Quote from: Cain on June 09, 2012, 07:49:29 PM
You know, I was considering doing a big write up on this fairly interesting book I am currently reading when I'm finished. But I'm finding myself wondering what the point would be. Given my last five rants barely garnered two pages worth of responses, where as tired old crap like this can get over seven pages in a single day, I'm finding myself increasingly disinclined to do anything that involves work.
Everyone else is taking the easy way out, why not me?
Your rants, while novel and highly interesting, tend to agree with the general worldview of PD.com members so the comments reflect that accord. I've tried to start discussions in some of your threads by asking questions that have occurred to me, but it seems everyone, including you on occasions, either just ignores them or assumes that you as the original poster are supposed to answer them. I ask questions in part because I'm curious but also for the sake of discussion. Since discussions haven't really took, I'm disinclined from asking people here and just search out the answers for myself. Maybe it's some sort of classical conditioning, having my posts apparently ignored repeatedly, or just some butthurt talking, but your rant threads have seemed to become echo-chambers of agreement and admiration rather than places for discussion and elaboration.
On the other hand, well established debate topics like drug policy tend to involve a clash of worldviews that are low on novelty but high in familiarity. They're also iconic in that they're proxies for larger ideological conflicts. They involve more opinion, rather than the complex declarations of facts that your rants tend to contain, so the game theory is clear and familiar enough that many people have something to say on the topic. The objective is to change someones' mind via reason or mockery, while helping their allies learn new new angles to engage with a different opponent with in the future.
Some of the most valuable threads on the forum don't go on very long, I've noticed that as well, but I still return to them to review what was said and reflect on it, or further research parts of them. One of the problems I've found with discussing the more important threads is that it doesn't seem like there's anything to do about it. Not many of us are in the position to do so. Dwelling on things outside of our control for too long is a recipe for depression and fatalism, so it seems only natural for people to spend a significant chunk of their time focusing on issues that they feel they can do something about and have the opportunity to do so, even if it is to change only one person's mind.
While I appreciate your rants a great deal, there's only so much I can absorb at one time and to be perfectly honest, there's only so much I'm willing to say in response to them, considering how heavily surveilled, catalogued, and archived public forums are these days. For example, the Yes Men were targeted by Dow Chemical during the first months of the Occupy protests, and paid Stratfor to collect information on them. It's not unreasonable to conclude that many other corporations have paid private companies for such information as well. It's a delicate problem of balancing online communication with protecting my ass from being too easily traced and monitored.
That said, I have a habit of searching out opposing viewpoints online to engage with the people who espouse them. I enjoy arguments and debates quite a bit, even with people who have drunk the Kool-Aid. Unfortunately, the arenas that allow for that are becoming more and more scarce as I've observed a zeitgeist in intolerance for dissenters within many political circles: left, right, activist, and even anti-authoritarians. I'm dismayed to see such discouragement coming from you and other PD.com members as well. I don't understand why I ought to just accept that otherwise intelligent people in my immediate vicinity are quite obviously fooling themselves, when that has always been something on this forum that has aroused debate and/or mockery.
Why does it follow that because I've had similar arguments with a person in the past that I should not revisit the ideas in the future, especially if they are still interested in talking about it? Rehashed arguments are usually interesting to me when the people involved in them are intelligent and are still driven towards the same loops, the same deflections of facts, and the same distortions of reality years down the line, regardless of what new information you offer them.
I'm extremely curious about how otherwise intelligent people pull the wool over their own eyes. I've studied it in psychology, anthropology, sociology, marketing and from many other theoretical frameworks, however, that's no substitute for applying ideas to an actual Pink. In my experience, places (both IRL and on the Internet) that allow for true freedom of expression, including insults, are getting rarer and rarer. PD.com is one of the few places you can really speak your mind and engage with an opponent without fear of being banned for either disagreeing or being insulting.
It's also the place that people freely can tell people that their belaboring of a point repeatedly is devoid of value. I like that. I wouldn't want to see you leave or quit writing merely because your threads don't turn into a toolbox of people trying to convince a true believer to worship satan. Postcount certainly is no measure of quality or worthwhileness. And I don't think a difference in opinion as to what is worthwhile or not needs to be an insurmountable sticking point.
TL;DR - I'm interested in reading the thread about the book you're reading, as well as reading the book in question. "Slow and Fast Thinking" by Daniel Kahneman, if I remember correctly. That I don't often feel I have much to contribute to your threads doesn't mean that I don't read them, reread them, and research them. It also seems like saying "Great thread" or "mittens" is insulting to the amount of work you've put into it. I prefer to wait until I have something of substance to say or ask.
