squint_meets_dafremen Dafremen This goes out to all the no0bies. Dearest squint, Hello there squinty, just a little letter to prepare you for our upcoming battle of wits, or should I say the Twit and Wit showdown? (Having generously given you top billing, I'm assuming you won't have any complaints about the name. Except perhaps that I didn't refer to you as a bitch. No dear, you're one-sixteenth the bitch that nocturnal is and she doesn't even fall into the top 50 bitches I've ever conversed with.) So what WAS it that drove you to press your foot down so firmly on the accelerator pedal that you like to call a tongue? Was it the mild success that you've had passing off the chronic PMS that you appear to suffer from as wit amongst the other blatherskites? The first mistake you made was allowing your transparent, "I am the wonder bitch so back off Tonto" act to delude you into overestimating yourself, the second was underestimating me, the third was thinking that you could handle it regardless. What DID you think? That endlessly f*cking with you wouldn't be just as entertaining for me as endlessly f*cking with you WITHOUT addressing you? Cmon, please! I used to think that your nickname squint probably had to do with your having engorged cheeks and a puffy brow, now I think you picked that name because it describes how you view reality..like a legally blind granny trying to pass her driver's license eye exam without glasses. Doesn't it bother you to be such a misanthropic piece of work? Even a little bit? To tell the truth, me either. I find it amusing, it's like watching another rerun of Good Times..I've seen the plot before a thousand times, the one-liners suck and the dialogue is amateurish, but the familiarity of watching dunderheads go through the same motions as all of the other dunderheads is somehow soothing...I have an old friend in the antics of dipsh*ts if you will. I really thought you might have had something for a second or two (when I first saw your stuff), that perhaps you were an intellect that would be worth my time to engage, I quickly realized that I was just very high and hungry for a soft shell taco and a beer. It isn't that I don't think you've got entirely too much pride to give it the old college-try, it's that I'm counting on the fact that you do, and hoping that you're as hopped up on your own limited, mediocre successes as I think you are. I'm planning on flicking you away like a fly buzzing around my ear, only to have you come back. The main difference being that I fully intend on enjoying each and every moment of it because frankly, squint-o...I'm bored. Heavily bored and looking for a ball of yarn to bat around. You fit the description in every way. Soft, wound-up, highly strung and not reflective enough to be very bright. This should be entertaining as hell. Your bud, Daf see also: INSIGHTS_INTO_LIBRA 021014 ... squint k. 021014 ... nocturnal (#1 bitch) in all fairness, daf, she's not yet been to college, so giving it "the old college try" could be a bit more challenging than you might hope. 021014 ... Dafremen Think we have an all talk no walker again noc? You know, like all of those other fro0t lo0ps that thought I looked like a likely target for their juvenile finger poking? The unsuspecting innocents as I like to call them. 021014 ... nocturnal a one-letter response to a challenge like that doesn't say much for her chances, but ya never know. I wish you both the best of luck, and all I ask is that you don't bore us. mix it up a bit, daf. make this interesting for the general blathering public. 021014 ... kss I got a kick out of the one letter response. depending on how you measure "wit", I'd say that was pretty brilliant. Think of it this way; it takes Daf about 400 or more words to say the same thing. Maybe there is more wit in the one letter response than squint is getting credit for? 021014 ... nocturnal yes, but consider what that will provoke. while still trying to refrain from saying anything negative about the old man as in the blather time zone it is still technically his birthday, such responses are little more than fuel to the fire. you know as well as I do how his mind works. if an attempt to shut him up is to have any chance at being successful (though even then he'd never admit it was) it has to, in a very round-about way, illustrate the uselessness and lack of entertainment value of whatever he may have to say on the subject. this will, however, only cue his response that, one way or another, it was exactly what he wanted and how delighted he is that so-and-so tried to amuse him and how tickled the missus was as well. but a response to daffy is more likely to achieve whatever ultimate goal it may have if it has some content to it. fight loud-mouth obnoxious fire with loud-mouth obnoxious fire. or, just don't bother responding at all and allow him to chase his own tail until the nurse comes in to put him down for his nap. 021014 ... phil trust me. The one thing squint isn't capable of is using one letter correctly. But I am only feeding on remains, the soul is safe in daf's clay jar wrapped with tin foil and masking tape. Whatever I mean when I say that, I don't know. We get along though, right squint? I have "pointed" my plucky fingers (plucky?) in daf's direction a time or two. I've even outright lied to him. In fact a lot of what HE has to say is a bunch of hypocritical nonsense (though he did give me a sheep) with an overall sense of bigotry hidden deep in easy listening context. Notice the hypnotic rythym of the wording, that makes you forget to READ. Finishing his text is like coming back from some sort of coma. But I think he takes most critisism the same way he writes it. So I don't throw down. Or else he'd get me. The idea of sharpening a pencil in your brain excited me. p.s. greatly ignore this 021015 ... FNP90 so what you're saying is he is more than likely going to continue writing? (night type thingee) 021015 ... stork daddy there was an idiocy contest and no one invited me to enter? i'm hurt. the sperm used to conceive the lot of you would've been put to better use drowning ants. ooh...eggs sound good right about now. omelettes anyone? 021015 ... Dafremen stand in phil, see: HYPOCRISY *trust me, that's what he will tell you* 021015 ... silentbob daf, you remind me of the worst person i know. he is an egomaniac and he freaks out on sixteen year old girls after calling them cunts and bitches and telling them they have nice asses and how their face is the face they've been looking at in porno for 20 years. he sells pot to all the kids and he threatens to kill them. he says he doesn't make a good impression and that he makes a good friend but a fucking worse enemy and other clever little descriptions. his main character flaw is that he didn't kill himself years ago. he spreads rumors about himself having sex with young men. he has a soundproof room in his basement. he stays up for three days at a time, drunk off his ass before rationalizing that someone fucked him over then goes over to their house a drunken sweaty mess and screams at them until they call the police. your battle of the wits or shits or whatever you're doing...reminds me of something he would do. 021015 ... stork daddy the only thing i'd regret is that to make fun of you, i'd have to actually learn more about you. there is no winning in a shit throwing contest. either way you're covered in shit. 021015 ... Dafremen Ahh...I see the fun has begun. EXCELLENT. Let the mob grow thick and thirsty for blo0d! Perhaps we'll get something besides the usual apathy out of you little dingleberries after all! I'm impressed, mightily. (No, not by anything you've said, just by the passion with which you've said it. Or what passes as passion amongst couch rats.) I've got a few things to blather and then I'll be back to have fun with you all. Hold on, I think I hear my enormous ego calling. (Actually, instead of hypocrisy, see INSIGHTS_INTO_ASSHOLES for a change.) (For those of you that know what's going on: Told you this would be fun.) 021015 ... stork daddy oh jeesh. this is just free air time. just another ad exec without a campaign. and if boobs sell, so will making fun of them. and yeah life may be redundant, but the words we deign worthy of actually commiting to paper should at least represent some sort of progress, or some new angle. and no, replacing the words in a diatribe with exact synonymns doesn't really do it for me. oh there are no exact synonymns you say? that's not true. dilettante and you work pretty well. and of course dingleberries and me. well, now this is going to become one of those unwieldly 500kb blathes, and in some way you'll have won. of course, in winning the game you're playing, you'll be losing plenty of other games. which game you place more value on, well that's up to you. i suppose being a skinny cassandra, a prophet in a world of false prophets, with a woman who understands the sex tricks her astrological sign uniquely (along with everyone else born in that month) enables her to perform on your unique (along with everyone else born in that month) no longer flabby, suddenly filled with purpose body. the point is, you're saying insightful things about something inherantly uninsightful. rhetoric devoted to something already dethroned both by more rhetoric and by that tenous thing we call reality. you've been seemingly unmoored from that for a while, which would make blather a perfect place for you, but you go and you do that whole hypocritical thing and berate its denizens, though they have more in common with you than you care to admit. and just because someone disclaims their hypocrisy, doesn't make it any less offensive or dumb. and if you play by those rules, you should be ready to lose by them. youre' right if you've surmised i have no personal stake in this. i just get sick of all of the aggrandizing of this little scheme. if there's going to be a nobody crowned, it's gonna be me. all this alpha male shit, even as a joke must be exterminated before your confidence grows to ridiculous preportions. pre-emptive strike right? 021015 ... stork daddy oh dear...a grammatical mistake. what i meant to say is that being a skinny cassandra will have to be good enough for you. 021015 ... Dafremen Now HOW can I argue with that? You're right, of course, the things we commit to paper SHOULD be worthwhile. This isn't paper, neither is it sacrosacnt as it was in the beginning. I'm not exactly certain, but I BELIEVE that is what blather_red was created for. I will lose WHAT? The silent support of a small minority, some of whom apparently have it in their heads to use the word cassandra as though it was something other than a name? What is the prize of which you speak? There is no prize here except that which entertains. Look around you. If things of value were TRULY valued, if things of beauty were TRULY valued by these clueless masses, do you HONESTLY think that your most beautiful creations would remain hidden unless you bumped them to the top? I've read your stuff. Some is good. What do you say to something poignant? What do you say to express your appreciation for a well written word? Thanks? You say nothing, and so the beauty goes away, after a day or two and the weeds keep coming to the top because they are more entertaining. Is it integrity of which you speak? Is that the prize? Integrity in what? In our writing? Children are born every day who are ugly and yet their mothers love them. Why shouldn't it be that way with creations. Oh stork daddy, if only you didn't feel so compelled to join the mob, certainly a voice of reason has more reasonable things to do than join the idiots in their dancing around Don Quixote's dragon. I hope that for you, now back to my mob! Oh rattleheads! Dunderf*cks! Where are you? Ahhh there's one! Silentbob - Tsk tsk. And you, dear bob, remind me of this guy who ALWAYS fell for the spot on your shirt gag, hook line and sinker. You remind me of the kid who thinks the toy on TV can REALLY blast through walls with it's laser vision, that the boogeyman is real and that he's in the closet. You remind me of a judge with no case, a critic who sits, waiting for the object of your petty hatreds to stumble so you can POUNCE with your typical Scorpio criticism, need for revenge and loyalty for the "innocents." Vengeance is MINE sayeth the Bob and I can almost see the gleem in your eye when you do. Typical Scorpio reaction to a perceived slight...how long ago was that Bob? Ahh, but you really don't care do you..no, you've been biding your time, and ME? Well I was half HOPING you'd take this opportunity, in fact half COUNTED on it. Heheh that's a GOOD Bob, come and do your tricks for me. Daffy's as bored with the same routine as you are tired of waiting, so come now..what's your next trick? How will the Scorpion get his vengeance? By calling me a little girl teaser? Guess that would make YOU the little girl then, wouldn't it? (Do not try this at home folks, scorps are Not to be messed with. Get Mom and Dad's permission first, or better yet, leave it to the professionals.) Lemme see, lemme see...who was next? Ahh PHIL! Phil old pal! How the HELL are you? I see you've decided to mull around on the sidelines and wait to see who's going to come out on top! WEll noone ever said you weren't a smart young man! AS for the coma that my stuff has put you into on several occasions, ISN'T THIS better?! Of course it is! There there, a coma for a coma is a fair trade and after a year of looking for a good exchange of words, I was damned near taken off of life support, so the year of long winded speeches and hypocritical yimyam of which you speak was only fair return for a nap well given. You have chosen wisely to stay on the sidelines, feel free to jump in whenever, of course. By the way, if your money was my money, I'd bet it all on the Dafster to confuse and irritate. Noc, Well HELL you know you're not in the mob. You're in the closet cheering section cuz you like a good blo0dsport as much as the next girl. You're not cheering for anyone but yourself I suppose, but whoever gives a good blow, you'll whisper a Hurrah! for them I suppose. Sometimes me, sometimes them. No dear, I'm going to try to switch it up this year, so although I appreciate the introduction (and a very thorough one at that), I WON'T be playing predictable host during this year's bruhaha. The only thing I'd ask is that you fairly realize in your summation of my performance, that redundant attacks can evoke redundant tactics and I can hardly be faulted for that. I'll try to keep it fresh wherever possible. That's a good Amazonian warrior princess, go punch someone in the nose for me. Thanks. KSS - No, old bean. It wasn't clever and my 400 words, if nothing else, were time consuming. "K" is neither thought provoking NOR time consuming and so, as much as you would like to give credit and discredit where they both are do, the facts betray the stupidity of your statements. Not to say that you're stupid, you're a genius and we both know it, but I won't sit here and stroke you when a battle is what I came for and YOU are as good a one to play the role of teenage girl as squint or SBob, since teenage girl is not what I'm after, simply a nice healthy mob. When I say healthy, I mean a mob with at LEAST one or two members in it with YOUR intellectual wherewithal, I'd rather not dispatch with the mob quickly and lord knows that another Dafremen won't be popping up to take me on unless you fabricate him (ala daf_index). (You've actually done a brilliant job at recreating me too, I must admit. Ever think of doing impressions for a living?) And finally, YOU squint Hi! Well noc told you, and I believe I've given you the howdy hi! See? Look at all of the people coming to defend you! Don't flatter yourself dear, Bob couldn't defend a boulder with a machinegun and besides, it isn't ABOUT you with Bob, it's about Bob and past grievances. As for KSS, well he's the consumate entertainer and he has been on this whole trip for MUCH longer than I have. Ever since I_HATE_ALL_OF_YOU. He's not here for you, or particularly on your side. He's on whichever side is the opposite of my side because he could dispatch with you in about 30 words. He's here because this is where the action is. I was disappointed with your response. I expected so much more, but then I suppose every dragon story must have a damsel in distress and every mob chasing Frankenstein's monster needs it's little girl in trouble, so if you like, why don't you just sit there like a good girl. Very good. P.S. Stork daddy, I will TRY to refrain from using the expression DINGLEBERRIES. Fair enough? Excellent, back to the fray! 021015 ... stork daddy first of all you can't blame people for giving you what you want, when it also happens to be what they want. secondly, i'm pacified, but not because of your words, only because this page is going to start taking longer to load than porno. you can guess which i find more "entertaining." and so that's all the world amounts to these days i suppose, entertainment value. you deflate your own earlier arguments more validly than most of the people who argue with you. well, excuse me for not riding a fence. i've decided not to be cynical when it suits me and sincere when it doesn't. i guess i'm not being very pragmatic. words like cassandra are more than just names. and words are more than just sounds or collections of letters. the fact that we can communicate in them shows that each words carries with it we web of implicit knowledge and associations. so your trite comment itself is no less dismissable than you using the term don quixote's dragons. of course i believe you were looking for windmills. and isn't that what you've set up. a bunch of windmills you're calling giants or dragons. at least don quixote truly believed they were dragons. and i don't care what blather red was created for. i agree that the weeds tend to replace the rare beauties, that's the