Merkins 2012

[Victus]

Irreligious wrote

You're free to interpret what I said how you want. But what I said is my vote is not for sale.

I.e., that the price is infinite, because you wouldn't sell for any price.

Irr wrote

I said it was your burden, asshole. I won't allow you to make it mine. You don't want to pay taxes? You don't like regulations? You want all or most roads to be private?

That's your business. I don't owe you any serious engagement on these profoundly stupid beefs of yours.

Is that concise and direct enough for you?

If you don't want commentary on these topics, why do you repeatedly ask me about my views on them?

[Irreligious]

Victus wrote

I.e., that the price is infinite, because you wouldn't sell for any price.

Why do you insist upon putting a price on my vote when I've already told you twice that it is not a salable commodity?

Victus wrote

If you don't want commentary on these topics, why do you repeatedly ask me about my views on them?

Get over yourself. I've never asked you for your alleged wisdom on this topic. I don't see you how you see you, Vic.

You say something, and I respond, sometimes in the form of a question with the vain hope that you might actually see something outside your perfectly symmetrical bubble.

Generally, I ask you questions for the same reasons I would ask Jerry or Ricardo questions: To see how you'll justify some particularly heinous point-of-view that you've expressed, to try and get some sense as to why you might hold the views that you do and to, hopefully, get you to examine the potential real-world repercussions of what you espouse.

It's a serious topic, but this is all sport for us here, since none of us is an actual policy maker. Thank ye unobserved gawds.

[Smellyoldgit]

Kinich Ahau wrote

Irr, It's probably because of you interplay here that a lot of us are free to ignore Bricktus most of the time. Personally I think it's probably more rewarding arguing with Jerry! So thanks for that and keep it up.

Fuck - can you imagine being cornered by real life Brictus' or Jerry at a party?
Not sure if I'd reach for the meths or a wrist-splitting spoon!

[Victus]

Irreligious wrote

Why do you insist upon putting a price on my vote when I've already told you twice that it is not a salable commodity?

Because the fact that the commodity is not for sale at any price means that the price is infinite, in the same way that saying that the sun is in the sky is synonymous that it is daytime.

Irr wrote

Get over yourself. I've never asked you for your alleged wisdom on this topic. I don't see you how you see you, Vic.

Are you sure? Because just a few posts ago you asked...

Irr, earlier wrote

And you don't see anything productive in sharing some resources: Our roads, our parks, our libraries, our great public works projects like, say, the Hoover Dam or the New York Power Authority?

If you don't want an answer, why do you keep asking these questions?

Irr wrote

You say something, and I respond, sometimes in the form of a question with the vain hope that you might actually see something outside your perfectly symmetrical bubble.

Which doesn't justify denial of asking the question when the answer isn't what you wanted.

Irr wrote

Generally, I ask you questions for the same reasons I would ask Jerry or Ricardo questions: To see how you'll justify some particularly heinous point-of-view that you've expressed, to try and get some sense as to why you might hold the views that you do and to, hopefully, get you to examine the potential real-world repercussions of what you espouse.

And you don't like it when I accept the supposedly terrible consequences as trivial, I take it.

Irr wrote

It's a serious topic, but this is all sport for us here, since none of us is an actual policy maker. Thank ye unobserved gawds.

Then why do you get so upset?

[Irreligious]

Victus wrote

Because the fact that the commodity is not for sale at any price means that the price is infinite, in the same way that saying that the sun is in the sky is synonymous that it is daytime.

My vote is not a commodity.

Victus wrote

Are you sure? Because just a few posts ago you asked...

Yes, I am certain that I am not seeking any alleged wisdom from you when I ask you questions, just like I am also certain that you're not seeking any wisdom from me when you toss queries my way. You usually ask me questions with an ulterior motive, which often is either an attempt on your part to show just how off-base you think I am, to "trip me up" in some way, or to get me to examine a question from your point of view. And, often, I'm doing the same thing when I question you.

Victus wrote

If you don't want an answer, why do you keep asking these questions?

I never said that I didn't want you to respond to my questions. Your bold and breezy statements often beg questions, so I ask them. Though, if you stopped responding to me altogether, I wouldn't be crushed. Shocked, perhaps, because it doesn't seem to fit your character, but not crushed, peturbed in any way, or left feeling like I've been deprived of something vital.

Victus wrote

Which doesn't justify denial of asking the question when the answer isn't what you wanted.

Vic, you make statements that I think are dumb, dishonest or callous and I ask you followup questions in the vain hope that you might see how dumb, dishonest or callous some of your assertions are. I make statesments that you think are illogical or overly emotional and you ask me questions from that perspective. This ain't rocket science.