Net, I know that you and I don't always see eye to eye, and I can respect that, but I gotta tell you, bro. Spot on. I believe that you've put better words to my thoughts than I could have, especially regarding your point on Cain's posts.
I too enjoy reading what he has to say, but to be honest, I rarely know what to say in response.
However, I'm not entirely sure that I agree with you about repeated arguments. I believe there's only so much that can be accompolished in an argument in which most (all) parties have their positions known and no one is willing to move an inch. The same old loops for the 900th time are not really all that entertaining, when they come with the price of everyone's goddamn feelings getting hurt, and a grinding halt of traffic as evryone slows down to watch the train wreck.
But hey, we gots our opinions, and since we live America, our opinions were pre-approved by the Department of Homeland Security. Or... something.
Pretty much what Net and Phox said. Agreement and the fact that I'm used to being one of the smart people, or at least one of the average people. I'm a derp in Cain's threads - which doesn't bother me, I get to learn something - but I do tend to keep my mouth shut.
In my experience, thorough, well-articulated, and properly supported dissertations are unlikely to garner much discussion, because they're thorough, well-articulated, and properly supported. You may get agreement, but if you've covered all your bases it's not all that likely that people will have much to say.
If you really want to get a debate or conversation going, the key is to throw out only part of the information. Leave it incomplete, and maybe even half-baked, so that people have something to argue with or correct. If you've already thought of everything, nobody's going to have anything to add... so leave some big, gaping holes for them to want to fill in. Rather than a well-supported conclusion, post an opinion, preferably worded controversially, and don't back it up right away. Keep your initial post short, and withhold the rest of your argument for dispensing in bite-size pieces in later posts as the thread develops. Your initial post is bait for the discussion; you want to leave your reader wanting more. Make them DEMAND more.
If you can phrase your thesis in a way that's inflammatory or even somewhat misleading, you're off to a running start.
Sorry, what exactly does this have to do with politics?
In response to the OP:
I like how it's my fault my rants aren't answered. You know full well I keep shitty hours, am frequently tired and can be called away at any moment. Sometimes I need days to recover from the lack of sleep I'm suffering from.
I'm terribly sorry that by the time I have my head back in working order, my threads have already sunk to the bottom of the page.
Oh, and "spies" might be watching. CLUEPHONE RINGING: SPIES ARE WATCHING GODDAMN EVERYONE. YOU'RE ALREADY BEING SURVEILLED.
Not that they'd have to do a very hard job on keeping an eye on this place.
What I'm getting from this is that basically people would rather have a conversation with a fanatic than with myself. So enjoy your little drugs talk circle jerks, because, quite frankly, you deserve them.
Quote from: PROFOUNDLY RETARDED CHARLIE MANSON on June 10, 2012, 06:23:37 PM
In my experience, thorough, well-articulated, and properly supported dissertations are unlikely to garner much discussion, because they're thorough, well-articulated, and properly supported. You may get agreement, but if you've covered all your bases it's not all that likely that people will have much to say.
If you really want to get a debate or conversation going, the key is to throw out only part of the information. Leave it incomplete, and maybe even half-baked, so that people have something to argue with or correct. If you've already thought of everything, nobody's going to have anything to add... so leave some big, gaping holes for them to want to fill in. Rather than a well-supported conclusion, post an opinion, preferably worded controversially, and don't back it up right away. Keep your initial post short, and withhold the rest of your argument for dispensing in bite-size pieces in later posts as the thread develops. Your initial post is bait for the discussion; you want to leave your reader wanting more. Make them DEMAND more.
If you can phrase your thesis in a way that's inflammatory or even somewhat misleading, you're off to a running start.
Opinion: contributing to PD in any way is a complete waste of time.
Discuss.
I am kind of mirroring what Nigel said, but there's a little more to it. Aside from what you (Cain) say generally being in line with the consensus opinion, if it is something we are aware of, you are also much more educated than the rest of us on most of the topics you talk about. Add in that you are an extremely talented researcher and parser of information and anyone that does decide to disagree with you is most likely going to come off looking like a fool.
The giant long threads arise from disagreement, yes, often the same disagreement over and over about Anarchy and Drugs (or sometimes Magic, or data piracy or what have you) In those arguements both sides are fairly certain that they have a valid point and the other side does not, neither side feels like they themselves are coming across as fools so the debate goes on. In one of your threads the person who disagrees with you is going to not only look like a fool, but feel like one, and even if it does happen, it doesn't last very long because once someone feels like a fool they stop arguing.