way of life, whatever replicates itself most furiously wins the day. values are things intelligence puts down. the "universe" knows only the crudest sense of value. it hasn't the sensations to justify others. however, that doesn't mean we shouldn't do our best to protect and ennumerate the progress we have made for the sake of truth and beauty. and i agree those are both tenous terms. but to give up, well that's the equivalent of not voting. and this has nothing to do with ugly babies, but thanks for the intuition pump. i was never the one who criticized, i have no problem with them going on and on about kissing in the rain or some punk show where they did an extremely rare cover of pennies from heaven. i'm just happy for the forum. so my only reason for doing this is because it seemed what you wanted. and because i want to show that if you're going to live by the subtle nihilism of appearance over substance, and slight tricks of hands, well then you're going to die by it eventually. and let's face it, i'm flashier. because if beauty is gone in seconds, what makes you think stupidity will last longer? just because you've got a neverending supply of it? everything seeks stability. something is beautiful because it configures words in a way that continues to represent a very real constellation of thoughts in our mind. it is capturing something that was long present and recognized but unrecorded. it is much like memory, in that it is a state of mind reoccuring in an imprecise way. a way that we can not only return to, but adjust to a changing world. a person is stable enough in this constant flux of a world to qualify as beautiful to me reguardless, but words don't get off the hook so easy, since they do not necessarily hit any bare minimum. there are some words which are only as poignant as silence, and even less so. and maybe you'll say some people are that ugly. i'd disagree, but not in depth here. all i'm saying is that if you believe this is a popularity contest then, about subjective standards, where the "weeds" of many perspectives drown out the "beauty" of one. you've been outspoken, outnumbered, and eventually you'll be drowned out. since everyone seems to agree you've got one hell of an ugly kid. just because you have more words, doesn't mean they're being listened to. but you're right, you've insured temporary survival in the evolution that is blather by launching these attacks. the half truths of your words gave you a sudden validity. but everyone is going to see that these battles of yours are nothing but fodder for your own self loathing. and i'm glad that you are able to put faces to all of the bitterness you face in life, but your anger is truly misplaced. as is mine. so i'd just like for you to take back all the mean things you've said and type up a blathe that says insights into my own problems, since you've obviously generalized other people beyond complete defendability, and all that keeps them from said defense is either capability (your bet) or apathy (my bet). this is tiresome. i'm done now. i won't be responding. so go ahead and hit me while i'm walking away. by the by, i much enjoy anecdotes like the one where you talk about your son getting his baseball equipment on to get the shit kicked out of him. you should really stick to them. also as a scorpio...shut up. 021015 ... methinx I was hoping when I saw this blathe that 'twould at least remotely relate to, oh I don't know, maybe “squint meeting Dafremen”. I'd actually been expecting somethin' worthwhile from this, but alas I am left disappointed. If you do so love inciting a riot, I would appreciate it if you would do so frm now on at bitching_to_''slash''_from_dafremen or some such alternative and leave the potentially interesting blathes alone. ...or not. I love you all either way. How could I possibly not? Au reservoir, 021015 ... stork daddy fan Damn. Stork Daddy wins. The End. 021015 ... silentbob see, the only part i even really read all the way through was the part about me. because i stopped listening, because daf...you're a boring person. and if you think i'm a boring person, well that will just hurt and i'll have to get over it... 021015 ... Dafremen Decided to blather this without reading the rest of the droning that´s going on in the room, because this really makes it all pointless anyhow. Everything you have all written up to this point is just flame war drivel, which I can respond to at any time and so I really lose nothing by making you wait for my response. Instead, here´s to the reasonable one in the room (as mistaken as he is about intention..and most of what he has said up to this point regarding what I want. There´s not a reading a book on it´s cover one of you that has any idea why this is happening and so, addressing stork daddy, who seems to have become the unofficial leader of this little mob that has come together, here you go(I typed this up in advance, saves cybercafe expenses): Stork Daddy - Don't for a second think that by my politely disregarding your attempts to use my writing to evoke an emotional response, or (dare we dream?) a complete surrender, that you can suddenly count on having achieved anything remotely resembling your objective. In order to bring about an emotional reaction in me, you're going to have to do much much better than using my own writings against me...MUCH better.(Only 4 blathers ever have..two were from suicidal teens, one was from florescent_light, the fourth from unhinged) Do you HONESTLY think that I would write anything here on blather that some ego-in-waiting could use against me? Tsk tsk. Petty hate is so common these days that I wouldn't think of making such a mistake. No, you can go on about my flabby ass, my wife, my kids..my sexual activities (or lack thereof) and the way I repeat myself to your heart's content. Nor will resorting to cheap parlor stunts like calling me hypocritical, boring, a latent homosexual, self aggrandizing, self centered, childish or egotistical work. Calling me a waste of your time and others time isn't going to phase me and neither is demonstrating it by leaving. Unhinged could probably tell you what would do the trick. I doubt she will though, because, more likely than not, it's also HER Achille's heel. You could read through everything that I've ever written and not find a single bit of ammo that would help you to successfully cause me to pause, stop or blush. Not a damned thing, although you MIGHT be able to find some writings that would give you insight into WHY you haven't a chance in hell of shutting me down and/or coming out with your alpha-male prize (which I don't particularly want or need, you can have it..here.) Reading all of my stuff could only do two things: land you in the record books or, as phil has so aptly phrased it, put you into a coma, it will NOT help you in this pissing match. Here, let me save you the trouble, I read you folks like characters in a book. I'm not saying that I know your intentions, I'm not God (I don't think HE thinks he is either), I mean you are like the characters in a book to me. What if a character in a book you were reading stopped in the middle of a scene, and suddenly said your name and said that you sucked? Even if you KNEW the author was having the character address YOU, how would that bother you? Would it work you into a rage? Me either. That's rule number one of my online persona, if I haven't met you, you're not real..hey how many sickos go around pretending to be girls out here? End of reality check part one. Secondly, the only emotion I feel in "sh*t flinging matches" like this one is enjoyment. Pure and unadulterated. The same would be true if you could engage me in a stimulating conversation about ANYTHING intelligent and/or neuron engaging. see: WHAT_IS_ART or PARTY_AT_DAF'S_HOUSE (for a couple of examples) INSIGHTS_INTO_LIBRA (for confirmation) I have no emotional attachment to my ego as so many of you folks who DON'T know me would like to believe(that's NOT the same as saying that I don't have an ego. Luckily, I managed to save the last shred before it was knocked out of me in childhood and have managed to nurse it back to a reasonable state of health.) If I was emotionally attached to my ego, you would probably stand a chance, and I would CERTAINLY be a much easier target. I am LOGICALLY attached to your words only, not emotionally. Ever notice my point by point response style? Hey man, each new phrase stimulates a response from me. Mentally...not emotionally. My mind plays chess, tries to anticipate responses, develop counter responses. The emotional part comes in reading a clever line, or writing one. And THAT is always fun! Who doesn't love a good line? Noone more than me, and as phil (man is this guy on a roll today or what?) pointed out, I take it the way I give it...with a smile on my face. Honest injun. There ARE no stimulating conversations around this place anymore, they all stink and they are all boring. I tried for the longest time to keep myself happy and content, sitting in the corner, writing about whatever caught my fancy, reading about whatever kept my mind REALLY occupied (half HOPING for an intelligent discussion on one of the subjects that I brought up.) I tried, unsuccessfully, to resist the urge to entertain myself as in the old days by issuing challenges and creating reactive blathers. Folks asked me not to anymore and I thought, "ok, I'll try to find something more constructive to do with this incessant thinking that goes on in my head." Something that would keep my mind lubricated and my writing going. Who wants to choose petty flame wars over stimulating conversation? Certainly not me, but hey f*ck it! I'll take what I can, and since both KSS in daf_index and squint in a few places (insights_into_libra comes to mind) kept tempting me, pulling me with the chance to use my mind, not just in one long tirade, but in a stream of them, engaged in dialogue instead of monologue, it became somewhat irresistable.(I think KSS is bored too, to tell you the truth. He was likely hoping to draw me out.) Believe it or not, this place has become so dry and UNSTIMULATING to the brain of late, that the innane prodding of a little girl's sarcasm and an old master's skillfully woven jabs started to CALL me out to play. I take full responsibility for this whole thing, of course, but let's face it, there's only so long you can wave easy (and in the case of KSS, not so easy) money in a man's face before he's bound to take it. I finally decided (particularly after the enjoyment I got out of sparring with KSS) that this was as stimulating as it was going to get. Can you honestly prove me wrong? Can you honestly come up with ONE conversation or intellectual debate that WASN'T sort of old and rehashed? As redundant as THIS may be, at least it's a little mental exercise each day, where as talking to myself in the corner wasn't allowing any character dialogue in the blather_book to develop, ie there was less thinking on my feet. If I dropped the "sh*t ball" that you flung my way, it's because just before your cunningly woven, but stale attempts to attack, was a shred of reason, and I certainly like to give folks the benefit of the doubt before I draw them into my little game. Continue if you will, but like noc said, it's just fuel on the fire (although fire it hardly qualifies as...more like a group of people puffing cigarettes furiously in an attempt to burn each other. It's just that some fool themselves into FEELING the burn. They're the first to say OUCH.) There is no end to this game for me, and there is CERTAINLY no way to score any point other than the few legitimate ones that you made about how we should write our words in a way that can help our thoughts progress. My grip on reality is just fine...question is, how is YOURS? How did a bunch of words on the screen suddenly become capable of harming anyone unless they let it? How does knowing what anyone has written give you ANY insight into their character? Their personality? Certainly if they slop their true nature all about like paint, you can learn of them, but what of someone who has been at this online thing for 23 years? Someone who has LEARNED from his mistakes and isn't so sloppy? How do words on the screen magically transform themselves into secret and useable knowledge of the individual who wrote them THEN? If you're in the game...let's play! If not, if you despise these games as much as you say, make some other game worthwhile. Truth be told, this will become boring more quickly than I'm willing to let on, but then again, so did ranting about philosophy and I kept at that for a year. Gimme something else to discuss, something worthwhile and perhaps that progress you speak of could happen. Otherwise, jump in, walk away or stand back and watch. I'll refrain from playing with the mob here just long enough to see if you actually have anything ELSE that a bunch of intelligent individuals could do with their time here on blather. Something engaging. If the answer is no, then sadly, you will have answered your own comments about the value of this redundant sh*t flinging crap. That answer will be that YOU can't come up with anything intelligent and stimulating to do either. At that point, you might wanna pack up your rocks and replace the few windows that you've already shattered in that greenhouse you're living in. A big part of me hopes that you won't come up empty-handed. P.S. Just noticed a whole bunch of DAF blathers on the recent list. Haven´t checked them out, don´t really have time to. Here´s MY guess. It´s KSS up to his usual tactic of late. Impersonating me. See? Even THAT is growing boring. (Course I COULD be wrong...guess I´ll see tomorrow, along with your response.) Good night lovely mob...see you in the morning. Hope I didn´t miss anything good. 021015 ... stork daddy if we were playing chess, you would've seen only a free eatsy of my pawn, and not the opening of my a file rook. but it's okay. you can tell something about a person's personality through their writing. of course not everything, not even always the things that matter. but you can see where they've been, what they understand words to mean. you can see whether they're impulsive or well thought out. the interesting thing about words is how they are both a part of and seperate from the invididual life that lived them. how they approximately bridge the gap between us, and through coarse commonalities allow us access to hitherto unfathomed possibilities which were before unique to an individual. if you were looking for an interesting conversation, you're right that only i can supply it, since everything else i've seen of you here has yet to accomplish it. like a little schoolyard precocious bully saying i was just doing a social experiment. the fact is no one does anything without motivation. emotional motivation. it may be just to work out your intellect, but that's only because you obviously pride yourself on it. so to play the detached observer is impossible when you're making choices based on your own motivations. however you're right, i don't need to bring in personal material to offend you. since you pride yourself on coherant logic, there are plenty of places you leave yourself open to further disillusionment and detachment. of course, who says i was emotionally involved saying those things. perhaps only the game interests me as well. and like all games, lower risks, less involvement. a sharpening of the knives for when something really needs to be cut. of course, my objective actually has been accomplished. all i wanted to do was put you on the defensive, see your position mellow out, see you justify this and that to me, when if they were so inherantly and obviously invalid points they would've needed no defense. but listen to your responses, suddenly so human, understandable. i just want some fun guys. i just want something of interest. if you need to know what i think is interesting, it's people feeling empowered by a forum like this in a way i am almost certain they lack in their personal lives. see how you can tell a lot about a person from their writing? now of course you'll give me examples from your life to the contrary. but i still believe and will defend the idea that in writing there are aspects of personality visible. it's just that they're not as obvious as the words relations to themselves and to what they purport to be relating to. the private meaning of words is less interesting than the statistical average that we share, than the meeting place between the two. even confessional poets have to be understood first. of course there are always going to be situations where vagueness is present because sometimes vaguely is the concisest way of putting something complex and our bandwidth is too low to achieve anything but approximate understanding. instead of explaining in abstract terms the connection between birth and death, a poet can merely bring together two images which have in their webs of implicit knowledge the terms connecting the two. the tail of a wave can swallow itself, an insect can eat its own offspring. through the specific we can best approach the general. anyways, back to my point. i enjoy coming here and writing poetry and philisophical treaties. nothing too grand, as i'm sure you'll inform me, but enough to build on. sure, the philosophy isn't rigourous enough for me to want to publish or anything, and the poetry cruder than it could be if i worked harder on it, but i keep my audience in mind. if this is about you thinking you're ready for some big league, i'm anxious to see your justifications for leaving blather behind. that is, i'd like to see if you can even interest yourself. i'm anxious to see your subjective interest in any given thing become a worthwhile enough measure objectively for us to all spend time listening to it and letting it inform our decisions. i don't think we've seen results. so while i generally have no problem with nihilism, and being disinterested in everything, it only bothers me when that bad egg tries to bring the rest of the world down with them. there are those amongst us who still want to live. to cry for your metaphorical suicide would only slow us down. and i'm sure it's just that you're holding out for better right? well i've never been an idealist, and i think we should make the best of what we can, since waiting is often just a heroic way to be cowardly. anyways, i'm not too worried because the tyranny of the minority will often be silenced in matters of words where popularity and pragmatism and utilitarianism are the mean. especially if that minority fails to make a contribution meaningful by widely accepted past standards. work within the system. but i appreciate your use of rhetoric for the sake of rhetoric. the problem is, it's too apparent and you admit to it. it's like playing one move at a time in chess. i mean i could be doing the same thing, but at least my reasons seem plausible. yours have changed and wavered. or at least the written expression of them has. and since that's all that's interacting here, i'm afraid that's what's going into the score. i'm not looking to hurt you. i'm just looking to see you basically do what you've already done, and admit your reasons aren't what they appear to be, that this isn't some fantastic task you've taken on, and that no one should thank you for it, or pretend they're entertained out of fear. i'm not afraid, i'm not entertained. and if you say this whole conversation is disinteresting, i can only ask why you'd reply. hipocrisy? not so. since i find interesting the people attacked, even if i find your personal diatribes uninteresting, i would interact with you out of interest for them, because on the off chance it affected them negatively, i'd like them to see that it isn't the defining voice. you have no such excuse in responding to me, since your goal is seemingly to stir up shit with all sorts of others. (enjoying flinging poop and all) if you respond to this, it's a fair admission of interest, however, since you could just as easily berate the others some more without involving me. 021015 ... Photophobe Why do you do this daf? It doesn't bother me, as it seems to do to some, but its like you're trying to appear monstrous, and then turning around and saying "Come ON! Give me yer best SHOT!!!" What do you get out of this? A powertrip as you get to shrug off any people wo respond? Is it for the simple joy of the exercise, the fun in deducing the flaws of others? Just wondering. 