So, I've been thinking....and well, maybe this is something that just bugs me, but AI is a little too much like most other political boards on forums out there. Maybe a little better, in term of content, but there's a lot of what, well, what I would consider irrelevant crap.
I'm responsible for this as much as anyone. In fact, possibly more. What do I mean by irrelevant crap? Well the kind of "he said she said" manufactured outrage, conventional liberal/conservative baiting nonsense that passes for much of the existing political discourse. "Stupid Republican Says Stupid Thing (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,23262.0.html)" is nearly "dog bites man" in terms of newsworthiness, in terms of relaying information about the world in which we live.
Look: we all accept, on an intellectual level, that party politics is 90% a sham, a show for the rubes, a distraction in short. Yet we seem to bother ourselves with it an awful lot, which suggests, at some gut level, as a site, we haven't yet quite internalized that belief.
What I would like to see, for this subforum in particular, is a focus away from the day to day events of politics, something which is almost always tied to party politics, and almost always a distraction from the long-term trends and events with which we should truly be concerning ourselves.
What should we be focusing on, instead then? What things truly matter, in a political sense?
I would say, first and foremost, the economy matters. What the large investment banks are doing, that matters. The number one threat to global stability and personal security at the moment right now is the world economy. Governments are being toppled, peoples lives are being destroyed and the underlying causes of this are rarely acknowledged, let alone actually being dealt with. Throw in secrecy to add to the political power of these major economic actors, and you have potentially very dangerous people - unaccountable, but with vast influence.
Secondly, geopolitics matters. What is geopolitics? At its most basic, the interaction of geography and politics. More usefully, however, think of it in terms of energy resources, trade routes, choke points, military basing and grand strategy. The competition between Iran and Russia on one hand, and Europe and the USA on the other, can be attributed at least in part as to who will control the routes of gas and oil into Europe. In the Congo, conflict was fuelled by the demand for certain materials in the mines there, materials vital to the burgeoning electronics and internet industry which underpins the modern global economy. Things like the establishment of new military bases, such as the Marine base in Australia as part of the "Return to the Pacific", increased Japanese naval spending, new Chinese weapons tech...stuff like that is important. Globalization is a failing model, and geography will return, with a vengeance.
Thirdly, conflict matters. Not just the mostly bloodless strategic manouvering and posturing of the Great Powers, as described above, but actual wars, insurgencies, assassinations and similar. Usually the Great Powers are involved in such conflicts, but covertly. Only through correctly discerning their actions can we come to understand their motivations, and thus their vital interests. For instance, there are constant rumours that the Sinaloa Cartel are in a tacit alliance with the Mexican and US government against the other cartels. Could this explain the Fast and Furious program the White House has authorized? Are techniques from Iraq, where the "Sunni Awakening" involved siding with former Sunni insurgents against Shiite militias (and siding with elements of Shiite militias, such as the Golden JAMs, in their internal disputes), be at play here? Why the Sinaloa, instead of other cartels?
Fourthly, internet freedom matters. We are seeing a massive, multi-party, multi-state pushback against internet freedoms lately. Not so much copyright related issues, though that is part of it, but corporate spying, disinformation, cybewarfare, hacking and so on. This kinda relates to number 2, though it can also relate to the first issue, as we saw with the HB Gary business (they were being financed by the Chamber of Commerce, recall). It can also relate to the third, as hacking can be part of the "invisible influence" of the state in supporting its proxies. Russia is especially noted for this, though of course it is not the only state to engage in such practices.
Fifthly, we should concentrate on anything the powers that be do not want us to know. This will likely involve all of the above four, and several topics besides. This topic would run the course from covert action to funding of political parties, pressure groups and "grassroot organizations" such as the various Tea Party organizations, to lobbying and PR. The invisible webs of power, as it were. I do not want lunatic conspiracy theorizing, which should be relegated to the High Weirdness subforum, but real secrets - things like private military company personnel being arrested for being where they shouldn't be, with weapons they shouldn't have. Or historical links between intelligence agencies and terrorist organizations. Or personal links between Bush Jr and the House of Saud (Prince Bandar as Bush's informal international politics tutor, for example).
Sixthly, we need more political theory. Not the dry and drab theory I was taught in classrooms necessarily, but things like Machiavelli, Assange's "State and Terrorist Conspriacies", political psychology...heuristic models which can help us to understand political activities and actions and put them in some kind of framework.