I hope that you don't stop posting because your posts have been the most informative things I have seen on the forum. I personally avoid posting in them not just because I don't usually see a way to improve what you have already said but also because i don't want to attract the sort of drama tat tends to accompany me posting in any thread.
Quote from: Cain on June 10, 2012, 08:21:03 PM
Sorry, what exactly does this have to do with politics?
It's certainly a political discussion, taking place among members of this board instead of talking
about members of some parliament or whatever.
Quote from: v3x on June 10, 2012, 08:33:34 PM
Quote from: Cain on June 10, 2012, 08:21:03 PM
Sorry, what exactly does this have to do with politics?
It's certainly a political discussion, taking place among members of this board instead of talking about members of some parliament or whatever.
Politics has to do with the distribution of power in a community, so, uh, fail etc.
Quote from: Cain on June 10, 2012, 08:27:07 PM
In response to the OP:
I like how it's my fault my rants aren't answered. You know full well I keep shitty hours, am frequently tired and can be called away at any moment. Sometimes I need days to recover from the lack of sleep I'm suffering from.
I'm terribly sorry that by the time I have my head back in working order, my threads have already sunk to the bottom of the page.
Oh, and "spies" might be watching. CLUEPHONE RINGING: SPIES ARE WATCHING GODDAMN EVERYONE. YOU'RE ALREADY BEING SURVEILLED.
Not that they'd have to do a very hard job on keeping an eye on this place.
What I'm getting from this is that basically people would rather have a conversation with a fanatic than with myself. So enjoy your little drugs talk circle jerks, because, quite frankly, you deserve them.
Which threads works and which ones don't is an occurrence of chance, popularity contest, and general mood of the board. I don't think I've
ever started a thread that lasted longer than maybe 4 pages, and if any of my topics get more than about 10 replies it's because they get threadjacked. I'm sure there are those who say that's because I post something uninteresting or in some other way bring about these results myself and they may be right. I don't expect everyone at PD to file into my thread and bring a discussion out of duty or obligation, and I'd probably hate it if they did because spontaneous conversations are better than forced ones.
You probably have a good point about the quality and recurrence of these tired threads, but if that's what the people want, that's what they want.
Quote from: Cain on June 10, 2012, 08:35:49 PM
Quote from: v3x on June 10, 2012, 08:33:34 PM
Quote from: Cain on June 10, 2012, 08:21:03 PM
Sorry, what exactly does this have to do with politics?
It's certainly a political discussion, taking place among members of this board instead of talking about members of some parliament or whatever.
Politics has to do with the distribution of power in a community, so, uh, fail etc.
That's a narrow definition. There is also "office politics," which is what this is akin to.
Quote from: v3x on June 10, 2012, 08:39:36 PM
Quote from: Cain on June 10, 2012, 08:27:07 PM
In response to the OP:
I like how it's my fault my rants aren't answered. You know full well I keep shitty hours, am frequently tired and can be called away at any moment. Sometimes I need days to recover from the lack of sleep I'm suffering from.
I'm terribly sorry that by the time I have my head back in working order, my threads have already sunk to the bottom of the page.
Oh, and "spies" might be watching. CLUEPHONE RINGING: SPIES ARE WATCHING GODDAMN EVERYONE. YOU'RE ALREADY BEING SURVEILLED.
Not that they'd have to do a very hard job on keeping an eye on this place.
What I'm getting from this is that basically people would rather have a conversation with a fanatic than with myself. So enjoy your little drugs talk circle jerks, because, quite frankly, you deserve them.
Which threads works and which ones don't is an occurrence of chance, popularity contest, and general mood of the board. I don't think I've ever started a thread that lasted longer than maybe 4 pages, and if any of my topics get more than about 10 replies it's because they get threadjacked. I'm sure there are those who say that's because I post something uninteresting or in some other way bring about these results myself and they may be right. I don't expect everyone at PD to file into my thread and bring a discussion out of duty or obligation, and I'd probably hate it if they did because spontaneous conversations are better than forced ones.
You probably have a good point about the quality and recurrence of these tired threads, but if that's what the people want, that's what they want.
I'm questioning the dichotomy that apparently my threads are terribly interesting and drug threads are terribly dull, but one of them gets 7 replies, and the other gets 1300.
That doesn't seem a little....odd, to you?