021016 ... The Devil Himself Blather Law - 'for every blathe, there is an equal and opposite re-blathe' 021016 ... kss Daff, you are such a piece of work. I can’t believe I’m getting sucked into this, but since you think I called you out, I might as well say a word or two. I skimmed all this, pretty typical. I’m sure you’ve heard the expression “less is more”, but I have long ago learned that’s not your style. I like all the people who try to guess at your motive. They always come up with such grand, almost credible sources for what drives you; attention, ego-boost, insecurity, blah blah blah. Your are all making Dafremen far too complex Ahem…okay, everyone, listen up please! I will now tell you what is going on here. Dafredood is a shit_raker, and he’s bored. Like so many others, he comes here for entertainment, thinly guised under what he hopes will come across as a quest for intellectual stimulation. He said it himself, and you keep trying to read more into it. Daf is “trying to draw a mob”, and he has succeeded. He doesn’t care if they are throwing stones, or here to pick him up on their shoulders. It’s not about “attention”, so much as something to do. There really is nothing more to it than that. You’re trying to figure out why a dog chases it’s tail. He just does, people. You can participate, you can be a spectator, you can ignore it. The dog does not have a “reason” it’s tail needs chasing, really doesn’t care if you participate or not. If you want to joust with Daf, keep punching away, and enjoy it. That’s what he’s doing, and he’ll never stop throwing out hooks. Daf is the King Tar Baby, begging you to slap him. He’ll rarely “lose” something like this, because that’s not the point. The point is activity, noise, filler, challenge, and something to do while he’s stoned, besides pick his ass, and beat off to his impressive collection of crippled orphan kiddie porn. By the way, Dafremook - I have never once impersonated you. I’ve been around long enough to know better, and besides, I have only a passing interest in your antics. I usually can’t get much farther than 10 lines into your posts – which I would guess is the same thing that happens to me – before I wander off. Thus, I’m not well read in Daffyland, and I wouldn’t be able to pull off an authentic impersonation. Besides, you have perfected your shtick to a refinement I dare not approach, as I would certainly miss some subtle turn of genius, which would point me out as a faker in an instant. Fact is, I've never impersonated anyone on blather. I have some quiet alter-identities, but it’s usually pretty obvious that it’s me. I don't deny that someone may be impersonating you, and if you must insist that it's me, so be it. However, just for the record, it wasn’t me. If you really need to figure out who it is, you should know that you're barking up the wrong tree, old buddy. Here’s a thought. Maybe Daffy is impersonating himself? That would be an interesting twist, a new take on the argue_with_god theme – argue_with_yourself! And it would certainly provide him with something to do. Daf, if I want to fuck with you, or attempt to piss on, or squirt lighter fluid into, the flames of any of your weenie-roasting ego-campfires, or tell you that your repetitive, semi-entertaining noise is getting on my nerves, or see if you’re going to stop by jeffrey_the_poets_wonderful_world_of_poetry, or tell you I think you are a rose among daises, I’ll say just that, and I’d do it as myself. or maybe I’d just mail you a cuckoo_bomb. and to the squint detractors, you should … ah, fuck it. squint can take care of herself. 021016 ... Dafremen Stork Daddy - I'll take that as a long-winded NO to my previous blathe and continue on my course. Unfortunately, pay day isn't until tomorrow, so I must keep my time brief. I hope you'll forgive any delay in answering that LAST nonreply and allow me instead, to reply to the blathe before that. Thanks in advance, you are a gentleman and a scoundr..er scholar. : ) Let's see what hides behind your pawn...shall we? Here comes my opening move. Ok, well that amounts to a big fat..."NO, Dafremen, I can't think of anything either" and since Stork Daddy seems to have the only response that's worthwhile, I suppose if I MUST continue with this charade, I'll have to continue it by answering his long-winded(even I'm impressed) run-on sentence (also guilty) that tries to pass for a shut-me-down blather. (I say tries, because walking away from a fight is NOT the same as winning one.) The REAL shame here is that, once again, I'm forced into the role of "hypocrite" by my very nature, which often requires me to challenge opinions contrary to my own, and by my desire for mental stimulation. There is NOTHING more challenging than arguing against a position that you agree with, and so, on MANY points, I will face a hell of a challenge. See, I AGREE with the stork on a LOT of what he has said. Regardless, my nature, my need for intellectual stimulation and my desire for entertainment all have me winding up for the next blow. Fun fun fun! Let the game begin. Where is that mob? Ahh there it is! What? Only one of you left? (It should be obvious why I'm not counting the guy with the uzi, hiding behind the boulder.) Well, you've come tilting windmills have you? Ready to take on the dragon? (That's right oh insightful-but-not-too-observant one, I was the dragon. You, by deciding to tilt at this long-wind-mill have become Don Quixote. You would have been better off sitting on the fence.) It's funny that you should think I was BLAMING you when I felt regret at your joining the ranks of the mob. I wasn't BLAMING you for joining the melee, I was warning you. It really is a shame, but, had it not been for this fight, I might NEVER have known that an intellect lay hidden beneath your surface, as it is, I am merely pleasantly surprised and a bit tickled that things are working out BETTER than I had planned. No, I have not a problem in the world with you jumping into the hubbub, nor could I stop it, in fact, thank goodness you did! There is a certain amount of guilt that comes with beating up on little girls and children like S'Bob over there(you decide which of the two he is.) At least now we can say that I bored you to death in a fair fight and have a FEW decent thoughts come out of this. Why would you accuse me of deflating my arguments? They are either valid or they are not. As you yourself have said, the words themselves carry meaning and so, once released, they no longer answer to my actions. Only the bigotry of a human being can put that baggage on a free standing piece of expression. You apparently choose to fall into that commonly sprung trap. How are 'The Raven' or 'Msg In a Bottle' diminished as free standing pieces of expression, simply because Edgar Allen Poe was a drunkard and a drug addict who spoke all sorts of other rubbish? They aren't and they shouldn't be. Your bigotry against expression is apparent and the value that you attach to the individuals behind those pieces is, at best predictable, at worst, pathetic and an injustice to the words themselves. Go ahead, tell me how my arguments weren't all that great anyhow. Doesn't that make any arguments that I now present against them that much more valid to an expression bigot? Penny for a pound or pound for a penny, you pick. There are DISTINCT advantages to hypocrisy once you get past the hang up of requiring an individual to support one point of view within the confines of free_expression. I can argue for or against my own personal opinions and it does NOTHING to invalidate my beliefs, nor does it do anything to weaken the individual arguments in favor, or against each point of view that I argue when I do so. Only to you, and others of your ilk does it matter whether a man argues black then white...hot then cold. If I could argue gray, I would do so, but then Mr. I-will-not-be-cynical-when-it-suits-me-unless-it-suits-me would accuse me of sitting on the fence. Fine! Then because gray is the truth, I will argue both the black points AND the white points and you can call me a hypocrite and I will tell you to see HYPOCRISY because that is what you require of ME, not I of you. One of the things I find MOST disappointing is your mention of my "rhetoric" when you yourself ascribe limited intelligence to the very universe that created you, the most unfounded and most frequently repeated piece of rhetoric that there is. From where exactly did you pull this notion that the universe is primitive and that human intellect is superior in some manner? Just rubbish that occured to an introverted, self-centered piece of human earth? Would you say that of your mother or your father? Did they have a CRUDE sense of value? Would you say that YOUR creation by the universe was as a result of ITS crude sense of value? Perhaps you're right, perhaps only the crudest values could create an ungrateful speck of meat that would look upon it's own creator as a bug. Perhaps it is only YOUR perceptions and YOUR knowledge that are crude. Perhaps your REAL wisdom lies waiting, dormant within the human race, waiting for that day when the true nature of the human race and the universe are revealed. In either event, your arrogance is more apparent than mine to all but other arrogant, closeminded humans like you who see themselves as the center of the universe. Welcome to the show, get in line. Did it EVER occur to you, that the RAW experience of entertainment is infinitely more valuable to the universe than your precious intelligent beauty? (Or should I say, HUMAN-defined beauty?) What is more valuable to the universe than the pleasure of its children during their short lifetimes? The stroking of their egos after they are gone and can no longer appreciate it?! Beauty is worthless unless it is seen. Pleasure is worthless unless it is sensed. Emotion is worthless unless it is felt. Better to feel the pain than to feel nothing at all. In many ways, you are a fool. An intelligent, self and society-deluded fool who believes in human progress at the expense of truth, thinking that human progress IS truth. You are NOT human after this life is over,you are all of the things that you look down on. You are a "primitive." Dust in the form of it's next incarnation. THAT is where your delusion leads you to believe that this is NOT about ugly babies, but it's entirely about ugly babies. You and I are two of them. Look at these spoiled, ungrateful, self-centered babies. What could be uglier than that? Yet the universe created us, and here we are, flourishing. Even the ugliest of babies has it's cherished place in the universe, there is a cradle for the damnedest of its children. Why not the ugliest of HUMAN creations, of human expressions as well? INCLUDING THIS EXPRESSION. The SMARTEST things you've admitted to so far were being pacified, and not criticizing. Why SHOULD you criticize? You have "no problem with them" saying what they say, as if whether or not you had a problem with it makes any difference. You're happy to LET them talk about blowing rainbows up Mary Sunshine's ass?! Happy to LET them talk about their group's latest remake?! How could you stop them, and by what right? None at all of course, you simply say that you have no problem with it, as if it would make a difference if you did, and it is just very telling about how TRULY arrogant you are without knowing so. My words have a crafted tone of arrogance designed to evoke a response. Yours speak of truth and beauty in GENUINE arrogance, YOURS is the hypocrisy, not mine. Mine is simply the expression of Yin in response to Yang and visa versa. Mine is the voice of the other half of the universe, that which you DO NOT represent because you are so busy believing in your half. At least we are both happy to have this forum. I, because our hosts have been gracious enough to let expression be what it is, you, it seems, because you are grateful to have a garbage pile to pick through in search of treasure. I said the weeds rise to the top, I did NOT say that I envy them or despise them for it. Quite the contrary, I ADMIRE them for it and wish them all of the best. The strong survive, we say. Strength is beauty, we say. Yet the facts of our fancies bely the reality of the world we live in. We talk of beauty and truth while ugliness and lies continue to win out against them among us. We speak of hope and happiness while all around us, despair and misery have taken the battle, soon the war, on the human front. I am not the one living outside of reality. That would be YOU and those like you, who condone ugliness in the world around them, but preahc beauty in here. I suppose you'll ask me to see HYPOCRISY and I'd be glad to. At least I know of hypocrisy's value, unlike a certain long legged, rare bird whose bill flaps wherefrom it does not know. Appearance is all we have as humans, don't knock it, because substance is all we are, but appearance is all we will ever know. Just look at your comments about my "self loathing", my "bitterness" and tell me that you did not base them on appearance! What substance was it based upon? You argue more validly for my points without knowing it than I could myself. Are you truly such an enigma? Are you truly such a bacon wrapped fool that I could have been taken in by your intellect, only to have found myself facing an imbecile in disguise? Did you truly believe that your eyes which have lied to you all of your life, would be true to you now? Anger? Is that what you see in me? What anger is there for a man who is living his life and enjoying the gift of his intellect? A man who is given the chance to REVEL in communication and wordplay? You KNOCK appearance over substance in your words, but you CHOOSE appearance over substance in practice. Which would you have me see in answer to that? HYPOCRISY or INSIGHTS_INTO_ASSHOLES? Please do tell! You accuse me of generalizing people and yet THERE you go, I am an angry, repressed, egomaniac because THAT is how I APPEAR to you, based upon your lifetime's experience. My GAWD. how did I get a reputation as a hypocrite while all around me stands so MUCH hypocrisy? Oh, I forgot, it's that I'm straightforward and substantive, even HONEST in my hypocrisy, and you HIDE yours behind appearances and generally accepted bigotries. People? The masses? Here's my bet: I bet that it's apathy that keeps people from rising above the mediocrity that they CHOOSE to wallow in, just like you, so at least on THAT point we can agree, I DON'T believe it's capability to DO, I believe that it's capability to WANT to do (aka chronic APATHY.) Still, you are twice the hypocrite that you claim I am, the only extenuating fact being that yours is hypocrisy born out of ignorance, yet nonetheless, your illusory high horse has proven to be nothing but a donkey made of steam, Don Quixote. However, I'll tell you what, I'll meet you half-way, because regardless of your deluded tirade, I actually am starting to enjoy your stuff. It's beautiful..even with it's ugliness, the nature of which, I hope, after being CLEARLY presented to you, is not LOST on you. Here is the apology: I never meant a MEAN thing I said in this whole yak-fest, never do, and so a sincere sorry comes more easily to ME than it probably would to you. I'm sorry to anyone who was hurt by anything mean I said. I will ALSO give you the blather you asked for. Here it is: Insights_Into_My_Own_Problems Everything