If I ask you a question, I have a justification for doing so. If you don't want to respond, I don't really give a fuck. Suit yourself.

Victus wrote

And you don't like it when I accept the supposedly terrible consequences as trivial, I take it.

"Accept" is not really the right word in this context, as I don't actually care what you, personally, accept or don't accept. I mean, I don't really know you, Vic, and our mutual points of view are unlikely to have any real world impact, yours on me or mine on you. We don't even live in the same country, for chissake. This bantering here is all virtual and we're just posting our thoughts on an Internet forum, at the end of the day.

In that context, I'm just responding to your statements. If I think the sentiment behind them is either callous, smug, thoughtless or wacked out, I'll pretty much respond in a way that shows I think what you're saying is either callous, smug, thoughtless or wacked out.

Victus wrote

Then why do you get so upset?

It kind of comes naturally when my sensibilities are offended. But don't worry about it, if you are; I'm not actually sitting here frothing at the mouth and cutting myself because I think you said something callous or dumb. I'm just using words to express what I honestly think and feel about it.

[ubs]

Smellyoldgit wrote

Fuck - can you imagine being cornered by real life Brictus' or Jerry at a party?
Not sure if I'd reach for the meths or a wrist-splitting spoon!

Yeah. Ya know, I don't really see Brick as a problem. His position is different from the rest of ours, but certainly we are better for not being a homogenous circle jerk and he isn't venomous unless insulted.

[ubs]

Irreligious wrote

It kind of comes naturally when my sensibilities are offended.

And who's fault is that when you're dealing with strangers on the internet? People you wouldn't even recognize if you passed them in the street aren't "Doing it to you." You are doing it to yourself. You are responsible for your interpretations and views and any resulting emotions.

Did you know that the supposed cathartic affect of engaging in emotional puking is a myth? You get a little adrenaline hit from it followed by a sense of calm, but actually feeding those neural pathways every day makes you angrier, more prone to aggression, and poorer at self control.

I guess if that's something you aspire to...

[Irreligious]

ubs wrote

Yeah. Ya know, I don't really see Brick as a problem.

We know. But some of us don't share your point of view.

ubs wrote

His position is different from the rest of ours, but certainly we are better for not being a homogenous circle jerk and he isn't venomous unless insulted.

None of us here thinks exactly alike. We disagree from time-to-time. It's always been that way here. For example, I disagree with your assertion that Brick is only venomous when he's being personally insulted.

His whole schtick is that you must be some kind of idiot if you don't agree with him. Some people find that kind of presentation insulting on its face.

[ubs]

Irreligious wrote

We know. But some of us don't share your point of view.

So put him on ignore. The personal insults you are constantly spewing bring much more ugliness to the site than even the most vulgar theist. Take a break for fuck sake!

Irreligious wrote

None of us here thinks exactly alike.

Really? In what way do your views differ from psychodiva's or Smelly's?

Irreligious wrote

His whole schtick is that you must be some kind of idiot if you don't agree with him. Some people find that kind of presentation insulting on its face.

Your projection. An excuse to rage actually...

[Irreligious]

ubs wrote

And who's fault is that when you're dealing with strangers on the internet?

Did I say my thoughts and feelings are anyone else's fault?

ubs wrote

People you wouldn't even recognize if you passed them in the street aren't "Doing it to you." You are doing it to yourself. You are responsible for your interpretations and views and any resulting emotions.

And when did I say I wasn't responsible for my emotions and thoughts?

ubs wrote

Did you know that the supposed cathartic affect of engaging in emotional puking is a myth?

Hmm. Should we shut down the Raving Atheist Forum? I'd hate to think that we were cultivating potential serial killers here.

ubs wrote

You get a little adrenaline hit from it followed by a sense of calm, but actually feeding those neural pathways every day makes you angrier, more prone to aggression, and poorer at self control.

Fascinating. What accounts for your own apparent anger and passive-aggressivenes on display here. You hitting the pipe, too?

ubs wrote

I guess if that's something you aspire to...

No, I don't aspire to become a serial killer. Nor do I aspire to become a dishrag, just soaking up any sop with which I happen to come in contact.

[Irreligious]

ubs wrote

So put him on ignore. The personal insults you are constantly spewing bring much more ugliness to the site than even the most vulgar theist. Take a break for fuck sake!

Sweetie, why don't you put me on ignore? That's something you can control, if you want something to control. I ain't trying to control Brick. I'm merely responding to him.

ubs wrote

Really? In what way do your views differ from psychodiva's or Smelly's?