Cain: No. I don't get anything out of a "conversation" with RWHN other than perpetual amazement at how somebody can close off and decide to be that stupid all their lives, and the satisfaction of dogpiling him. And I'm aware that your job fucks with your sleep patterns and having been through similar (though not being in charge of a bunch of little snots while doing it), I know what that does. If anything I've been even more quiet in your threads trying not to rub you the wrong way because of this. And as stated, what you post is meticulous and complete as far as I can see, so there's really wouldn't be much to add but mittens.
Nigel's idea sounds pretty workable, IMO.
Quote from: v3x on June 10, 2012, 08:41:07 PM
Quote from: Cain on June 10, 2012, 08:35:49 PM
Quote from: v3x on June 10, 2012, 08:33:34 PM
Quote from: Cain on June 10, 2012, 08:21:03 PM
Sorry, what exactly does this have to do with politics?
It's certainly a political discussion, taking place among members of this board instead of talking about members of some parliament or whatever.
Politics has to do with the distribution of power in a community, so, uh, fail etc.
That's a narrow definition. There is also "office politics," which is what this is akin to.
Yeah, no shit it's a narrow definition, I expect Kai has a narrow definition of what science is, too. Oh, well, in that case, co-worker backstabbing must really be a form of violent assault.
Quote from: Cain on June 10, 2012, 08:44:35 PM
Quote from: v3x on June 10, 2012, 08:39:36 PM
Quote from: Cain on June 10, 2012, 08:27:07 PM
In response to the OP:
I like how it's my fault my rants aren't answered. You know full well I keep shitty hours, am frequently tired and can be called away at any moment. Sometimes I need days to recover from the lack of sleep I'm suffering from.
I'm terribly sorry that by the time I have my head back in working order, my threads have already sunk to the bottom of the page.
Oh, and "spies" might be watching. CLUEPHONE RINGING: SPIES ARE WATCHING GODDAMN EVERYONE. YOU'RE ALREADY BEING SURVEILLED.
Not that they'd have to do a very hard job on keeping an eye on this place.
What I'm getting from this is that basically people would rather have a conversation with a fanatic than with myself. So enjoy your little drugs talk circle jerks, because, quite frankly, you deserve them.
Which threads works and which ones don't is an occurrence of chance, popularity contest, and general mood of the board. I don't think I've ever started a thread that lasted longer than maybe 4 pages, and if any of my topics get more than about 10 replies it's because they get threadjacked. I'm sure there are those who say that's because I post something uninteresting or in some other way bring about these results myself and they may be right. I don't expect everyone at PD to file into my thread and bring a discussion out of duty or obligation, and I'd probably hate it if they did because spontaneous conversations are better than forced ones.
You probably have a good point about the quality and recurrence of these tired threads, but if that's what the people want, that's what they want.
I'm questioning the dichotomy that apparently my threads are terribly interesting and drug threads are terribly dull, but one of them gets 7 replies, and the other gets 1300.
That doesn't seem a little....odd, to you?
I don't think that's what Net was saying at all. He was saying your threads are more substantive, and yes more interesting, but you do such a good job of explaining the situation that it often seems unlikely that the average reader has anything equally substantive to contribute. I know I run into that all the time. Drug threads and the like, on the other hand, are low hanging fruit.
Everybody has something to say about that, even if it's already been said a thousand times. It's partly
because of these threads' status as sub-standard that no one has any problem contributing to them. "It's a fucking drug thread, what am I going to do, lower the level of the discussion?"
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on June 10, 2012, 08:31:56 PM
Add in that you are an extremely talented researcher and parser of information and anyone that does decide to disagree with you is most likely going to come off looking like a fool.
I'm not scared of looking like a fool disagreeing with Cain or anybody else. "OMG I MIGHT GET SMACKED ON THE INTERNETS!"
The thing is, there's essentially nothing to disagree with. The man has his bases covered.
And this isn't just about my rants, though that was a useful example. Roger's rants get just as little attention. As does Placid Dingo's writing, and several other people's efforts I could name. Creative work of any kind gets sidelined in favour of link-commentary, bashing easy targets and tired old arguments.
Why? Because tired old arguments are easy and require no fucking original thought. Everyone knows where everyone else stands and nothing is going to change but it sure is a hell of a lot simpler than looking at something you haven't seen before or thinking about something from a wildly different point of view and then either adding to it, where merited, or criticizing it, where merited.
What a great fucking advertisement for a religious of chaos, on a site of people who pride themselves on creativity.
Oh Christ, now apparently I cannot be disagreed with.
Why don't you just put up a bronze statue of me? It'll last longer.
:lol: Fine, I'll look for something to nitpick.
You don't make it easy, though. :argh!:
Well, for someone who is so hard to argue against, you're all doing a great job of it in this here thread.