is great. We're a little strapped for cash once in awhile, but the paycheck comes once a week and having been well-to-do, I know that there are more important things than money. I guess my biggest problem is BOREDOM. My brain is addicted to thought, just can't get enough. The more I work it, the better my writing is coming along. Finally, after a long time, decent stuff is coming out, ever since I started having fun with KSS on my daf_index page. I even got a compliment on the Good_Brother piece. I had no idea anyone was even reading anymore. I must find more of this mental stimulation, it's intoxicating, although I wish it weren't so NEGATIVE. Ahh well, mustn't throw out the good with the bad, I suppose. Trying to catch the kids up in school with some homeschooling. Things go well with that and they seem to be enjoying their new teacher, me. Looking forward to ANOTHER wonderful year. Thank you for everything you've given me, my creator. Dafremen P.S. You could have read WRITE_A_LETTER_TO_YOURSELF and found out most of the same stuff. Having come to the halfway point in your requests, I will go no further, which means my shutting up about Scorpios is out of the question. Especially not while you're still capable of eating MORE of that foot which you so unknowingly tend to chew on, and ESPECIALLY not while I'm still so bored. P.S. You are the LAST person that I would accuse of being emotionally involved. Not outwardly anyhow, not a good Eagle like you, you keep it all on the inside. I made no mention of YOUR emotional weaknesses, only mention of the fact that YOUR obvious schoolyard hero tactics would NOT play to any of MY weaknesses. Do I take pride in my intellect? Certainly not anymore than I take pride in the size of my feet or the color of my eyes. How ridiculous is that? Pride in something that I had nothing to do with creating? Where is the pride in that? I believe that the pride you were speaking of was your own, and that you were attempting to apply your OWN feelings to someone whose motivations you have been told and simply refuse to believe. Think of yourself as a man who hears the truth but refuses to believe it, simply because the delusions which he has allowed to become hard set opinions will not be so easily set free. You are, as are most Scorpions, fixed in purpose and once you have set your mind upon an opinion, it is NOT so easily changed. I on the other hand, have been given the distinct advantage of being able to change my opinions as the facts reveal themselves. I have told you of my intentions here, you instead chose to pursue this as though all of my statements were fabrications. Excellent. I can think of only ONE better way for this to have gone, for something constructive to have spun off from this, but maybe YOUR ego and competitive nature have decided that it should continue. Perhaps (could it be possible?!), you are enjoying this just as much as you say you do not enjoy these sorts of things. After all, who turns from a fight, states their intention not to return, then comes willingly back into the fray? Why a bully, of course, used to getting his intellectual way, or another kindred soul, excited by the stimulation. Seems we're providing useful entertainment for each other after all. As I said before, EXcellent. (Told you folks that this would be entertaining.) 021016 ... Dafremen This thing broken? Apparently the fates are trying to intervene. Drat! Foiled again! 021016 ... Dafremen Ok maybe THIS will fix it. 021016 ... Dafremen And THERE you have frustration masked as insight my friends. KSS finally shows back up when his OTHER redundant tricks don't DO the trick.(ie trying to draw me out by blathing on any and all blathes with my name. Two looked interesting, they weren't.) Anyhow, I'm disregarding KSS for a second because he's obviously as stimulated by all of this as I am and so I really don't have to worry about HIM going anywhere anytime soon. (Yes I know that makes you sound like my regular girl, KSS and these others like my pieces on the side, hope you aren't too slighted by the lack of attention, but seriously, your game has grown as tiresome as the philosophy that I walked away from.) Photophobe - I read your blathe before it disappeared from this blather. Sorry old chum. Didn't mean to disappoint you, man. Tell you what, since you are the ONLY one so far who has figured out the truth on this thread, I'll let you in on a little secret: (It's just a character. I needed a villain and I play the part fairly passably, don't you think?) Thanks, do0d for showing me that SOME folks out there can REALLY see through and into the writing. Unlike all of these armchair psychologists who claim to be able to. : ) You seriously rock, and having figured me out better than most folks here, you'll no doubt recognize that I am being sincere when I say that. Stork Daddy - I'll take that as a long-winded NO to my previous blathe and continue on my course. Unfortunately, pay day isn't until tomorrow, so I must keep my time brief. I hope you'll forgive any delay in answering that LAST nonreply and allow me instead, to reply to the blathe before that. Thanks in advance, you are a gentleman and a scoundr..er scholar. : ) Let's see what hides behind your pawn...shall we? Here comes my opening move. Ok, well that amounts to a big fat..."NO, Dafremen, I can't think of anything either" and since Stork Daddy seems to have the only response that's worthwhile, I suppose if I MUST continue with this charade, I'll have to continue it by answering his long-winded(even I'm impressed) run-on sentence (also guilty) that tries to pass for a shut-me-down blather. (I say tries, because walking away from a fight is NOT the same as winning one.) The REAL shame here is that, once again, I'm forced into the role of "hypocrite" by my very nature, which often requires me to challenge opinions contrary to my own, and by my desire for mental stimulation. There is NOTHING more challenging than arguing against a position that you agree with, and so, on MANY points, I will face a hell of a challenge. See, I AGREE with the stork on a LOT of what he has said. Regardless, my nature, my need for intellectual stimulation and my desire for entertainment all have me winding up for the next blow. Fun fun fun! Let the game begin. Where is that mob? Ahh there it is! What? Only one of you left? (It should be obvious why I'm not counting the guy with the uzi, hiding behind the boulder.) Well, you've come tilting windmills have you? Ready to take on the dragon? (That's right oh insightful-but-not-too-observant one, I was the dragon. You, by deciding to tilt at this long-wind-mill have become Don Quixote. You would have been better off sitting on the fence.) It's funny that you should think I was BLAMING you when I felt regret at your joining the ranks of the mob. I wasn't BLAMING you for joining the melee, I was warning you. It really is a shame, but, had it not been for this fight, I might NEVER have known that an intellect lay hidden beneath your surface, as it is, I am merely pleasantly surprised and a bit tickled that things are working out BETTER than I had planned. No, I have not a problem in the world with you jumping into the hubbub, nor could I stop it, in fact, thank goodness you did! There is a certain amount of guilt that comes with beating up on little girls and children like S'Bob over there(you decide which of the two he is.) At least now we can say that I bored you to death in a fair fight and have a FEW decent thoughts come out of this. Why would you accuse me of deflating my arguments? They are either valid or they are not. As you yourself have said, the words themselves carry meaning and so, once released, they no longer answer to my actions. Only the bigotry of a human being can put that baggage on a free standing piece of expression. You apparently choose to fall into that commonly sprung trap. How are 'The Raven' or 'Msg In a Bottle' diminished as free standing pieces of expression, simply because Edgar Allen Poe was a drunkard and a drug addict who spoke all sorts of other rubbish? They aren't and they shouldn't be. Your bigotry against expression is apparent and the value that you attach to the individuals behind those pieces is, at best predictable, at worst, pathetic and an injustice to the words themselves. Go ahead, tell me how my arguments weren't all that great anyhow. Doesn't that make any arguments that I now present against them that much more valid to an expression bigot? Penny for a pound or pound for a penny, you pick. There are DISTINCT advantages to hypocrisy once you get past the hang up of requiring an individual to support one point of view within the confines of free_expression. I can argue for or against my own personal opinions and it does NOTHING to invalidate my beliefs, nor does it do anything to weaken the individual arguments in favor, or against each point of view that I argue when I do so. Only to you, and others of your ilk does it matter whether a man argues black then white...hot then cold. If I could argue gray, I would do so, but then Mr. I-will-not-be-cynical-when-it-suits-me-unless-it-suits-me would accuse me of sitting on the fence. Fine! Then because gray is the truth, I will argue both the black points AND the white points and you can call me a hypocrite and I will tell you to see HYPOCRISY because that is what you require of ME, not I of you. One of the things I find MOST disappointing is your mention of my "rhetoric" when you yourself ascribe limited intelligence to the very universe that created you, the most unfounded and most frequently repeated piece of rhetoric that there is. From where exactly did you pull this notion that the universe is primitive and that human intellect is superior in some manner? Just rubbish that occured to an introverted, self-centered piece of human earth? Would you say that of your mother or your father? Did they have a CRUDE sense of value? Would you say that YOUR creation by the universe was as a result of ITS crude sense of value? Perhaps you're right, perhaps only the crudest values could create an ungrateful speck of meat that would look upon it's own creator as a bug. Perhaps it is only YOUR perceptions and YOUR knowledge that are crude. Perhaps your REAL wisdom lies waiting, dormant within the human race, waiting for that day when the true nature of the human race and the universe are revealed. In either event, your arrogance is more apparent than mine to all but other arrogant, closeminded humans like you who see themselves as the center of the universe. Welcome to the show, get in line. Did it EVER occur to you, that the RAW experience of entertainment is infinitely more valuable to the universe than your precious intelligent beauty? (Or should I say, HUMAN-defined beauty?) What is more valuable to the universe than the pleasure of its children during their short lifetimes? The stroking of their egos after they are gone and can no longer appreciate it?! Beauty is worthless unless it is seen. Pleasure is worthless unless it is sensed. Emotion is worthless unless it is felt. Better to feel the pain than to feel nothing at all. In many ways, you are a fool. An intelligent, self and society-deluded fool who believes in human progress at the expense of truth, thinking that human progress IS truth. You are NOT human after this life is over,you are all of the things that you look down on. You are a "primitive." Dust in the form of it's next incarnation. THAT is where your delusion leads you to believe that this is NOT about ugly babies, but it's entirely about ugly babies. You and I are two of them. Look at these spoiled, ungrateful, self-centered babies. What could be uglier than that? Yet the universe created us, and here we are, flourishing. Even the ugliest of babies has it's cherished place in the universe, there is a cradle for the damnedest of its children. Why not the ugliest of HUMAN creations, of human expressions as well? INCLUDING THIS EXPRESSION. The SMARTEST things you've admitted to so far were being pacified, and not criticizing. Why SHOULD you criticize? You have "no problem with them" saying what they say, as if whether or not you had a problem with it makes any difference. You're happy to LET them talk about blowing rainbows up Mary Sunshine's ass?! Happy to LET them talk about their group's latest remake?! How could you stop them, and by what right? None at all of course, you simply say that you have no problem with it, as if it would make a difference if you did, and it is just very telling about how TRULY arrogant you are without knowing so. My words have a crafted tone of arrogance designed to evoke a response. Yours speak of truth and beauty in GENUINE arrogance, YOURS is the hypocrisy, not mine. Mine is simply the expression of Yin in response to Yang and visa versa. Mine is the voice of the other half of the universe, that which you DO NOT represent because you are so busy believing in your half. At least we are both happy to have this forum. I, because our hosts have been gracious enough to let expression be what it is, you, it seems, because you are grateful to have a garbage pile to pick through in search of treasure. I said the weeds rise to the top, I did NOT say that I envy them or despise them for it. Quite the contrary, I ADMIRE them for it and wish them all of the best. The strong survive, we say. Strength is beauty, we say. Yet the facts of our fancies bely the reality of the world we live in. We talk of beauty and truth while ugliness and lies continue to win out against them among us. We speak of hope and happiness while all around us, despair and misery have taken the battle, soon the war, on the human front. I am not the one living outside of reality. That would be YOU and those like you, who condone ugliness in the world around them, but preahc beauty in here. I suppose you'll ask me to see HYPOCRISY and I'd be glad to. At least I know of hypocrisy's value, unlike a certain long legged, rare bird whose bill flaps wherefrom it does not know. Appearance is all we have as humans, don't knock it, because substance is all we are, but appearance is all we will ever know. Just look at your comments about my "self loathing", my "bitterness" and tell me that you did not base them on appearance! What substance was it based upon? You argue more validly for my points without knowing it than I could myself. Are you truly such an enigma? Are you truly such a bacon wrapped fool that I could have been taken in by your intellect, only to have found myself facing an imbecile in disguise? Did you truly believe that your eyes which have lied to you all of your life, would be true to you now? Anger? Is that what you see in me? What anger is there for a man who is living his life and enjoying the gift of his intellect? A man who is given the chance to REVEL in communication and wordplay? You KNOCK appearance over substance in your words, but you CHOOSE appearance over substance in practice. Which would you have me see in answer to that? HYPOCRISY or INSIGHTS_INTO_ASSHOLES? Please do tell! You accuse me of generalizing people and yet THERE you go, I am an angry, repressed, egomaniac because THAT is how I APPEAR to you, based upon your lifetime's experience. My GAWD. how did I get a reputation as a hypocrite while all around me stands so MUCH hypocrisy? Oh, I forgot, it's that I'm straightforward and substantive, even HONEST in my hypocrisy, and you HIDE yours behind appearances and generally accepted bigotries. People? The masses? Here's my bet: I bet that it's apathy that keeps people from rising above the mediocrity that they CHOOSE to wallow in, just like you, so at least on THAT point we can agree, I DON'T believe it's capability to DO, I believe that it's capability to WANT to do (aka chronic APATHY.) Still, you are twice the hypocrite that you claim I am, the only extenuating fact being that yours is hypocrisy born out of ignorance, yet nonetheless, your illusory high horse has proven to be nothing but a donkey made of steam, Don Quixote. However, I'll tell you what, I'll meet you half-way, because regardless of your deluded tirade, I actually am starting to enjoy your stuff. It's beautiful..even with it's ugliness, the nature of which, I hope, after being CLEARLY presented to you, is not LOST on you. Here is the apology: I never meant a MEAN thing I said in this whole yak-fest, never do, and so a sincere sorry comes more easily to ME than it probably would to you. I'm sorry to anyone who was hurt by anything mean I said. I will ALSO give you the blather you asked for. Here it is: Insights_Into_My_Own_Problems Everything is great. We're a little strapped for cash once in awhile, but the paycheck comes once a week and having been well-to-do, I know that there are more important things than money. I guess my biggest problem is BOREDOM. My brain is addicted to thought, just can't get enough. The more I work it, the better my writing is coming along. Finally, after a long time, decent stuff is coming out, ever since I started having fun with KSS on my daf_index page. I even got a compliment on the Good_Brother piece. I had no idea anyone was even reading anymore. I must find more of this mental stimulation, it's intoxicating, although I wish it weren't so NEGATIVE. Ahh well, mustn't throw out the good with the bad, I suppose. Trying to catch the kids up in school with some homeschooling. Things go well with that and they seem to be enjoying their new teacher, me. Looking forward to ANOTHER wonderful year. Thank you for everything you've given me, my creator. Dafremen P.S. You could have read WRITE_A_LETTER_TO_YOURSELF and found out most of the same stuff. Having come to the halfway point in your requests, I will go no further, which means my shutting up about Scorpios is out of the question. Especially not while you're still capable of eating MORE of that foot which you so unknowingly tend to chew on, and ESPECIALLY not while I'm still so bored. P.S. You are the LAST person that I would accuse of being emotionally involved. Not outwardly anyhow, not a good Eagle like you, you keep it all on the inside. I made no mention of YOUR emotional weaknesses, only mention of the fact that YOUR obvious schoolyard hero tactics would NOT play to any of MY weaknesses. Do I take pride in my intellect? Certainly not anymore than I take pride in the size of my feet or the color of my eyes. How ridiculous is that? Pride in something that I had nothing to do with creating? Where is the pride in that? I believe that the pride you were speaking of was your own, and that you were attempting to apply your OWN feelings to someone whose motivations you have been told and simply refuse to believe. Think of yourself as a man who hears the truth but refuses to believe it, simply because the delusions which he has allowed to become hard set opinions will not be so easily set free. You are, as are most Scorpions, fixed in purpose and once you have set your mind upon an opinion, it is NOT so easily changed. I on the other hand, have been given the distinct advantage of being able to change my opinions as the facts reveal themselves. I have told you of my intentions here, you instead chose to pursue this as though all of my statements were fabrications. Excellent. I can think of only ONE better way for this to have gone, for something constructive to have spun off from this, but maybe YOUR ego and competitive nature have decided that it should continue. Perhaps (could it be possible?!), you are enjoying this just as much as you say you do not enjoy these sorts of things. After all, who turns from a fight, states their intention not to return, then comes willingly back into the fray? Why a bully, of course, used to getting his intellectual way, or another kindred soul, excited by the stimulation. Seems we're providing useful entertainment for each other after all. As I said before, EXcellent. (Told you folks that this would be entertaining.) 