Finally, we should also keep a close, if critical eye on resistance. By this I mean groups like Occupy, like Anonymous, like Wikileaks...people who can do things we broadly approve of. Both in order to keep ourselves informed, and to help them if possible, but also so if they start doing things which are...strategically sub-optimal, we can help advise them on how to get back on track.
So does this sound like a plan, or do we really want to talk about John Boehner's blubbering?
I think this is a good aim, especially considering that the amount of party politics talked about by the news (and other political boards) is likely to increase closer to the 2012 election. Easier to get our talks on more constructive tracks now.
I also like Cain's suggestion. My only problem is that I'm more or less completely ignorant of the above topics, at least from a point of view of coherently posting about it. I find this subforum incredibly interesting, as it gives me a lot of information I would never come across otherwise, but I always feel like a dummy when I try to respond.
But, yeah. Less network news, and more Spider Jerusalem.
Your opening is solid, will read the rest after coffee.
I also like what Cain is suggesting here (basically, I concur with LMNO on all points).
I'm especially keen on the geopolitics angle. Even if my role in such threads would only be to ask questions and do google searches so I know what's going on, I would still be learning something. The "Return to the Pacific", for example. That's something which involves so many states, big and small, on multiple levels that trying to piece together the implications and possible consequences blows my mind. I take that as a sign that I should probably get me some edumacation.
Day-to-day politics are still a source of great lulz, and are worth looking at if only to see what the politicians of the day think they need to do to secure voter interest. However, I heartily agree that it is, by and large, a circus performance more designed to distract and obfuscate than anything else.
There's more to say, but I should probably go to class now.
I think these are great points. Here at PD, I feel like a lot of us have benefited from exposure to that skeptical, horrormirth, trickster tone we have here.. it makes it a lot easier to talk about things like religion, philosophy, and other ephemeral topics.
What Cain's talking about is consciously developing a similar tone for politics - something that keeps us oriented on the things that matter, and stop getting distracted by the Two Man Con.
What I think will be difficult - is that the two-man con politics are often amusing as hell. Or frustrating as hell. Either way, they're evocative -- that's why they take the center stage! So I think it will be impossible to not post about santorum's latest gaffe (and other political horrormirth), but yeah, let's hold that at arm's length in terms of what's actually important.
Cliff notes version of the OPWhat things truly matter, in a political sense?
- The economy - The interplay of investment banking, government, and economic actors that are essentially unaccountable
- Geopolitics - the interaction of geography and politics. Think of it in terms of energy resources, trade routes, choke points, military basing and grand strategy. Globalization is a failing model, and geography will return, with a vengeance.
- Conflict - actual wars, insurgencies, assassinations and similar.
- Internet freedom - corporate spying, disinformation, cybewarfare, hacking and so on.
- Anything the powers that be do not want us to know - ie covert action to funding of political parties, pressure groups and "grassroot organizations" such as the various Tea Party organizations, to lobbying and PR. The invisible webs of power, as it were. No lunatic conspiracy theorizing.
- Political theory - Machiavelli, Assange's "State and Terrorist Conspriacies", political psychology...heuristic models which can help us to understand political activities and actions and put them in some kind of framework.
- Resistance - groups like Occupy, Anonymous, Wikileaks
100% agree. While it's still (and will always be) true that Politicians Say The Funniest Things, I definitely think that by focusing on the blundering of Republicans and the Tea Party as if we are on the Democrat's "side", we are letting ourselves get sucked into the Two-Man Con.
Quote from: Nigel on February 13, 2012, 03:38:13 PM
100% agree. While it's still (and will always be) true that Politicians Say The Funniest Things, I definitely think that by focusing on the blundering of Republicans and the Tea Party as if we are on the Democrat's "side", we are letting ourselves get sucked into the Two-Man Con.
This.
However, the thread is about what WINGNUTS say, and as I was reminded yesterday, there's wingnuts on every wing.
And I LIKE reading what the monkeys say. I think we've just been spending too much time concentrating on one of the Punch & Judy dolls, because let's face it...the ones on the "right" are funnier in terms of sheer humor. You have to have a finely developed sense of horrormirth to get the gags coming from the "left".
Video related:
Judge Napolitano.How to get fired from Fox Business in under 5 mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=fOaCemmsnNk
Judge Napolitano, of Fox News announced that next week will be his last show. Then he started spitting truth about the two-man con.