You can't have it both ways. Either I'm right about this, or I can be argued with.
Quote from: Cain on June 10, 2012, 08:30:24 PM
Quote from: PROFOUNDLY RETARDED CHARLIE MANSON on June 10, 2012, 06:23:37 PM
In my experience, thorough, well-articulated, and properly supported dissertations are unlikely to garner much discussion, because they're thorough, well-articulated, and properly supported. You may get agreement, but if you've covered all your bases it's not all that likely that people will have much to say.
If you really want to get a debate or conversation going, the key is to throw out only part of the information. Leave it incomplete, and maybe even half-baked, so that people have something to argue with or correct. If you've already thought of everything, nobody's going to have anything to add... so leave some big, gaping holes for them to want to fill in. Rather than a well-supported conclusion, post an opinion, preferably worded controversially, and don't back it up right away. Keep your initial post short, and withhold the rest of your argument for dispensing in bite-size pieces in later posts as the thread develops. Your initial post is bait for the discussion; you want to leave your reader wanting more. Make them DEMAND more.
If you can phrase your thesis in a way that's inflammatory or even somewhat misleading, you're off to a running start.
Opinion: contributing to PD in any way is a complete waste of time.
Discuss.
Of course it is, in some sense. We have (during the good times) maybe 100 or so individuals that read our posts. Generally they're about things that are important in some sense, to some people. Let's face this honestly though, our posts here aren't going to fix any politics, change drug laws, revolutionize philosophies or win us nobel prizes. At best, they will be interesting to the people that find them interesting... at worst they will inspire a cult that will some decades hence have a bunch of people fighting with each other over whatever communication tools they have at that time.
On the other hand, I personally find it occasionally useful to post here. I've made arguments that have been invalidated and forced me to reconsider my position (many times). I've been inspired to write something creative and I've found some occasional sanctuary in the middle of office hell.
PD posts - Bullshit makes the flowers grow, and that is beautiful.
It should also be noted that youre the first person we ask what your thoughts are if we come across anything political. Your a respected source and an expert. But the other side of that is that were not going to have much to say in response. In regards to rogers posts ive been reading and posting from my phone a lot lately. A long thought out post is going to be too long to view from anything but my computer at home.
Quote from: Cain on June 10, 2012, 08:44:35 PMI'm questioning the dichotomy that apparently my threads are terribly interesting and drug threads are terribly dull, but one of them gets 7 replies, and the other gets 1300.
That doesn't seem a little....odd, to you?
No, and neither should it seem odd to anyone who spent time researching trolling techniques. That does NOT mean it is a good thing, nor does it mean it's the fault of the thread with less replies.
- The drug thread has people in it with opposing viewpoints. Your threads usually do not. Unless people like Disco Pickle jump in and you'll find that those threads did get a lot more replies. But it'll be about some dumb thing DP can't wrap his head around. I suppose in some sense it's not all that bad because it allows everybody to pounce on him, while showing they did indeed read and understand the OP.
(not entirely serious) ideas: should we get a Court Jester? Or maybe just reinvite Wade?
- There's a lot of trolling going on in those drugs threads, especially the last one I estimate about 75% of the posts. I'm assuming that's not how you want your threads to get big.
- As you already point out, THIS thread is getting quite some discussion. Why? Because it's a controversial topic. Similarly your thread about Islam got quite a few pages of replies, IIRC.
But are those the kinds of discussion you want to see?
If I had a dial to turn between "discussion in drugs threads" and "discussion in Cain's threads", I'd turn it all the way. But as you say, the same goes for Placid Dingo's and Roger's and other's writings not getting a lot of attention.
So from that I distill a good reminder to myself:
To not spend as much time in reading and/or replying to "link-commentary, bashing easy targets and tired old arguments", in favour of spending my energy on threads that require creative input to start and to keep going.And that probably includes this thread.
I'm also going to ponder if it's possible to purposefully start a thread about a controversial topic in order to build a large, interesting discussion, without actually trolling or taking a position I don't agree with.
Quote from: Cain on June 10, 2012, 08:44:35 PM
Quote from: v3x on June 10, 2012, 08:39:36 PM
Quote from: Cain on June 10, 2012, 08:27:07 PM
In response to the OP:
I like how it's my fault my rants aren't answered. You know full well I keep shitty hours, am frequently tired and can be called away at any moment. Sometimes I need days to recover from the lack of sleep I'm suffering from.
I'm terribly sorry that by the time I have my head back in working order, my threads have already sunk to the bottom of the page.