021016 ... nocturnal I thought you said this wasn't going to be boring. come on, do something funny or cruel or something to someone. I don't even care if it's me. just punch this up already. 021016 ... stork daddy first of all, i was never argainst your bitterness. just the bitterness of your words. your most damaging statements are unsupported or wrapped around fuzzy logic and an obvious misunderstanding of what i wrote. i never said intelligence is the center of the universe. as a matter of fact, intelligence has yet to prove it has long term survival value. when i said the universe only has the most crude measure of value, i of course meant it subjectively, but how else can we measure value. man is the measure of all things. you said it yourself, the universe needs to be heard. so all values we ascribe to the universe are going to be compared to our human values. as humans we value the stable, the progressive, we value the eloquent and concise. this doesn't mean junk doesn't win out. but we know the difference between junk and non-junk. or some of us does. sure i've generalized people. but you generalized the whole universe. how is it you know what the universe wants again? my point was exactly this. the universe's values do not match our own. what we judge wortwhile does not necessarily survive in the universe. what we expect to happen does not always. a dog can kill a wolf. this is what is meant when one discusses the universe's crude values. there is only that which survives and that which does not. it does not matter what a particular thing could've offered in a given situation. it does not matter if it's been surmised by some intellect what that situation would be. if there's a weakness and something else exploits is, all those other chances are lost. so if you talk of me as arrogant, remember, that i'm not the one telling god what to do. frankly though, your arguments amount to namecalling, and misunderstanding a point then tearing apart the strawman you built over the real argument. so stomp away. the fact is, the "crude" values i ascribed to the universe exist plain as day. there are plenty of contrasts to the ideals most humans share as coarse commonalities. potential einsteins and potential mother teresa's daily never grow into adulthood due to starvation. the universe isn't set up to value them more. or you more, or i more. it has its rules and it sticks to them bar none. if you're calling me arrogant for believing that humanity has worth, well then yes i'm arrogant. i never even claimed i have worth. i believe in the process. and i believe firmly that there are values that we can roughly average out to objectivity. i believe you fall short of those values. your words play off themselves, but are empty. when i said you delfate your own arguments, i meant with your words. not with whatever it is you do. bringing up edgar allen poe was even worse than the ugly babies. so what it amounts to is that in your argument for white, you argued for black. your individual arguments defeat each other. but that's besides the point. you haven't argued any consistent point. i'm stating clearly, that only if you admit this is a game, with no significance in the real world can you win, or justify your actions. and if you admit that, i argue that there is no purpose to the exact arguments you've chosen since they can't be defended outside of the rules of this game. go pick up chess where each move only tenously symbolizes something in the real world. words are meant to signify reality. i agree it is interesting how they often leave reality behind and interact with themselves, but you started out attempting to actually signify correlations to the world around us in your words and now you've backed into words relating to themselves. your actual arguments are defunct, because they've ceased to signify anything of importance. but i'd be happy to argue with you. by the way, i like how you put an insult next to some pseudo logic as if it's the logical conclusion of that shaky logic. also comparing the universe to my parents was interesting. personifying the universe is once again, an interesting thing you can do with words, but devoid of any correlations with empirical reality strong enough to consider it as an actuality. i'm not going to argue against religion, because i consider it a strong possibility, but to berate me because i didn't assume it to be a fact is a bit bold. value needs a perspective. something is of value when something else needs it. so if you meant the universe is entertained because you find all of this entertaining, i can see your threadbare point. of course comparing oneself to the universe would be even more arrogant than i assume you to be. and i never said i wasn't arrogant. there's a bit of arrogance in just continuing to exist when so much beauty is drowned out by so many weeds. there's plenty of people who deserve more security and happiness than me. and that's what i mean, the universe isn't about worth. it doesn't judge on the same scale as we do. it has crude values in that they take into account the inner state of nothing. it is only when we use our inner state to reconfigure the universe that we affect it at all. it isn't hungry, it isn't happy or sad, it just drives on. pushing at the edges of the universe into who knows what. making space so that order can be created. and certainly we are an interesting development, a universe that evolved to observe itself. see, but all of these interesting points are theoretical, and have nothign to do with our argument. you say you regret me joining the mob? i joined no mob. their opinions had no influence on me joining. i was merely defending an ideal i have, the idea that if a person makes unchecked statements which are supposed to correspond to some reality, they should be rigourously examined, before value is ascribed to them. your argument seems to be that all viewpoints are equally valid, ugly babies and ugly babies alike. but to argue is to show that in the human intellect you so quickly throw away, there are positions which have more value than others, premises which back up other premises. that said, you're arguing against the very fact that an ugly baby is as worthwhile as a pretty one, metaphorically speaking of course. if you admit to the very purpose of arguing, you admit there is such a thing as junk in the universe and it isn't as worthwhile. my argument is that the forum is the right way to do this, and that your statements were unfounded and inflammatory with no real substance or even rhetoric soundly backing them up. i have no problem with a critical attack as that is part of the forum, but when the critical attack itself jumps to conclusions which haven't been supported by the other premises in the argument, it defeats the purpose of the critical attack. i guess the true hipocrisy was that you never left the mediocrity you lambasted. your arguments were just so much namecalling. now i'd agree if you just feel you want your ugly baby out and in the open for the world to see, that it's your right. which is what much of writing amounts to, baby pictures. you're fascinated by them and everyone else is bored if not slightly annoyed. however, the moment you insinuate that arguments can mean something, you'd better back it up. this is what i mean. your own words deflate your own arguments. it has nothing to do with your strange interest in astrological sex. it's that you claim all expressions equally valid, and then argue. one is an argument against another. and i'm saying, if you thought you had something besides an ugly baby, you were wrong. i told you what i felt was more interesting. allowing the forum to progress, and not forgetting the human values that go into our words. no, i don't believe human values should be seperated from words. words are a form of communication. i think what words can do is less interesting than what words must do. words are not able to exist in a permanent value. we supply the value through other context. after all, the statements: 1.) the statement below is true. and 2.) the statement above is false. show that words when devoid of the signified lose real value and become arbitrary. so perhaps the other blatherpeoples are disgusted that i'm allowing this to go on. and yes allowing, since no one else would engage you like this and you know it. once again though, how do you know that? through my writing. i'd argue that poe's works were allowed through his other depravities, not emperiled by them. i hope you approve of my style. i followed the jump around inconsistent style you blathe in to make it easier for you to respond. but to drive a point home, i find a lot on this site interesting. i like seeing people try to express themselves in words. even you. also, qualifications like it's almost payday so i have to make this quick, merely bring the personal into the argument, or did i miss something and that somehow bolstered the rest of your argument? i found it strange when i tried to relate it to the other arguments. and one more thing...i never claimed to not be a hipocrite. i merely know that when arguing, it is best to take a consistent stance so that your arguments support themselves not defeat themselves. to say i'm doing this because i want to protect them is something which is arguable. to say i want to fight is something which amounts to namecalling, because there is nothing to argue then. so you can't really call me hipocritical since pretending i have a point is the only way to get into an argument. actually, it's just as consistent with my position as it would be if i really believed those points. saying i don't want to fight? drama...entertainment value. it makes you look bad...or worse i should say. as if that's something which is either possible or bothersome to you. the fact is, you're right, the universe needs an audience, and so do we. if you argue that your words are what really matter, how they relate to themselves, well that is the clearest example of valuing idealized human intelligence. if anything, i'm the moderate one who sees that communication can happen only approximately and the universe doesn't always value logic in the way human minds have conceived it. you have blathed to the effect that your argument alone should be what's interesting and i see it's more than that. i'm glad you're a windmill by the way. dragons are much easier to kill. since you're my own construction, i'll watch back and see if you react as i've predicted. (see how statements like that, while inflammatory on a human level, or on the common level of understanding that those words in that combination normally represent, are not rigourously logical? it doesn't follow from anything but your personal opinion, not your written one, that i am a steam donkey or whatever you called me). however, you win over all the associations given to those words as if it makes your argument all that much more conclusive. all it comes down to is who's a better namecaller. and i really don't want to show you that you've lost your edge in name calling. although love dove was pretty insulting. i wouldn't show her that if i were you. 021016 ... minnesota_chris say, one of you guys who likes to type on and on and on. . . I have this paper to write. . . would one of you please type 10 pages on my teaching philosophy? Due next week. Thanks. 021016 ... stork daddy addendum the problem with formal logic is all the if this then this. the problem is the if. words can't supply the if. the rest just follows from words relations to themselves. but the if is where the problems are. you appeal to the world outside of language as much as i do when you talk of a creator who appreciates entertainment. as if we can understand what entertainment even is outside of a human context. entertainment has no meaning outside of what we understand it to be. also, i believe that bad art and bad self expression has its place, and it may overwhelm other types of expression, but bad criticism is directly destructive. also, you cannot deny the "personal" value of your words when making comments about people's apperances and ability. your words once again correlate to the world outside of words. there is more than arguments involved. so i guess my main issue is that you argue you're doing this for entertainment value as if that makes your words any less mean or real to the people involved. i'm saying that there are certain words which cannot be robbed of their human baggage. it is arrogant to think we can seperate ourselves from our emotions, or that our words can stand on their own as free expression. especially when they're directed directly at another individual and not at an idea or even the remotest attempt to cover up the individual with an abstraction of their general pattern. your attacks were direct and depended on knowledge of appearances and personality quite outside of the quality of the words posted here. that isn't rhetoric. i'm arguing that certain things shouldn't be used for entertainment value or boredom by anyone but a true nihilist. and of course i know you just wanted to play the andy kaufmanesque heel. my point to you is this, you aren't andy. you just aren't andy. it's sad that he's gone. but even sadder that you're still here. you can respond to whatever detailed parts you like, since there's little to no chance of you responding to it's basic push. 021017 ... stork daddy and another thing. expression bigot? whatever the hell that is, i can assure you i did not deduce your personality traits from your writing near as much as i would've liked to. after all i never even called you a retard. you have the poetry of a personal injury lawyer and the logic of a door to door vacuum salesman. and i mean that in the general sense, since words alone may not be enough for you to sufficiently catch my drift. anyways. i can't believe it but you've done it. unlike you, i tend to be able to find interest in most things, but i've decidedly lost interest in this. and no, it isn't about having the last laugh, since i know you will reply. i'd bet your bottom nickel on it. anyways, i'm done. i'll read what you have to say, see the same errors as before, grow tired and see that the entirety of your arguments was just another war of attrition, just another weed. it's okay, i forgive you, you know not what you do. well i'm young, i suppose i can still become a decent human being despite involving myself in this worthless procedure. oh but all those lost minutes. i could've made a pop tart...nay, four or five pop tarts. but you go ahead, go on with yourself, and "entertain" the universe. because certainly you're not entertaining anyone else. oh yourself that's right. i'll do my part and make a pop tart for the universe. p.s. if a player sees a checkmate and walks away from the board, who's really lost? 021017 ... stork daddy enraged and another thing. expression bigot? whatever the hell that is, i can assure you i did not deduce your personality traits from your writing near as much as i would've liked to. after all i never even called you a retard. you have the poetry of a personal injury lawyer and the logic of a door to door vacuum salesman. and i mean that in the general sense, since words alone may not be enough for you to sufficiently catch my drift. anyways. i can't believe it but you've done it. unlike you, i tend to be able to find interest in most things, but i've decidedly lost interest in this. and no, it isn't about having the last laugh, since i know you will reply. i'd bet your bottom nickel on it. anyways, i'm done. i'll read what you have to say, see the same errors as before, grow tired and see that the entirety of your arguments was just another war of attrition, just another weed. it's okay, i forgive you, you know not what you do. well i'm young, i suppose i can still become a decent human being despite involving myself in this worthless procedure. oh but all those lost minutes. i could've made