He does throw in a little Ron Paul support in there, but it's only one or two sentences towards the end.
One of the videos which helped accelerate the Occupy movement was that charged up "Get the money out of politics" rant by Dylan Rattigan. It perfectly articulated the frustrating things about current system and the channel through which positive change could come.
I think we need similar memes which express this thread's OP. Like, when a friend posts some political claptrap on facebook, I wish I had a tight image I could use to reply -- to the effect of "You have been distracted".
Quote from: Cain on February 13, 2012, 01:06:40 PM
Look: we all accept, on an intellectual level, that party politics is 90% a sham, a show for the rubes, a distraction in short. Yet we seem to bother ourselves with it an awful lot, which suggests, at some gut level, as a site, we haven't yet quite internalized that belief.
Couldn't agree moar. I'd rather not have to trawl through posts by people who profess to know better, acting all surprised because some talking head hasn't done what they said they'd do or otherwise lived up to some "expectation" especially when no one in their right mind would harbour that expectation in the first place.
I suck at commenting on the good stuff and my comments on party politics are restricted to mockery and trolling on general principle but this board is how I stay educated so I'd rather not have to wade through pages and pages of political soap opera to get to the good shit.
Well, I guess I'll go get my political humor elsewhere.
are we to put the politically oriented fluff in AT, then?
like Roger, i enjoy the slant that is put on political humor among this group. And, although you may find the jokes or links or whatnot on another site, you're not going to find this gaggle's response to it anywhere else...
Quote from: Cramulus on February 13, 2012, 04:08:23 PM
Video related:
Judge Napolitano.How to get fired from Fox Business in under 5 mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=fOaCemmsnNk
Judge Napolitano, of Fox News announced that next week will be his last show. Then he started spitting truth about the two-man con.
Fuck me. That was unexpected. The rant, not the inevitable sacking.
More of this kind of thing. If every newscaster decided to do something similar people might start realising what a joke any political system is. Who knows, they may even figure out who can actually change it. Clue - It's the same person who prevents forest fires.
Back on topic, I'd suggest that a focus on geopolitics is worth considering. Current tensions in Iran for example, have very little to do with the political structure but a lot to do with the potential (And subtle threats) to disrupt oil flow.
Spreading the relevant information behind decisions could be as important as what the decisions actually are, if not moreso.
Quote from: Iptuous on February 13, 2012, 04:49:02 PM
are we to put the politically oriented fluff in AT, then?
like Roger, i enjoy the slant that is put on political humor among this group. And, although you may find the jokes or links or whatnot on another site, you're not going to find this gaggle's response to it anywhere else...
Well, sure. The right makes political statements straight out of the old
Weekly World News, and the left spends all its time either ignoring the right, or - more often - queuing up to lick the right's pimply arses. The right gets more attention - at least from me - because they are in a horrible spiral of extremism, and I find that funny as hell.
It should get old...But for me it never does, especially in an election year. I view the whole charade as cheap slapstick vaudville, and as long as it's kept in the wingnut/Arizona threads, I don't see the harm.
I think we can have both, actually... provided we remember to go deeper into the news items. I mean, you could post Santorum's idiotic statement about women in combat, and then use it to tie into the role of military women as seen through global political eyes, or whether there's a psychological argument to be made if the US faces enemy women in combat, or...
...See, this is the point when I start talking out of my ass about politics. But I think you get my point.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on February 13, 2012, 05:02:16 PM
I think we can have both, actually... provided we remember to go deeper into the news items. I mean, you could post Santorum's idiotic statement about women in combat, and then use it to tie into the role of military women as seen through global political eyes, or whether there's a psychological argument to be made if the US faces enemy women in combat, or...
...See, this is the point when I start talking out of my ass about politics. But I think you get my point.
There isn't always anything deeper, LMNO. Sometimes there's just DUMB, and that dumb can be funny.
There is no "deeper" when it comes to the Committee to Re-Elect Obama (Gingrich, Paul, Romney, Santorum). They are exactly what they appear to be, and the things they say - while funny - are utterly meaningless.
On the left, you can sometimes find something deeper. Usually when Obama grins at you. What that deeper thing IS, of course, is the presidential penis smashing your lower GI tract into pudding while he tells you things about hopey-hopey-change-change.
Yes, please.
Some of the suggestions are easier for me to follow than others, but that's not because they are less important, rather that things like geopolitics require a truckload of focus for me to understand.
