesting.
Or we're not lazy fucks who can't follow a conversation or exert themselves enough to middle-click a link.
Don't be disingenuous, "Red Shirt Riley".
I'll be what I want to do.
"I'll be what I want to do."
Oh clever. :|
My only real question is, what triggered this invasion? Are your dimwit friends coming along shortly to serve as backup, or is this a solo mission?
Other than Dove, that is...
Found it.
Hmmm.
I really don't think Arafelis hangs at the Cellar. Of course, I only know him as noneuklid from Convert_Me, so I could be wrong.
Quote from: Telarus on June 10, 2009, 01:42:19 AM
I really don't think Arafelis hangs at the Cellar. Of course, I only know him as noneuklid from Convert_Me, so I could be wrong.
I suppose it's remotely possible that he could live on the same block as another guy who also fairly recently dropped by for the express purpose of stirring shit.
But I doubt it.
Quote from: Nigel on June 10, 2009, 01:17:36 AM
My only real question is, what triggered this invasion? Are your dimwit friends coming along shortly to serve as backup, or is this a solo mission?
I still don't know what you're talking about, and I absolutely don't know anything about any invasion.
Quote from: Arafelis on June 10, 2009, 01:52:23 AM
Quote from: Nigel on June 10, 2009, 01:17:36 AM
My only real question is, what triggered this invasion? Are your dimwit friends coming along shortly to serve as backup, or is this a solo mission?
I still don't know what you're talking about, and I absolutely don't know anything about any invasion.
:|
Quote from: Arafelis on June 10, 2009, 01:52:23 AM
Quote from: Nigel on June 10, 2009, 01:17:36 AM
My only real question is, what triggered this invasion? Are your dimwit friends coming along shortly to serve as backup, or is this a solo mission?
I still don't know what you're talking about, and I absolutely don't know anything about any invasion.
:lulz: Right.
Quote from: Arafelis on June 09, 2009, 11:59:33 PM
Missed this post over last night. Saw it when I was searching for Dove's posts.
Imagine that.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on June 10, 2009, 01:44:33 AM
Quote from: Telarus on June 10, 2009, 01:42:19 AM
I really don't think Arafelis hangs at the Cellar. Of course, I only know him as noneuklid from Convert_Me, so I could be wrong.
I suppose it's remotely possible that he could live on the same block as another guy who also fairly recently dropped by for the express purpose of stirring shit.
But I doubt it.
Well, he came over because I linked to here from Convert_Me where he had posted about Discordians... He popped in here within an hour of me linking (using the same nick in email... sloppy sloppy ;-) ).
I mean, its possible that his post there was bait for my links back etc as some part of an elaborate scheme to invade us. It seems a bit paranoid, but I suppose its possible.
As often as you get the IP/Poster thing wrong TGRR, I'd think you'd be a little softer on drawing conclusions. :wink:
There are a ton of assumptions going on in this thread.
I really only care to correct one. He=She. Thanks. ;)
Quote from: Dove on June 10, 2009, 11:19:16 PM
There are a ton of assumptions going on in this thread.
I really only care to correct one. He=She. Thanks. ;)
You actually care abut that?
Quote from: Ratatosk on June 10, 2009, 04:28:45 PM
As often as you get the IP/Poster thing wrong TGRR, I'd think you'd be a little softer on drawing conclusions. :wink:
If I can't fly off the fucking handle on little or no evidence, then what the FUCK is the point of being a Holy Man?
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on June 11, 2009, 05:12:28 AM
Quote from: Ratatosk on June 10, 2009, 04:28:45 PM
As often as you get the IP/Poster thing wrong TGRR, I'd think you'd be a little softer on drawing conclusions. :wink:
If I can't fly off the fucking handle on little or no evidence, then what the FUCK is the point of being a Holy Man?
Point!