Oh, and "spies" might be watching. CLUEPHONE RINGING: SPIES ARE WATCHING GODDAMN EVERYONE. YOU'RE ALREADY BEING SURVEILLED.
Not that they'd have to do a very hard job on keeping an eye on this place.
What I'm getting from this is that basically people would rather have a conversation with a fanatic than with myself. So enjoy your little drugs talk circle jerks, because, quite frankly, you deserve them.
Which threads works and which ones don't is an occurrence of chance, popularity contest, and general mood of the board. I don't think I've ever started a thread that lasted longer than maybe 4 pages, and if any of my topics get more than about 10 replies it's because they get threadjacked. I'm sure there are those who say that's because I post something uninteresting or in some other way bring about these results myself and they may be right. I don't expect everyone at PD to file into my thread and bring a discussion out of duty or obligation, and I'd probably hate it if they did because spontaneous conversations are better than forced ones.
You probably have a good point about the quality and recurrence of these tired threads, but if that's what the people want, that's what they want.
I'm questioning the dichotomy that apparently my threads are terribly interesting and drug threads are terribly dull, but one of them gets 7 replies, and the other gets 1300.
That doesn't seem a little....odd, to you?
Only when you consider that Democracy Now! has 10 listeners and Jerry Springer, millions.
A bit of a false equivalence that, since we're talking about participation and not viewership. But it does go to the same point that Nigel made. Complete is complete and there's not much to add. Bullshit at least warrants an "OMG! THAT'S BULLSHIT".
My favorite threads on AI are those that discuss actionable things. So much of what is on here is just :horrormirth: (appropriately). But really, beyond making a smart ass comment to keep from screaming, there's not a lot to add. OTOH, there's always room for discussion and debate in tactics even when we all agree that they should be aimed towards the same end. The Occupy threads have given plenty of evidence of that.
I've been a lazy ass in not creating the kinds of threads I like, even though I've got plenty of them running around in my noodle. Your threads are pure gold, even when I only read them and don't comment. So if there's blame for lack of participation it's on me, and I'll take it.
Quote from: Cain on June 10, 2012, 08:45:56 PM
Quote from: v3x on June 10, 2012, 08:41:07 PM
Quote from: Cain on June 10, 2012, 08:35:49 PM
Quote from: v3x on June 10, 2012, 08:33:34 PM
Quote from: Cain on June 10, 2012, 08:21:03 PM
Sorry, what exactly does this have to do with politics?
It's certainly a political discussion, taking place among members of this board instead of talking about members of some parliament or whatever.
Politics has to do with the distribution of power in a community, so, uh, fail etc.
That's a narrow definition. There is also "office politics," which is what this is akin to.
Yeah, no shit it's a narrow definition, I expect Kai has a narrow definition of what science is, too. Oh, well, in that case, co-worker backstabbing must really be a form of violent assault.
Indeed, though I don't have as succinct a definition as you do for politics. I think it's time to remind everyone of the Virtue of Narrowness (http://lesswrong.com/lw/ic/the_virtue_of_narrowness/).
Quote from: Cain on June 10, 2012, 09:10:02 PM
And this isn't just about my rants, though that was a useful example. Roger's rants get just as little attention. As does Placid Dingo's writing, and several other people's efforts I could name. Creative work of any kind gets sidelined in favour of link-commentary, bashing easy targets and tired old arguments.
This.
No matter what you write, everyone's down in the fucking drugs thread. All day. It went up something like 30 pages over the weekend, for fuck's sake, and nothing else was said anywhere. Because apparently the best "TFYS" can mean is "VIEW" the same tired-ass arguments all day.
Opinion: Shut down the rest of the board and rename PD "All Drugs, All Day".
Opinion: Discordianism is utterly bogus. In its own way, it's worse than Paganism, because at least Pagans don't make claims of original thought. They make claims of ridiculously long traditions, which specifically
condemns original thought. Discordianism
is about thinking for yourself. That rarely, if ever, happens. It's too much work. So much easier to VIEW, and then make excuses. It's television in a funny dress.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on June 11, 2012, 09:31:25 PM
Quote from: Cain on June 10, 2012, 09:10:02 PM
And this isn't just about my rants, though that was a useful example. Roger's rants get just as little attention. As does Placid Dingo's writing, and several other people's efforts I could name. Creative work of any kind gets sidelined in favour of link-commentary, bashing easy targets and tired old arguments.
This.
No matter what you write, everyone's down in the fucking drugs thread. All day. It went up something like 30 pages over the weekend, for fuck's sake, and nothing else was said anywhere. Because apparently the best "TFYS" can mean is "VIEW" the same tired-ass arguments all day.