Still, it might be hard to understand sometimes, but I'd rather read it than the latest stupid thing said by the latest famous stupid person
somewhere in the world.
Quote from: Cramulus on February 13, 2012, 02:20:41 PMWhat I think will be difficult - is that the two-man con politics are often amusing as hell. Or frustrating as hell. Either way, they're evocative -- that's why they take the center stage! So I think it will be impossible to not post about santorum's latest gaffe (and other political horrormirth), but yeah, let's hold that at arm's length in terms of what's actually important.
I disagree! And not because I don't live in the US but for the same reasons I don't care about celebrity gossip. I don't need to discuss at length about every single moronic thing Geert Wilders tweets either.
I did twitter-follow him, out of curiosity, but it has never made me any wiser, not even with regard to PVV standpoints,
because their public face is mindless empty populist poop of the exact same kind that's been on repeat for over half a century, at least. As Cain said, if you want to know what's going on, you need to look beyond that. And then Wilders is just a dumb screaming pig, an outward facing node in huge web of growing neo fascism in Europe, which is being steered by people outside the public eye that can do their work undisturbed, quiter and better the louder people like Wilders scream their inanities, and Breivik is a mentally ill psychopath and we must talk about these "lone wolf terrorists" and talk because if he's not he only gets 20 years no we talk and talk
Sure there are exceptions, for instance the whole "frothy mixture" thing is brilliant, and Santorum absolutely deserves the center stage there, together with mr Savage of course because it's a brilliant mindfuck (that belongs in O:MF) and when similar hilarities happen in Europe or Belgium I'll certainly share them.
Quote from: Nigel on February 13, 2012, 03:38:13 PM100% agree. While it's still (and will always be) true that Politicians Say The Funniest Things, I definitely think that by focusing on the blundering of Republicans and the Tea Party as if we are on the Democrat's "side", we are letting ourselves get sucked into the Two-Man Con.
I'm quite sure the OP
really didn't say anything about focusing too much on one side of the US political soap opera, and most definitely did not suggest evening it out by laughing at
both the puppet on the right
and the puppet on the left, because that'll solve your Two-Man Con! Don't mind the horrible thing that's got both fists elbow-deep inside them, he's harmleEUAAARGBLGBL OH MY GOD THAT'S NO PUPPET BO--
OK so where did it come from? No, where did it come from THIS time and who let out the Crazy Lady feed those things bread crumbs again?
What? :?
I wasn't saying anything about balancing it out by laughing at the other side. I was, in fact, agreeing that while they do say the darndest things, laughing at the things they say is merely funny and not productive, and that taking a partisan approach to who we laugh at just buys into the Con.
Okay sorry, just steering then that's all :)
Caught up. Good energy.
I'd be comfortable with shifting the lighter political talk/humor to AT and seeing what will happen.
I'll keep that in mind for future links, etc.
Quote from: Cramulus on February 13, 2012, 02:27:40 PM
Cliff notes version of the OP
What things truly matter, in a political sense?
- The economy - The interplay of investment banking, government, and economic actors that are essentially unaccountable
- Geopolitics - the interaction of geography and politics. Think of it in terms of energy resources, trade routes, choke points, military basing and grand strategy. Globalization is a failing model, and geography will return, with a vengeance.
- Conflict - actual wars, insurgencies, assassinations and similar.
- Internet freedom - corporate spying, disinformation, cybewarfare, hacking and so on.
- Anything the powers that be do not want us to know - ie covert action to funding of political parties, pressure groups and "grassroot organizations" such as the various Tea Party organizations, to lobbying and PR. The invisible webs of power, as it were. No lunatic conspiracy theorizing.
- Political theory - Machiavelli, Assange's "State and Terrorist Conspriacies", political psychology...heuristic models which can help us to understand political activities and actions and put them in some kind of framework.
- Resistance - groups like Occupy, Anonymous, Wikileaks
- Ideology - As distinct from political theory, an ethos?
Quote from: Telarus on February 14, 2012, 08:55:51 AM
Caught up. Good energy.
I'd be comfortable with shifting the lighter political talk/humor to AT and seeing what will happen.
I'll keep that in mind for future links, etc.
I'm okay with this, too.
Might want to move the PICS thread to AT. Or better, close it, archive it as (blah - 2012) and start a new one in AT.