a pop tart...nay, four or five pop tarts. but you go ahead, go on with yourself, and "entertain" the universe. because certainly you're not entertaining anyone else. oh yourself that's right. i'll do my part and make a pop tart for the universe. p.s. if a player sees a checkmate and walks away from the board, who's really lost? so your mind sharpened yet? i imagine that's like sharpening a marble. well i guess a marble can be sharp if you throw it fast enough. and boy do you have a lot of words. hypocrite? moi? that's french you asshole. also you smell like poop. 021017 ... ????????????? If it's any consolation for your lost time, Stork Daddy, I've enjoyed the hell out of your writing. But don't walk away just yet--the best part of winning a chess game is knocking the other guy's king over! 021017 ... phil squint much like a sponge does nothing yet still sucks 021018 ... The Devil Himself me an absolute devil does nothing and reigns supreme 021018 ... Dafremen "Now all I get is hatemail saying ' Dre fell off. ' What? Cuz I've been in the lab With a pen and a pad Trying to get this damned label off?" - Dr. Dre / "Forgot About Dre" It's a BOY!!! Well the babies have arrived and appear healthy, although they say that parents can't help but love their own babies, even the ugly ones. Thank you all for coming. Your participation was appreciated very much and I apologize for any inconvenience that this may have caused you. I hope, at least that it was entertaining and/or time consuming, whether that was in a delightful or not-so-delightful sort of way. Stork Daddy, although I am not endowed with the power to confer blather_alpha_male status, if my vote counts for anything, here you go man, you've earned it. I'm not combative enough to be an alpha male, I'm just an eccentric little artist who finds his muse where he can. (I saved your responses, they look absolutely brilliant. If you like we can continue this..could be fun! : ) Photophobe, thanks for helping give that little piece of inspiration that allowed one of these songs to finally be born, you provided the ending and THAT is the most important part. (Monstrous was the word, man.) Squint, sorry if you got caught up in this, you did sort of ask for SOMETHING to happen, but no young person deserves to have their finger bitten off for poking at old geezers..that, as I am well aware, is the nature of most teens. Bob, bob bob...when will this charade that poses as emnity between us ever end? A special apology to YOU Bob because it seems obvious that you take these things that I do seriously and, if anything, I have only served to amplify your negative impression of me. Sadly, it's sort of a snowball effect that this little workshop did nothing to stop. Perhaps someday you will be reminded of the misfit that I am and not some OTHER societal misfit whose lifestyle (based upon your description) I find despiccable. Noc, thanks for showing up, you were lovely(as usual) in your role of bloodthirsty, indifferent townsperson. To tell the truth, I wasn't even sure you were around anymore, but I'm glad that you are. Your ego and bitchiness are second to NONE, my dear. I assure you that when I said that you weren't in the top 50, what I REALLY meant to say was that you aren't in the top 50, you ARE the top 50. I hope you will accept that as a retraction of my exaggerration. Phil, brilliant hemming and hawing..if anyone on this page came close to playing the part of the REAL me in this whole thing, it was probably you. Although I wouldn't have put SO much edge on the sarcasm. In real life, I ride the fence a whole lot better than that. (As all of the attempts at avoiding a fight with stork daddy must have demonstrated, I'm NOT a very convincing antagonist lately...sigh.) Finally to KSS, well man, you got the ball rolling. All of the songs, poetry and writing that I've been coming up with lately have been full of so much POSITIVITY that it was getting damned near impossible to develop a true-to-life negative character. (Just look at the less than believeable performance of the grasshopper in DANCE_GRASSHOPPER_DANCE.) Any negative stuff I touched was hoaky and forced. (Living a positive life will do that to a person.) It was only after you started the taunting on daf_index that I was able to write passable dark humor(GOOD_BROTHER). (INSIGHT_AND_REDUNDANCY was a sarcasm scratchpad.) Regardless of what your TRUE intentions are on your side of the screen, my interpretation remains the same (see also: MY_FAVORITE_BLATHERERS) and I am truly appreciative of what you do around here; providing the darkness without which the brightness would seem less bright. The importance of that lesson will NOT be lost on me again anytime soon. Thank you all again, very much. Please accept my "cop out" and feel free to berate, chastise, ignore or spit. No doubt it's been earned. see also: DONNY'S_TALE ME_FOR_REAL The first song is recorded already (acapella. Hope you like screeching.) I'll try to put it online sometime Sunday morning for the curious and/or masochistic. (No decent FTP program at the cybercafe.) 021018 ... ????????????? Well, Daffyman, I'm glad I inspired you. What's funny about your "This is just a show, I have no intentions, I have no emotional attachment, the missus loved what you worte" rhetoric is that it justified everything that I wrote. But I'm still not KingSuperSpecial, Daffyman. Come on, just admit that you made a bad guess. When you first accused KSS, I had no idea why. I guessed it was based on some earlier interpersonal Blather conflict. But then he wrote something about "planting the seed". I scrolled up to see that he had posted some brief, satirical Daffyman-isms (he signed it, notably, with his own name). But I didn't see KSS's Daffyman parody before I wrote mine. And to think that KSS would go from making fun of you (with name attached) to covert Daffyman impersonation is absurd (An' U know it, do0000d). Actually, I'm not sure if you really think I'm him. As I see it, there are 2 (two) possible explanations for your continual denial of KSS's inculpability: Either you don't want to admit to being wrong about your sto0pid guess, or you're so fucking arrogant that you can't even admit to yourself that you were wrong. 021018 ... stork daddy ooh i reread this all, and as the sun rose then sank then rose then sank, i saw that none of this was essay worthy. we all should've put in a little more time. but it felt like such an emergency, so i forgive myself. blather will tend to be a little more forgiving in that it is a free forum. of course a lack of standardization does lead to the troubles we had. language itself sometimes isn't narrow enough to ensure exact understanding between two people even when the same word is used by both. just like blather, we define language through language. oh it's pleasant how it all turned out. well good luck all. 021018 ... ????????????? Okay, since this is all over, I'd like to write a biased summary for the benefit of those who don't have the endurance to wade through the dense text of this page. The following events are listed in chronological order (infer causality at will): 1) I screw with Daffyman on his DAF_INDEX page. 2) Daffyman attacks a Blather person, saying that he's bringing back the big, bad Daffyman of old. 3) People tell Daffyman that he sucks. 4) Daffyman settles down, admitting that Stork Daddy is "Alpha Male" to his "Omega Wolf". Daffyman also makes the admisson, cloaked in Daffyman rhetoric, that I taught him a lesson. There. Hopefully I will never have to load this page again. 021018 ... Dafremen : ) My, isn't the ego flying hot and heavy tonight? Heheh, love it. You really couldn't have created a better preface to this next one man. And YES, KSS it's still YOU getting all the credit for the fun. You're BRILLIANT man! Trying to make we think it isn't you! Niiice. Ok so the game is supposed to go on...you said you wanted to play Stork Daddy. So let's REALLY have some fun now that we've gotten the reality check out of the way k do0d? (By the way, whether your naturally suspicious nature will allow you to believe it or not...it's true..this is just expression. Ok, now for a new addition to this scathing fun...the DISCLAIMER) DISCLAIMER: For those of you who don't get it. These are just words. They don't mean anything unless you LET them. Even if they offend you, or speak OF you, only YOU have the ability to interpret what they mean to YOU. If they seem to represent beliefs or opinions contrary to yours. Let it go..or JUMP in! If they start to make you miserable (and you don't want that) let it go. You are free to stop reading at any time. In addition I'd like to mention that I think Stork Daddy kicks ass. He is funny, clever and OBVIOUSLY intelligent, REGARDLESS of what he may think of me. THAT is the magic of the written word and THAT is the magic of cyberspace. I can believe what I want to, accept what I want, be affected by what I want and discard the rest. WHAT_IS_ART? To me, THIS is one of its many forms. Unlike my earlier reactive blathers, (and the beginning of this one), I will refrain from starting these sorts of things without a DISCLAIMER from now on. It is a reality of life that some people just don't get it. Anyhow, for those of you that do, hope you enjoy. (Noc, I tried to turn it up a notch. Let me know if it's seasoned to taste or if you would like more.) (Stork Daddy, you go bird!) : ) Well bird-brain, almost clever start to an even less clever finish! Kudos and what I mean is, aren't you almost clever in a Koko-signs-with-her-middle-finger sort of way? You open up by trying to misdirect me (Shyea...right. You'd have better luck misdirecting a train with a sign that says "TRAINS THIS WAY.") and the audience (if there are any of them who haven't passed out from the sheer volume of our combined blathes.) You say that you never "argued against my bitterness." KNOCK KNOCK hello?! Is there anyone in there who hasn't hopped out of the clown car that is your head already? What bitterness? There is none! It is a figment of your imagination, much as the rest of your statements are figments of your bowels. THAT was my point, not that you argued against "my bitterness", that you ASSUME there IS bitterness simply because you PERCIEVE bitter words. Are you living in a dream world or something? THIS is the world of words, Foot-On-Your-Chin-For-Easy-Eatin' boy! It is ENTIRELY within the realm of LOGICAL possibilities that I am grinning from ear to ear without the tiniest BIT of bitterness or arrogance. It is entirely possible that insults written are simply words, like David Letterman f*cking with the President or Mark Twain calling the entire Congress a bunch of empty headed morons. (In case your neuron-and-information deficient brain didn't know, Mark Twain was a close aquaintance of SEVERAL members of Congress at the time and David Letterman has been invited to the White House on at least one occasion.) Not only are these lacks of intent ENTIRELY within the realm of logical possibilities, THEY ARE FACTS, not fuzzy logic (which you appear to use here as a synonym for, "Well you got me there Dafremen, and since I'm too lazy to do anything but toast pop tarts and spank the monkey that is my ego, I'm just going to label those 'fuzzy logic' and be done with them." Nice try. Fuzzy logic, the PHRASE will not save you. Neither will your funny logic.) I am neither bitter, nor am I angry. I am simply writing. Period. You would CONTINUE to make the mistake that has you arguing that insults have a meaning which is inseparable from the individuals who create them. That mistake is that YOU as the person INTERPRETING the words have CREATED that connection. Here's an insult that I DID NOT create: What's the difference between California Governor Gray Davis and a bucket of sh*t? The bucket! Who would you attach THAT insult to? Noone of course, why? Because you have no "culprit"? If someone had said those same words, directing them at Governor Davis himself would you have connected the words to the person who created them? Of course you would because YES, you ARE an expression bigot. An expression bigot is hereby defined (for your benefit only)as a BIGOT against certain types of expression. It is the application to a piece of expression those associations that are NOT empirically evident via the expression. Such as calling someone angry based upon angry words. They APPEAR to be angry, but THAT is not empirical proof, that is YOUR interpretation, if you create in your mind "FACTS" of these interpretations, that is on YOU, not the writer.Your bigotry is quantified by the wrapping-your-lips-around-a-misconception-and-blowing-it-til-it-cums-the-way-you-want-it-to manner in which you justify your bigotry. Of course you must justify it, all bigots do, even EXPRESSION bigots like your mysoginistic wouldn't-have-a-clo0-if-Colonel Mustard-gave-one-to-you ass. You seem to disregard the fact that a word is capable of something approximating immortality, whereas a human being is not. There are OTHER glaring differences that make it nonsensical to connect the two. Take this WHOLE spiel that I am currently wacking your brutally misinformed Cro-Magnon tush back into the Stone Age with. None of these words have intent behind them. Why? Because I DO NOT KNOW A DAMNED THING ABOUT YOU, nor do I have any reason to believe that you are unintelligent. I simply choose to EXPRESS those ideas in words. Not only that, I have refused to allow your words to become emotions or possible misconceptions. I have REFUSED to taint my KNOWLEDGE base with "appears to be" knowledge. Speaking of appearances, and getting BACK to the point that I was TRYING to make, you talked about valuing SUBSTANCE over appearance. My POINT (besides the one you so graciously sharpened into my marble with your stunningly hard head) was that YOU judge the TRUE intentions and feelings of a PERSON by words alone, THEN you claim to value substance over appearance. There is no proof of intent in mere words, there MAY be APPARENT intent. The definition being intent that APPEARS to be, not intent that IS. Your actions appear to be the actions not of an empirical thinker, but of a class of scientist that I like to call SEEMS TO BE...FOR NOW researchers. Empirical thinkers do NOT allow something as ethereal and subject to the introduction of false data as WORDS to become the basis for establishing FACTS. ESPECIALLY NOT ON A SITE DEDICATED TO ARTISTIC FREE_EXPRESSION. We leave that to the apparently BLIND and BLEEDING-from-their-ears-for-contemplating-Nintendo64 wannabes like you. You KNOW nothing based upon what is written here, anymore than I do. You simply know what the words are. That is ALL. There isn't much ego on this side of the screen, I gave that up the first time I walked into a TRuck Stop, one gloomy road trip night, to buy feminine hygiene products for the missus. (I have three daughters so whatever scrap of my ego remains has taken a severe bruising since that time.) My ego went out the door when I realized how infinitesimally SMALL I am compared with the rest of the known universe. The majority of the rest of the human race decided to shrink those same ENORMOUS mental images down to mere inches and make a book out of the best of them. Human arrogance goes hand in hand with appreciation of all things human as superior, WHICH, apparently, seems to be YOUR appreciation.. "So all values we ascribe to the universe are going to be compared to our human values.", you say. (Sorry man, not true. A veterinarian who did that would not have very happy patients.Animals aren't the universe you say? Their values are as much outside the scope of our human values as the universe's. Neither would someone who believes as I do compare the universe's values to my own human values. I am human now only, not always and am capable of seeing BEYOND my time as a human, to when I will go back into the earth. Because YOU don't appear to be capable of seeing beyond your own human vanity, don't push that close-minded perspective off on the rest of us. The key to understanding perspective and values of nonhuman things, in many cases, is observation.) "As humans we value the stable, the progressive, we value the eloquent and concise.", you say. Ok, well on behalf of the REST of the human race I would like to thank you for clearing up what it is WE value. Sh*t, now not only have you made all values the domain of the human race, but you've made YOUR values the values of the human race. Holy Sh*t...you're not running for public office are you? That WOULD be scary. Bonzo Takes The White House type scary. I know people that are SCARED SHITLESS of the progressive. I know folks that get mortified at the possibility of stability. I know folks that think eloquence is pretentious and concise is lazy. "Man is the measure of all things" you say. (Nope not arrogant at all. How exactly is man the measure of time? Space? Universal progression? I'm sorry, I meant OUTSIDE of Stork-Daddy-World and the universe in which it resides.) "I of course meant it subjectively, but how else can we measure value?", you ask. (Naively arrogant, oh that's refreshing. 