Opinion: Shut down the rest of the board and rename PD "All Drugs, All Day".
Opinion: Discordianism is utterly bogus. In its own way, it's worse than Paganism, because at least Pagans don't make claims of original thought. They make claims of ridiculously long traditions, which specifically condemns original thought. Discordianism is about thinking for yourself. That rarely, if ever, happens. It's too much work. So much easier to VIEW, and then make excuses. It's television in a funny dress.
Creative writing and art isn't an argument. As far as the game theory of how I see people approaching it here is more like entering an art gallery. People observe it, share their appreciation, stifle most criticism as they don't want to discourage creativity or appear rude for sharing their negative reaction unsolicited, and then leave the building. The threads stay short.
Debates, even one's you find tiring, have an explicitly participatory game theory. Convince someone, practice arguments on an opponent, learn new angles from allies, research sources, critically evaluate evidence, turn some anger into mockery, and so on. For the endlessly repeated arguments, the challenge is to find a new angle, new evidence, or an undiscovered weakness in someone's argument.
When there was more of a collaborative spirit on this board, there was less animosity and a less critical atmosphere, so it was only natural for more people to feel comfortable enough to share their creative content or take a stab at a creative sphere they aren't familiar with. I also think people were also less possessive of their work and ideas. Explicitly making things kopyleft or creative commons is an invitation to collaborate and riff in ways that people are not likely to do otherwise.
Asserting copyright certainly is your right as a writer and artist, but the costs of doing so are severely inhibiting collaborative efforts and interest. Navigating a collaborative process that retains copyright and licenses work is a time-consuming, hairy, scary thing for anyone that has not done so before. It actually isn't that big of a deal to license work, but I'm aware that that perception is out there and is quite strong.
Unfortunately, joint efforts have often went very wrong here, so it makes sense that people are leery of anything more than expressing appreciation. And even showing admiration in the wrong way has been heavily criticized. Then people didn't post enough. Now they're posting in the wrong topics and not showing enough appreciation for the creative work that has been posted. But what if I don't like people's creative work? I'm not going to criticize it unless they ask for that input, and most people don't. I'm also wary of saying that I appreciate work in a way that is too brief, as that has been taken as insulting as well. So the result is that I don't even comment until something crystallizes.
???
Everybody just sliced and diced the guy that guy that wrote that TRUE PAGANIZM thing. I think that was last week. And Alty just posted a rant and it was great, but kind of naive and people mentioned that.
Well that was the second one I ever posted. And when I did post it I expected much more intense critique. Now I don't really get anything but mittens. Which, you know, is awesome and all...
Quote from: Alty on June 11, 2012, 11:40:58 PM
Well that was the second one I ever posted. And when I did post it I expected much more intense critique. Now I don't really get anything but mittens. Which, you know, is awesome and all...
Trans-thread :mittens:
It's an era of disenfranchisement, of the individual losing his grip on whatever illusion of power he has left over his life. Whether we even have a TV or not, we are bombarded with stories of despair and failure, crisis and calamity. Many of the people here are probably already occupied with keeping that shit out of their actual lives. That drains creativity to begin with. And personally, I'm just not very interested in having big long discussions about anything "Important." I mean, after a few years talking about it, making posters, hanging flyers... and seeing that no matter how strongly you believe the world is fucked up, the world is going to continue to be fucked up... why talk about it?
Why is it a surprise that there is little thirst for the Big Picture right now? We can't even hang the Little Picture straight right now.
What was that old Carlin quote? "You can't change things, anybody who thinks they can is part of the problem." Something like that.
It's no reason to shut down because you can't change the big stuff, though. If somebody gets fucked buying a car, tell them how to get the attorney general on the dealerships ass. If somebody says their work conditions are dangerous and they don't know about OSHA, tell 'em. There's a whole world of people who don't know shit out there and somebody counts on that to continue the fucking.
Quote from: TEXAS FAIRIES FOR ALL YOU SPAGS on June 12, 2012, 12:07:01 AM
What was that old Carlin quote? "You can't change things, anybody who thinks they can is part of the problem." Something like that.
It's no reason to shut down because you can't change the big stuff, though. If somebody gets fucked buying a car, tell them how to get the attorney general on the dealerships ass. If somebody says their work conditions are dangerous and they don't know about OSHA, tell 'em. There's a whole world of people who don't know shit out there and somebody counts on that to continue the fucking.