I can't tell if Random News Stories is more Open Bar than anything. I think it serves a good purpose, but maybe not in the current form (too 'Open Bar').
Any ideas for saving that? (I can think of a "Lo5 a Random News Story, where the linker has to provide one fact/link not in the article as part of the game, and if you link up more than one story with behind the scenes info you get MAD POINTS, or whatever").
Those are the only stickies I can see shifting. The other threads can sink or swim on their own.
OR
?????
Re: The OP
Yes on all points. This was very well put.
http://technoccult.net/archives/2011/12/29/justin-boland-interviewed-by-rev-r4d4/
Let's listen to Justin Boland blow minds in the hip-hop scene relevant to points brought up in the OP).
Justin (Thirtyseven/Skilluminati/etc) should go on the "affiliated mindset" list, and one person we could probably throw ideas at after we've refined them a bit.
Ethan Zuckermantalks about Serendipity (very intresting background), how Cities are planend, and how this influenced the development of "online spaces". Then goes on to list some of the things we can learn from IRL spaces and apply to our online spaces. Many things from the article stand out, but one of the ones that jumped at me was the fact that the PD forum (by exposing people with expertise to new/random/out-of-everyday-experience information and events) serves as a real digital commons (where-as Facebook is much more akin to the Rail/Subway.. you may wave at a friend going by, or chat a moment before exiting at your station).
I think there is some more there that we can apply specifically to Aneristic Illusions. Like the effects of 'curation' on information sources (Ethan calls out how a small monied minority controls current media technologies), how half of 'serendipity' is being prepared to leverage your expertise when a random happy accident happens, etc.
http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2011/05/12/chi-keynote-desperately-seeking-serendipity/
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 13, 2012, 04:56:40 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on February 13, 2012, 04:49:02 PM
are we to put the politically oriented fluff in AT, then?
like Roger, i enjoy the slant that is put on political humor among this group. And, although you may find the jokes or links or whatnot on another site, you're not going to find this gaggle's response to it anywhere else...
Well, sure. The right makes political statements straight out of the old Weekly World News, and the left spends all its time either ignoring the right, or - more often - queuing up to lick the right's pimply arses. The right gets more attention - at least from me - because they are in a horrible spiral of extremism, and I find that funny as hell.
It should get old...But for me it never does, especially in an election year. I view the whole charade as cheap slapstick vaudville, and as long as it's kept in the wingnut/Arizona threads, I don't see the harm.
There's certainly a place for those kind of things, I certainly don't want to see them go (there is a reason why Wonkette's feed is in my "daily read" list, after all), but I'd like other stuff too. Because otherwise I end up ranting about it on Facebook and looking like a crazy person to everyone except Lizzay, H, and Chomskyite Ex-Stripper, who are all aware of my general world outlook.
For instance, I'm probably going to be defriended by at least 50 people today for calling people getting angry about RBS staff getting bonuses despite massive losses "chumps" who "don't understand politics" and should "probably not be allowed to vote". And some of those people may be useful in the future, if only as a source of protein.
Quote from: LuciferX on February 14, 2012, 10:16:46 AM
- Ideology - As distinct from political theory, an ethos?
Perhaps... though I'm kinda averse to that because it seems, at least on PD, the only things that get discussed ideologically are Libertarianism and Anarchism...and those two subjects make PD veterans cry. Also, I don't think anyone on PD would actually agree, ideologically, since we tend to span the spectrum between anarchists, libertarians, socially liberal capitalists, social democrats/liberals, socialists, COMMIEZ!! and cynical nihilists.
I think a focus on theory would be better, because it then allows for a baseline of agreement, either philosophically or based on political science, for discussions to proceed.
Quote from: Telarus on February 15, 2012, 10:39:27 AM
http://technoccult.net/archives/2011/12/29/justin-boland-interviewed-by-rev-r4d4/
Let's listen to Justin Boland blow minds in the hip-hop scene relevant to points brought up in the OP).
Justin (Thirtyseven/Skilluminati/etc) should go on the "affiliated mindset" list, and one person we could probably throw ideas at after we've refined them a bit.
Thirtyseven is basically one of my most favourite people on the internet when it comes to politics. While I tend to be very unwilling to label people's methods as the "right" way to do things, he is certainly riding the correct motorcycle as far as I'm concerned.