'Other than subjective' meaning, other than our own way of thinking. You can't drive yet CAN you? Please say no.) "Intelligence has yet to prove it has long term survival value." (Ok, so on that point you got me. YOU being a perfect case in point.) No your words aren't arrogant (Your words are about as humble as Donald Trump at a casino opening with a breast in each hand.) You appear to attempt to cover your ass by writing: "You misunderstood what I wrote." There's an all-encompassing unqualified cop-out if I ever read one. How do YOU know what I understood or didn't? I understood what you wrote extremely well, the arrogant tone of the words was well established and further reiterated here. I know 5th graders that could have understood what you wrote and PROBABLY could have written it better...AND turned it in on time WITH a DOZEN pop-tarts for the teacher to boot. You are self-deluded and DEFINITELY OUT OF YOUR LEAGUE in this conversation. How do I know what the universe WANTS? I NEVER CLAIMED TO. Once again, I think it's apparent WHO didn't understand whom. Perhaps your reading level isn't up to this discussion? Perhaps I should tone the words down a bit? Hmm ok what I ASKED was: "Did it EVER occur to you, that the RAW experience of entertainment is infinitely more valuable to the universe than your precious intelligent beauty?" Lemme see, how to translate into mongoloid-speak? Did you ever think of the pretty of things that aren't smart? Do you think is good things that aren't smart like big head humans? Do you think unhumans like these too? Pretty time-spending things..SLURP..gurg? I also ASKED: "What is more valuable to the universe than the pleasure of its children during their short lifetimes?" Oops, I forgot...better tone that down to sub-crustacean reading levels. Hmm..ok hows this? You think bored bad? You like die bored? You live short time, no? Me too. Short time here for other things too. Bored bad, you think for everything? YOU THINK? (I stress the last question because I would like you to notice how in BOTH cases I ask for a subjective opinion. You know...a QUESTION. Let me rephrase for you:Little curly Cootie tongue on end of words.) In fact, if ANYONE is trying to state the nature of the universe's values, that would be YOU. "my point was exactly this. the universe's values do not match our own." Whoa! and you based this assumption on WHAT exactly? "The universe has only the CRUDEST sense of value." I see, and when exactly did it tell you this? When did you OBSERVE this for that matter? So, basically, comparing the actions of the universe to your own HUMAN value system, you've determined that the universe's values are crude. Hello?! Good thing you DIDN'T say you weren't a hypocrite. Because you're not much of an intellect either,(as I assumed at first, my bad) and I would have hated to point BOTH of those facts out to you with one sentence. Ok, so now that we've established that I HAVEN'T generalized the entire universe and that YOU have narrowed the universe down to all things human, particularly the stork-daddy part of all things human,(thereby "proving" SOMEHOW that you AREN'T the narrow-minded, arrogant, product of a sperm recycling program gone bad that you appear to be.), let's move on. That's IF you can follow, which, at this point I'm not sure you can. If you need a hand, let me know, this IS an equal access blathe with assistance available to the mentally challenged, as well as those even LESS fortunate, like yourself. (You'll notice the handrails on the side.) "A dog can kill a wolf." So? Was that an exercise out of your Dick and Jane Abridged Reader For the Textually Impaired? If the point you're trying to make is that we expect the wolf to win, I beg to differ. There are numerous circumstances under which I would EXPECT the dog to kill the wolf. An old wolf, a young wolf, a sick wolf, a big strong dog, an inexperienced wolf or a dog with much greater experience, the wolf is in the middle of a circle of humans who have tranquilized him so that the dog can tear him to bits in order to entertain themselves. The list goes on, and on. " i'm not the one telling god what to do." I see, and, disregarding all of that pro humans-as-caretakers-of-all-values crap your were ralphing up earlier, who IS saying that? I don't think I even mention God ONCE do I? Oh yea, I mention him long enough to say that I'm not him and that I don't think our fellow blatherskite thinks HE is either. Did you HAVE a point? Besides the one that defines the shape of your head, I mean. No point at all? I didn't think so. "Your arguments amount to namecalling." You BETCHA! I'm calling you an APPARENTLY mysoginistic self-centered eye-rollingly-subhuman chunk of creation's d*ck butter. Universal and universally-unwanted SMEGMA. WHY what's it to ya? YOUR arguments amount to blowing words which more than likely formed in the thick white plaque that probably coats your tongue onto a page in cyberspace via your digestive tract. They amount to Mickey blowing Pluto and wondering why his dog is now f*cking him in his ass. Your arguments are the equivilant of, not a room full of monkeys or a million years, but three monkeys typing for 5 minutes. Two of those monkeys having typed on a PlaySkool piano, the third on an electric typewriter with a blown fuse. "Stomp away." Yee haw! "Your words play off themselves, but are empty." Unlike YOURS which play WITH themselves and are full of it. "i argue that there is no purpose to the exact arguments you've chosen since they can't be defended outside of the rules of this game." Let's add PURPOSE to the list of things which YOU have domain over defining shall we? I argue that there is no purpose to language since you obviously don't know how to use it other than as an opening mechanism for your mouth. Ok, well, I suppose you must feed yourself, although you could probably find something more nutritious than your own feet to snack on. Then again, I argue, what is the purpose of YOU EATING? (An argument that almost certainly has more validity than your own.) Must the food be wasted so? My arguments have a VERY definite purpose and the fact that you keep coming back here after stating again and again your intention not to do so, only serves to illustrate the surety of that purpose and their effectiveness in achieving it. "Your individual arguments defeat each other." Words defeat words? How is that? I mean at this point, you should be putting your tail between you legs, but NOOOO you're probably about to type something else. You aren't defeated by words and the words themselves are almost CERTAINLY more capable of controlling their emotions than you are. How can they be defeated? By an opposing statement? It is ONLY the interpretation of the expression that defines the argument. This being the case, any argument in favor of can be perceived as being better than any argument opposed to and visa versa. YOU create this defeat in your head. It does NOT exist on paper or in cyberspace. Nor does it necessarily exist in the minds of everyone simply because it exists in yours. (Ooops! Did I forget who I was talking to oh supreme decider of all that everyone and everything values? Judge of that which has purpose! Decider of perspective and valuable content, please forgive me! Dictator of all that is logical and fabricator of all that is not, please don't punch me with the fist of oatmeal that is your wit anymore!) "go pick up chess where each move only tenously symbolizes something in the real world" I am in fact, quite good at chess. This is more stimulating however. Even when, as in this case, it amounts to my being shot at by a babboon with a box full of rubber bands. I find the opportunity to create new combinations of words entertaining. I find your crude, semi-intellectual attempts at "putting me in my place" amusing in a little-kid-punches-the-air-while-big-brother-holds-his-head sort of way. You are laughable, yet provide a strangely comforting reassurance to me that most human beings are STILL, indeed, as predictable as ever. You are a fist full of M&M's on a hot sidewalk to me. I could pick your nasty, dirt-covered little ass up and dispense with you, but I prefer to watch you slowly melt, leaving these pretty colors behind which I can look at and enjoy again and again. "your actual arguments are defunct, because they've ceased to signify anything of importance. but i'd be happy to argue with you." Because you say they are, right? This is a typical pseudo intellectual piece of socio-political propaganda. You believe that the majority of readers are NOT following most of this logic, therefore you make unqualified statements about the VALIDITY of MY logic, assuming that by doing so, you invalidate that logic. You do not. My logic is not only sound, but your resorting to cheap tricks only serves to weaken what pathetic presence you HAD as a player in this game. In fact, there are OTHER examples of this SAME idiotic tomfoolery. You are starting to remind me of DannyH's last ditch attempts to discredit me in WHAT_IS_ART. Don't be foolish. Ooops, again I forget myself. What else COULD you be? (Well besides a living-proof-of-why-siblings-shouldn't-marry threat to the gene pool, that is.) There IS proof of a correlation between your parents and the universe. You wouldn't be here without them. All of them. Proof enough? Or do you need me to draw a diagram? Sh*t...hold on, I think my son has some crayons left (for your easy viewing, of course.) Once again, you try to discredit using obvious ploys and sleight of word, but you prove nothing and THIS time you make the mistake of attempting it with a statement that points out a similarity that even a grade schooler could follow. Apparently that was more than you could do. I'm still bored and you STILL haven't come close. Would you like to continue? If you DO, why don't you NOT keep repeating how this game has no value and how you will not be coming back...ok? That's a good bird..you've created quite enough intent in your head for one day. Do respond if you'd like to lose the rest of your tail feathers in a similar spanking. But this time, you might want to think about bringing something bigger than a letter opener to a nukefest of minds, K? Ok, kid brother, I'll take my hand off of your skull just long enough for you to give it your best shot now. It had better be MUCH better too. I'm just getting warmed up. (Oh and chess spectator, you will have finally evolved into something capable of locomotion by the time my King falls.) 021018 ... ????????????? Your king is lodged firmly in your ass, Daffyman. 021018 ... stork daddy Now for the latest installment of words and the fools who use them. The fact is, i never argued that the person you was bitter at all. I try not to picture what you look like behind your computer screen. Please don’t tell me. I argued against the bitterness of your words. The bitterness inherent in them, since their combined meanings were well within the defiintion of bitter. Intent has nothing to do with it. You’re right in that i cannot ascertain your intent. However, the words themselves have the qualities we ascribe to bitterness in that they attack others in a way which is acrid, caustic, and generallly uninformed. These are not objective statements, or even words playing off themselves but statements which have no merit on their own but require evidence from outside of the blathe to support them. Since that evidence is not forthcoming, what the words claim is empty. They exist not in the realm of immortality you mistakingly ascribe to words but in a general sense. That is, they are insults devoid of support, and are therefore useless in describing the individual they seek to describe. It’s true you can make a comment about Gray Davis and a bucket of shit, but it gets personal once you use the name Gray Davis. Insults even at the best, can only be impersonally personal. This is also an insult at the worst, because nothing meaningful has been said about the individual. You’re depending on the associations ascribed to shit to be ascribed to Gray Davis, or whomever, without using words to defend any analagous connection between the two. Reguardless of what the individual making the joke means by it, the words alone are personal, in that they require knowledge of a personality to be true and cannot be defended on their own using the accepted definitions of words. This makes them false in a classically logical sense. Of course there are degrees of truth to them, which is what justifies the phrase fuzzy logic. That is, you mistakingly think you prove a statement wrong and then add a cute image of clown cars and think the two are somehow connected. That’s fuzzy logic. Also it’s personal, not on your end or my end, but on what the words require to be meaningful. And what the words require is more than what you’ve provided. The greatest arguments for your lack of intelligence come not from my arguments but from your own. A bigot against certain types of expression? Yes i suppose i am. Not all forms of expression are valid in a useful sense. I don’t believe a lack of discrimination is a good feature to have in this world. This way i can tell the difference between a candy bar and a piece of shit. The fact is, your writing and all writing cannot exist without interpretation, so the status you ascribe to your words as having a certain meaning is ridiculous. I’m saying that your words by themselves cannot be meaningful. I’m saying they need appeal to a larger context. Because they always have to go searching for another premise to support them, and that premise eventually lies outside of the realm of language. There’s always an undecided preposition somewhere, an if that is not satisfied within the system. This is why what is real is more interesting than what is true. All i ever said is that your words are angry, and unjustifiably so. I cannot begin to fathom your own justifications for this nor do i care to. It has nothing to do with the argument. And your words are angry in the sense most commonly understood to be angry. This is the sense you must be conveying your words in, or else how can they be understood? Or are you saying that words have a personal meaning and cannot exist without personal interpretation. And if this is so, how can your words have an idealized meaning which is immortal? I understand your general push. Your general push is that a proverb is one person’s wit and all people’s wisdom, but there are certain words which depend on the interpretation of the reader. This is how poetry works. It isn’t that the writer was feeling the emotion which is captured at time the piece was written, but what does matter is that the ephemeral meaning is capitulated in a way that maintains at least a peripheral connection with the word used to capture it. That is, your words must describe a real phenomenon, whether it is your real phenomenon or not. Sometimes a lie is something which exists outside of the words. That is, a lie can be true. However, your lies are not true, reguardless of whether or not they are lies two times or one time over. In poetry again, the approximate meaning of words are used to narrow down the infinite amount of interpretations. The intersections of understanding are used to guide the personal definitions of words into a mean of sorts, a most likely possible meaning with various standard deviations. However, there are a great variety of words which cannot exist without personal interpretation. Shit is one. You are using the negative associations a person most likely has with that word in conjuction with a person to bring those associations into the web of meaning that person has. How this can be anything but personal is beyond me. Yes i’m sure you’ll say a lot is beyond me. Strange how words can be angry or bitter? That’s because words still represent human interactions, they cannot leave behind their reason for being formed. Sure one could argue that they are passively parasitic in that the words which are easier at getting repeated become more and more prevalent. But still that sidesteps the fact that what would get words repeated a lot are their use in our own progress and survival. Words if they are to “parasitically” (in qoutes because i don’t want you to mistake a description of intention with a description of using our own intention as a metaphor) ride us must insure that we, their carriers survive in some form to pass them along. See, my problem is, there is nothing empirically evident in your insults. Nothing at all. The words themselves have meaning, but not when applied to what they are being applied to. For instance, neuron deficient information deficient brain. That is, the words do not mean what they purport to mean. That is, they do not mean what their standard definition in that sense would have them mean. They lack the standard bearer of truth we ascribe to words tentatively so that we can use them to describe other words in a meaningful way. A word can outlive a human being. Nothing makes me sadder than knowing your words will outlive you. Thank god i’m the only one reading this. But to say a word even approximates immortality is more arrogant and human centric than anything i’ve said. A word needs something to interpret it. It needs an intelligence to appreciate it (more on that later). There is no ideal which the exact word slouches off of, no platonic form. Words have a shared meaning, and we all engage in changing them. There is no such thing as an impersonal word, because it is always being defined by a person who is at some level comparing them to some experience, whether it was vicariously (even through words perhaps once the base associations between sensations and perceptions and words are made) or directly through a sensation whether direct or ethereal. Words require a larger context. Even the words fed to a computer depend on the computers other values for a definition. It must have a context from which to value the word. This is apparent when you use analogies like the donald trump one. Imagine us both dead (as i’m a gentleman i’ll let you go first) and living in a world where there is no more donald trump, or no knowledge of him or his history of enough import to inform people’s information (or am i being idealistic again?). What would that phrase mean to a person in that world? A word is only as immortal as the people who pass it on. It cannot exist on its own, not in a meaningful way. Your insults require empirical evidence to stand as logical, as opposed to just being grammatically correct. You argue for the empirical nature of words, but make insults which show words inherant dependance on other forms of information. So it matters not what your intent was, i can seperate you and your intent from the words, but