I'm not shut down... And I don't think PD is a dormant volcano, either. I think it erupts with good shit once in a while... just because we're in an extended dry spell lately doesn't mean anything unless we allow it to mean something. Right now it just feels like we're wallowing in our own bullshit a little too much, because we have no collective object of hate (or accomplishment). And that's normal.
Besides, PD has always been the kind of place that would simultaneously pioneer groundbreaking philosophy like Black Iron Prison
and push the limits of logic and argument based on scat fiction.
Quote from: v3x on June 12, 2012, 12:13:37 AM
Quote from: TEXAS FAIRIES FOR ALL YOU SPAGS on June 12, 2012, 12:07:01 AM
What was that old Carlin quote? "You can't change things, anybody who thinks they can is part of the problem." Something like that.
It's no reason to shut down because you can't change the big stuff, though. If somebody gets fucked buying a car, tell them how to get the attorney general on the dealerships ass. If somebody says their work conditions are dangerous and they don't know about OSHA, tell 'em. There's a whole world of people who don't know shit out there and somebody counts on that to continue the fucking.
I'm not shut down... And I don't think PD is a dormant volcano, either. I think it erupts with good shit once in a while... just because we're in an extended dry spell lately doesn't mean anything unless we allow it to mean something. Right now it just feels like we're wallowing in our own bullshit a little too much, because we have no collective object of hate (or accomplishment). And that's normal.
Besides, PD has always been the kind of place that would simultaneously pioneer groundbreaking philosophy like Black Iron Prison and push the limits of logic and argument based on scat fiction.
Maybe PD is just getting backed up and we'll get EXPLOSIVE SPEW when it happens.
Quote from: Alty on June 11, 2012, 11:40:58 PM
Well that was the second one I ever posted. And when I did post it I expected much more intense critique. Now I don't really get anything but mittens. Which, you know, is awesome and all...
sucks deep down in side?
Quote from: TEXAS FAIRIES FOR ALL YOU SPAGS on June 12, 2012, 12:07:01 AM"You can't change things, anybody who thinks they can is part of the problem."
This! A million times this. This is the reason I've never stuck a sticker or a poster up in my life. Saving the world is not my bag. How the fuck am I supposed to laugh at the whole thing going up in smoke if I'm too busy putting the fires out? I get the distinct impression that some people round these parts are still holding on to the vain hope that something can be done about it. Maybe this is part of the frustration?
PD for me has always been funny as fuck. Edgy, cynical, smart, educational, sure, it's all those things but so are a lot of other places, it's the "harr harr" that keeps me coming back here. Discordianism? I have no idea what the fuck that even is, let alone what it's meant to accomplish or do with itself. It's not a religion, if it was I wouldn't be here. It's not political, because it sees right through politics. I think, for me, discordian is just something written over the door so I know where I am.
Agenda? Not me guv. My agenda is to laugh. Laugh at shit working out and laugh at it all going south. I'd be the first to admit I'm pretty fucking shallow that way. I'm going to die some time in the next couple of years. The more time I can spend, between now and then, laughing and having fun while the world around me repeatedly kicks itself in the nuts, all the while bitching and whining about how it's nuts hurt and there's no way to prevent it, the more I'll feel like I've lived a rewarding and meaningful life.
Others want fame and fortune, a statue or a pyramid in their honour. To be remembered. To make a difference, to leave the world a better place than they found it, and a whole bunch of shit like that. Good on them. I'm not like them at all. You expect or demand more of me? Good luck with that.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on June 12, 2012, 11:57:57 AM
Quote from: TEXAS FAIRIES FOR ALL YOU SPAGS on June 12, 2012, 12:07:01 AM"You can't change things, anybody who thinks they can is part of the problem."
This! A million times this. This is the reason I've never stuck a sticker or a poster up in my life. Saving the world is not my bag.
You don't save the world with stickers. You just give the rubes a little sneak-peek at what it is they've been screaming for.
Stickers and posters make me laugh
HOW DO YOU LIKE THEM APPLES?
Quote from: PROFOUNDLY RETARDED CHARLIE MANSON on June 13, 2012, 12:30:50 AM
Stickers and posters make me laugh
HOW DO YOU LIKE THEM APPLES?
HERETIC! APOSTATE! THROW HER OUT!
:jihaad:
:lulz:
Quote from: PROFOUNDLY RETARDED CHARLIE MANSON on June 13, 2012, 12:30:50 AM
Stickers and posters make me laugh
HOW DO YOU LIKE THEM APPLES?
If that's true then my advice is - keep doing it! :)
Of course you can change things; but you need to be realistic and pragmatic about the extent of your impact.