This may go under "Anything the powers that be do not want us to know", but it's not the hidden stuff I'm talking about, it's the stuff most people don't bother to read. Definitely U.S.-centric here, but I spend a lot of time poring over legislation, Supreme Court decisions, executive orders, etc, etc, in order to try to get past the wiki-summaries and draw my own conclusions based on the actual texts. Yeah, a lot of this involves reading something and screaming "ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME???" but from time to time it spurs an "a-ha" or a "holy fuck". Looking at a 1000 page piece of legislation, two sections of which are dominating our attention, it's a fairly sure bet there's 4 or 5 sections which we are ignoring at our peril.
Quote from: Cain on February 13, 2012, 01:06:40 PM
...long-term trends and events with which we should truly be concerning ourselves.
... What things truly matter, in a political sense?
.... conflict matters. Not just the mostly bloodless strategic manouvering and posturing of the Great Powers, as described above, but actual wars, insurgencies, assassinations and ....
....Only through correctly discerning their actions can we come to understand their motivations, and thus their vital interests...
...we need more political theory. Not the dry and drab theory I was taught in classrooms necessarily, but things like Machiavelli, Assange's "State and Terrorist Conspriacies", political psychology...heuristic models which can help us to understand political activities and actions and put them in some kind of framework.
I guess my thinking is that political theory runs on ideology. Ideology is like the operating system used to actuate and tap the "human" resource. From a Machiavellian perspective, the Prince may be allowed to act above the principles of practical reason that apply to his subjects, however, the people want to be told a story if they are to be part of the action. I think it is plausible for some to view people as a resource, then understanding their narrative is important. That narrative is ideology. Ideology is the framework that informs how the polis will operate?
I was thinking something like that, but cannot really seem to express myself clearly (maybe because I don't really know what I'm talking about... [coffee...])
Hahaha, well this was a waste of fucking bandwidth.
Quote from: Cain on June 10, 2012, 01:45:01 PM
Hahaha, well this was a waste of fucking bandwidth.
Well, I'm sorry you feel that way. It has me thinking about my own goals for science communication and conversation, what is interesting to people and myself, how to separate science news from broader science trends and issues. &tc.
I give it a month, at best, before whatever plan you have falls apart due to the disinterest of others and their and unwillingness to engage.
Thinking is hard, and besides, there's another thread on copyright piracy everyone is taking part in!
Quote from: Cain on June 10, 2012, 07:56:39 PM
I give it a month, at best, before whatever plan you have falls apart due to the disinterest of others and their and unwillingness to engage.
Thinking is hard, and besides, there's another thread on copyright piracy everyone is taking part in!
So we're supposed to be all equally interested in the same things at the same time, or it's a giant catastrophe?
Yes, that's precisely what I said, well done
:retard:
Quote from: Cain on June 10, 2012, 08:18:43 PM
Yes, that's precisely what I said, well done
:retard:
People are willing to engage with you Cain, but apparently it's never high enough quality, it's never in high enough amounts, and if they have interests that don't coincide with yours they're worthless idiots.
I dunno, I find it pretty easy not to spend much time encouraging "stupid X says stupid Y" discussions. Where X is *mostly* Republicans or USA politicians in general, but if it was continuously about Geert Wilders (or his fellow party members), I'd be done with it just as quickly.
The basic idea is similar to the drug threads and the anarchism/free will/libertarian threads. You can only make the same point so many times, until it stops being signal and becomes noise.
Maybe we should see if there's an SMF plugin that does that thing what the #XKCD moderator bot does, forbidding people from saying lines that have been said before by anyone, forever. Just for a single subforum of course. Dunno if it's feasible on a forum, TBH.
And as promised the continuation of what I wrote in the Dedicated Server thread but decided would be more on-topic here:
But then, maybe you're right. As you said in the other thread "thinking is hard!", did that attitude use to be different or are we just remembering the past with rose-tinted glasses? One thing is I can't remember people demanding entertainment as quickly if the board has a slow evening (afternoon, timezone, whatever), if you're pressuring me to post for the sake of posting, expect quips and puns. If you want an intelligent and thought-out reply, or an original story or riff on the OP, give me a day or two, three sometimes even a week. And nothing demotivates quicker than the OP declaring the thread dead or ruined before I even got the chance to give it my attention (which is different from simply posting a reminder "hey guys did anyone read this I'd really appreciate some feedback").