I've actually had disagreements with them both over the five years I've been posting here, and it's never resulted in the end of the world. We're different people, so we're bound to see some things differently.

But we've never taken our disagreements so far as to wind up losing respect for each other. That's the difference between my engagements with them and my engagements between you, Brick and Victus. If you're gonna get ugly in how you choose to disagree (and all three of you have), well, I'm gonna respond in kind. That's how I roll. Here.

ubs wrote

Your projection. An excuse to rage actually...

Again, you and I are not sharing the same perceptions, ubie.

[ubs]

Irreligious wrote

Did I say my thoughts and feelings are anyone else's fault?

Yes. You said you were reacting to the actions of another. You are reacting to your own interpretations.

Irreligious wrote

Hmm. Should we shut down the Raving Atheist Forum? I'd hate to think that we were cultivating potential serial killers here.

It would be nice to raise the level of discourse a little and have some fresh faces, and fresh ideas in the house. No one wants to risk voicing an opinion when deviations from the majority are met with the kind of venom that you are dishing out.

Irreligious wrote

Fascinating. What accounts for your own apparent anger and passive-aggressivenes on display here. You hitting the pipe, too?

Thank you for rushing forward to illustrate my point.

Irreligious wrote

No, I don't aspire to become a serial killer. Nor do I aspire to become a dishrag, just soaking up any sop with which I happen to come in contact.

Well, I guess you must view yourself as a dishrag. That's sad to hear but what ever the reason, the end result is an ugliness that is dampening conversation.

[ubs]

Irreligious wrote

Sweetie, why don't you put me on ignore? That's something you can control, if you want something to control. I ain't trying to control Brick. I'm merely responding to him.

Implying again that your responses are an involuntary reflex....that you are a victim. You are a grown man. You are responsible for You.

Irreligious wrote

I've actually had disagreements with them both over the five years I've been posting here, and it's never resulted in the end of the world. We're different people, so we're bound to see some things differently.

Nope. There's only three or four of us that ever deviate from the consensus. You are afraid to be treated the way that you treat others. Consider the irony of that.

Irreligious wrote

That's how I roll.

No, you come looking for adrenaline hits and the habit has ballooned to the point where it is doing damage to what could be and has been a decent place for conversation.

[Irreligious]

ubs wrote

Yes. You said you were reacting to the actions of another. You are reacting to your own interpretations.

As does everybody here (including you) who responds to something they've read.

ubs wrote

It would be nice to raise the level of discourse a little and have some fresh faces, and fresh ideas in the house. No one wants to risk voicing an opinion when deviations from the majority are met with the kind of venom that you are dishing out.

All this libertarian stuff ain't helping.

ubs wrote

Thank you for rushing forward to illustrate my point.

If your point is that you are the voice of calm and reason here in comparison to me, that's certainly not any point that I've ever illustrated for you. You have a different style than I do, but it's no less aggressive and off-putting to others.

ubs wrote

Well, I guess you must view yourself as a dishrag.

Quite the opposite, which is what I said.

ubs wrote

That's sad to hear but what ever the reason, the end result is an ugliness that is dampening conversation.

I tried to warn you a long time ago where all this libertarian talk would naturally lead.

Just like I am, you're free to raise any topic that you want here. But like I tell the theists who post here: This ain't your church. If you're gonna preach, I'm the type of poster who's gonna respond to that.

[ubs]

Irreligious wrote

As does everybody here (including you) who responds to something they've read.

No you are laying your emotional baggage at the feet of a kid the approximate age of your daughter.

Irreligious wrote

All this libertarian stuff ain't helping.

Our views are not a personal insult to you. You are behaving in an extremely intolerant manner.

Irreligious wrote

If your point is that you are the voice of calm and reason here in comparison to me, that's certainly not any point that I've ever illustrated for you. You have a different style than I do, but it's no less aggressive and off-putting to others.

No Irr. You are excessive.

Irreligious wrote

I tried to warn you a long time ago where all this libertarian talk would naturally lead.

Once again - other people's words don't "make you" do stuff. You are a grown man addressing someone half your age. You are responsible for you.

Irreligious wrote

Just like I am, you're free to raise any topic that you want here. But like I tell the theists who post here: This ain't your church. If you're gonna preach, I'm the type of poster who's gonna respond to that.

It must be a horrible place to live in a world where your good opinion of yourself is so fragile that the only way to preserve it is to try and silence other people's children with as much malice as you can manage. I think it's very sad.