Quote from: Triple Zero on June 10, 2012, 09:25:34 PM
The basic idea is similar to the drug threads and the anarchism/free will/libertarian threads. You can only make the same point so many times, until it stops being signal and becomes noise.
Maybe we should see if there's an SMF plugin that does that thing what the #XKCD moderator bot does, forbidding people from saying lines that have been said before by anyone, forever. Just for a single subforum of course. Dunno if it's feasible on a forum, TBH.
I suppose I'm interested in both signal and noise in that case, and therefore I ought to be censored.
I think one of the problems is that regarding politics, most of us here are just amateurs with no specialized knowledge in the matter.
Another problem is the tendency to be passive receivers of outrageous political stories or news that we happen to run into, and no specific build up or research of a particular topic that leads to the discussion of either local injustices that happen everyday, or major in-vogue happenings.
Although at least ive seen Nigel talk some about the system in itself regarding the work abouts of the prison system and corruption of officials and the why's of drug policy enforcement that benefit certain elites.
Quote from: Net on June 10, 2012, 09:49:50 PM
Quote from: Triple Zero on June 10, 2012, 09:25:34 PM
The basic idea is similar to the drug threads and the anarchism/free will/libertarian threads. You can only make the same point so many times, until it stops being signal and becomes noise.
Maybe we should see if there's an SMF plugin that does that thing what the #XKCD moderator bot does, forbidding people from saying lines that have been said before by anyone, forever. Just for a single subforum of course. Dunno if it's feasible on a forum, TBH.
I suppose I'm interested in both signal and noise in that case, and therefore I ought to be censored.
In a single subforum where a special algorithm makes posting there a challenge?
Suppose I enjoy jumping in bottomless pits in videogames, and therefore I ought to lose a life and start over all the time.
Quote from: Triple Zero on June 10, 2012, 11:05:55 PM
Quote from: Net on June 10, 2012, 09:49:50 PM
Quote from: Triple Zero on June 10, 2012, 09:25:34 PM
The basic idea is similar to the drug threads and the anarchism/free will/libertarian threads. You can only make the same point so many times, until it stops being signal and becomes noise.
Maybe we should see if there's an SMF plugin that does that thing what the #XKCD moderator bot does, forbidding people from saying lines that have been said before by anyone, forever. Just for a single subforum of course. Dunno if it's feasible on a forum, TBH.
I suppose I'm interested in both signal and noise in that case, and therefore I ought to be censored.
In a single subforum where a special algorithm makes posting there a challenge?
Suppose I enjoy jumping in bottomless pits in videogames, and therefore I ought to lose a life and start over all the time.
What would you call that subforum? The Free Speech Zone?
Quote from: Cain on June 10, 2012, 07:56:39 PM
I give it a month, at best, before whatever plan you have falls apart due to the disinterest of others and their and unwillingness to engage.
Thinking is hard, and besides, there's another thread on copyright piracy everyone is taking part in!
Entirely a possibility. At this point, I have two options: either ignore PD because it's impossible to have a conversation above the lowest common denominator; or, attempt to discuss, regardless of my cynicism. For me, it's a xanatos gambit. If I end up buggering off like I have been, I win because I have all kinds of worthwhile things I could fill my time with, and anything I write here before that happens is practice. As is all writing I do. If I actually engage people, that's a win as well.
Thinking /is/ hard. Certainly not easy for me some days. Especially staring down the barrel of topics I've never considered before.
Quote from: Net on June 11, 2012, 03:44:11 AM
Quote from: Triple Zero on June 10, 2012, 11:05:55 PM
Quote from: Net on June 10, 2012, 09:49:50 PM
Quote from: Triple Zero on June 10, 2012, 09:25:34 PM
The basic idea is similar to the drug threads and the anarchism/free will/libertarian threads. You can only make the same point so many times, until it stops being signal and becomes noise.
Maybe we should see if there's an SMF plugin that does that thing what the #XKCD moderator bot does, forbidding people from saying lines that have been said before by anyone, forever. Just for a single subforum of course. Dunno if it's feasible on a forum, TBH.
I suppose I'm interested in both signal and noise in that case, and therefore I ought to be censored.
In a single subforum where a special algorithm makes posting there a challenge?
Suppose I enjoy jumping in bottomless pits in videogames, and therefore I ought to lose a life and start over all the time.
What would you call that subforum? The Free Speech Zone?
I believe it's called <SomethingBot>5000 ... I can't remember.