they still depend on information beyond what they themselves supply. This also has to do with your arguments towards substance over appearance. The fact is, that with humans and logically all perceiving creatures, substance is appearance. We may be able to describe the clock that is this universe, but that doesn’t mean we’ve seen inside it. Within our limits, we may be able to make distinctions between appearance and substance, but if we imagine there is substance possible beyond our limits, we have no access to it. We can only see in three dimensions, we have no proof that when i use the word blue it means the same thing as the word blue does to you. It is an agreement, a pragmatic agreement between substance and appearance. By agreeing on the appearance we agree on the substance. Since we both point to the same thing and say blue, we assume that its nature is similar to both of us, but we have no proof of this. Words are meant, however, to represent this agreement. When they are used in a way that violates their shared meaning, it disvalidates the argument using the words. It removes the substance from the appearance. My whole point was that facts couldn’t be established with words alone in the way you used them. But then to use them in a way where their suggested meaning points to fact disvalidates the words and the very “free expression” you seem to champion. Words depend on some connection to the actual world for understanding to take place. If you’re so up on free expression rather than meaningful expression where the words represent if nothing else tentative facts (which is after all as good as we can get) why don’t you blather on about blue theodore pasta or shampoo bedazzled jogging or any of the other quasi-random appropriation of language so popular these days. You can either admit to the meaninglessness of the insults or be consistent. You can’t have both. One precludes the other, and this is what i mean by your arguments contradict themselves. Sure one point can be brought up and another valid to the contrary in the same rant, but this assumes that arguments and meaning are only transferred in short declarative statements, and nothing more substantial or usefully pruning in meaning. Your attention span can’t be that short if you’ve made it through all of this writing. Oh i forgot, you skipped thinking about it as a labor saving device. This new direction seems to be an argument you had with someone else which you’re misapplying to this situation. On another note, I agree we are in some sense small compared to the universe. But to realize this, we must first perceive the universe. Since the only way we can “see” the universe is with our “eyes” in some sense our sight is the universe. There is no other access we have. In that sense we are all of the universe. Solipism perhaps, but to try and deny the role of intelligence in even appreciating the “pretty things.” We need intelligence just to describe those things as pretty. It’s i think therefore i am sort of trap. We can’t even appreciate not being intelligent without intelligence to do so. How can you say there are other values than human values? And that they aren’t ever present in words? If we’ve come up with a word, it was because it was useful for us to be able to describe something. It has our purposes all over it. Vetrenarians save animals because guess what? Humans value animals. We have no idea what the animals value themselves, other than what we assume to be the drive to survive. But even that is our intelligence finding a connection between behaviors we see as roughly similar in nature. We do not save animals because of what the animals value. But certainly there are many pretty things which we see doing things which are meaningful to us, almost reverse metaphors of our own internal states (this makes sense when you consider that our own internal states were at some level defined by the parameters of the outside world and its demands, which of course are demands felt by all of creation.) The fact remains the universe cannot by definition match all of our values. It must be different enough for us to describe it as other. Just for us to postulate it as a seperate thing which we are smaller than we admit that it is not in direct harmony with us, but some sort of tape delay between the microcosm within and the microcosms without. You are not capable of seeing beyond your time as a human, you cannot at all imagine what it will be like, all you can do is abstract the situation you’ve seen in others who you imagine as being similar to yourself. Everything you see is through the forum we have been given somehow to see it. We can advance within that system, all of our meanings and meanderings, but we cannot escape its limitations, which is something your insults and leapt to conclusions imagine they have done, and state they have done, reguardless of your intent. Observation itself is a human endeavor. We choose what to observe. We are always making choices, and it’d be foolish to say they weren’t value oriented. Our great scientific discoveries were still motivated by the needs of people. Perhaps it is beautiful that a lust for understanding has served our ends so well that it is passed on, and can exist on its own. An equation, a poem, a bit of something seperated from the specific to the general from which can be understood so well by all that it can be reapplied to any individual. Your words do not have that crossover appeal i’m afraid. They claim to. I’m trying to help you understand why they do not. They always leave off with an undecided preposition. When i said we valued the concise and the progressive and the eloquent. I was referring to what i saw as concise and progressive and eloquent. We of course value the useful, that which has served us and continues to. However, i find the very fact that we can even communicate, that we can even observe the universe to be those very things. Sure we’re less concise than cellular automatons, but we’re much more eloquent. Oh, but see how that word needs interpretation? Where is it’s immortality? In the tired minds of those who read it. It is a vampire, and it needs the blood and the pulse of a lifeform like it enough to support it, but different enough to justify its seperate existence. Haha...i find it interesting that you say man is not the measure of time and space, when the theory of relativity pretty much basically states that time is a dimension with qualities relative to what’s being observed of it. The observer changes it. From one point or one speed it is one thing, and from another it is another. Quantum mechanics show that light acts like a photon or a wave depending on who and what is asking the question. Man is the measure of all things. A clock might move fast, but time can move slow. Without our perception of time we might not have memory. Memories are just states of mind reoccuring imprecisely, but without there being a perception within us that recognizes its similarity to another state, or allows for narrative, we might be unmoored in a world of novel experiences. The fact is, we cannot escape our perceptions of things. How we view others will almost invariably differ at the very best still pretty conclusively of how others view them or how they view themselves. We are once again, not the universe, but we are what listens to it, what sees it, what draws certain qualities from it and not others. If we do not measure it, is it really there to us in a meaningful way. Sure it could affect us in some way, but then that’s a measurment of some sort, and it’s a measurement we make in terms of the values we have. If it makes us happy, that’s a measurment we’ve made of it. If we observe it passively, that’s a measurement. But it’s not passive in the way we’ve defined the word. This goes to show that with words, just because we can imagine something as being possible, doesn’t mean it is real or even plausible. This is an important distinction. A lot of beauty arises this way. How a microcosm of the universe could come to recognize possibilities which do not exist in the physical universe at all because physical states had a conceptual level which when appreciated consciously allows departures in meaning from the meaning manifested for measurement in the physical world. The world of concepts exists on its own, with its own limitations we are not aware of. We can after all imagine a world where order increases instead of decreases, but we cannot live in one. This is because the concept of order is something which our mind breaks down into components not existent in the natural world. We’ve divided the firmament of the skies and the sea. We are not the world like we felt we were when we were infants (who knows, perhaps we took a step backwards). You say i’m not one qualified to state whether or not you understood my words. Well now i agree that what’s amazing about words is that they have valid interpretations based on other people’s understanding of them, valid in the sense that they have use to an individual seperate from their intent. I think it’s amazing that there can be secrets at all. In the world in our own words and in others. But the writer of words is still the most qualified to state what was meant, since the meaning the words have when written down is the most precise replication of the meaning they had in the writers mind before being written down. So yes i can say you misunderstood. Sure a fifth grader can understand my words. By your logic a fifth grader could “understand” Ulysses by James Joyce. However, it isn’t understood in a way that’s useful for a conversation, which is after all a collaboration, between words and their suppliers. But once again, try in all your futility to remove the personal from the words, in what is an attempt at personal communication, not the safe standardization which is required of attempts at communication with the masses. Of course highly personalized symbols can be used in communication, but the implicit information they carry isn’t effectively delivered. Which is obvious in the way you replied to my thoughts. You misunderstood. Call it a copout, be my guess, but if you aren’t arguing against my thoughts or my words, you can’t really claim any sort of progress in this oneupmanship. After all i can interpret your words as having been a defense of feeding orphans to the homeless, but i wouldn’t be arguing against anything meaningful. Words represent facts in that they can only be argued with if they actually mean what they purport to mean. Truth of some sort is necessary if words are to interact with other words. There must be a meeting place, an intersection of understanding. But go on believing what you will orphankiller. I also appreciate how you dismiss my “human arrogance, of all human things as the defining center of values” but then depend on that very viewpoint for the negative associations of your comparisons to cromagnons and lobsters to hold. See, your argument is inconsistent. If i may use chess again. You moved into an easy check to force me to move, but in doing so you weakened the strong queenside offense you had going by moving a key piece and demonstrating on your own to your opponent a weakness to exploit. Besides, at least if i was a lobster i’d be delicious. Oh that’s right, humans are the measure of all things. I’m willing to be the most you know about crustacean life is that it tastes good with sourdough bread and drawn butter. And being bored has nothing to do with the universe. How can you possibly ask me personally what i think is bad and not agree that subjective values are the defining nature of what it means to be an alive perceiving organism. The universe doesn’t care if we’re bored or not. Otherwise when i’m sitting here sifting through your long winded b.s. the universe would knock on my door and say...hey...you look bored wanna play? Or am i not listening hard enough? The very fact that people can be bored shows that the initiative lies in the complex interactions of humans and not the universe. The universe allows for the bored and the non bored. But entertainment itself is only a higher level dynamic. It is not only the sensation of hunger or desire, or the meeting of either of those needs, it depends on an awareness capable of “feeling” those events and then on top of that seperating the sensation from what it normally signifies in the real world. We could not even define entertainment without depending on human situations to exemplify it. On top of that, even as a social argument it friggin sucks. Entertainment devoid of the signified is the number one cause of apathy. Seeing the sensational being robbed of its everyday context makes us lose sight of the value of the original context and we become dependant on the work of others for that sensation. If we can achieve vicarious happiness through television, why go out and achieve the things which normally achieve this state? People will nine out of ten times take the easy over the satisfying. Entertainment is easy. I could entertain myself with a live wire, a puddle and an old woman for hours. The fact is, the universe does have crude values based on what humans define as valuable. It’s ridiculous even ascribing values to the universe. Why not a name and a wardrobe? These viewing devices are just ways we make the universe more human and more understandable to us. When i said a dog can kill a wolf, my point was exactly the one you made. This is the general accepted value of dogs and wolves. But the universe does not follow our patterns just because we’ve surmised them or they are beautiful to us. Applied art and applied science is much more complicated than that. The universe has so many interactions (and the laws we describe working in them) going on at once that our perceived patterns are often trumped. The fact remains, that the universe does not differentiate between us and other objects in the same way we do. The only way our internal states even become known to the universe is how we make them known through interaction with it. However, we differentiate between ourself and other objects in a variety of ways that are obviously not shared by the universe. We somehow think our lives are worth more. and we cannot help that, because that is what allowed us to exist for so long. Our intelligence values our motivations because it is driven by them. Our intelligence describes the universe in ways that suit us, it tries as best as it can to imagine itself in a meaningful relationship with the universe, when the universe is just in it for the sex. Its values are crude in that they do not match the values we have refined over it to help our survival. This is because crude is a word defined by human processes. Something which is refined is only refined in a way that is meaningful to how a human refines things. The universes values are crude. If we are to refine them, we must do so on our own. That is, we can make sense of them, and they are open to having sense made of them, but we cannot change them to match our values. In this sense, they are incapable of being refined and are crude. Does that make sense to you? They must be lived within, not without, though we are capable of imagining them differently due to the abilities we accidentally stole from evolution. A block of stone has crude values compared to a sculpture. This is of course only from a human perspective. And only a certain human perspective, but since crude is a human word, it is an arguable point, one which you have not made less so. Certainly a stone may be more complex than a sculpture in the amount of information present. But refining may be a process of making something more simple, more precise or eloquent. That is, cutting down the amount of information present but increasing the amount of implicit information. A word goes from crude to refined when it is used in a way that defines it while defining much else. Your words my friend are crude. They float out on their own and correspond to any given number of situations, none of which seem to apply to this argument here. You talk about foot-eating and cro-magnons and tushy spanking as if they are postulates in some system. Your reign of terror is over. It’s been over for a while, i’m just the first to see it. I don’t even know how to respond to the mickey mouse and pluto thing. But if i were to find intent and the personal behind personal words, i’d say that you have not only an bestiality but a cartoon fetish and that if you won’t accept help, there are at least some websites which will more appropriately apply to you than this one. And yes, i believe words have purpose, let’s add that to the list of things i’ve defended while you’ve shot at with an empty gun like some hillbilly. Just a whole lot of noise. Words have a purpose based on their definition. However, the fact that they must appeal to a larger context, a world of sensations and facts and ethereal connections between them, shows that your words did not fufill the purpose of their definitions. That is, your insults and jibberish depend on things from the outside world that they do not supply and therefore do not fufill their purpose. Of course, i’m talking about the purpose of the words themselves, since i don’t want you coining weird terms again. And yes, i’d say there are plenty out there more deserving of security and happiness than me, but that’s a decidedly human value, and remember, the universe’s are crude when compared to them and a comparison like that is the only way we could define a word in our language like crude. And yes, any argument in favor of can be perceived as better than another, but that doesn’t mean it can’t be perceived wrongly. If what’s being perceived is in disagreement with the meaning as defined as the common useage, then what’s being perceived is either wrong or invalidates the language used to describe it. That is, if i say two plus two equals four and you say i perceive that to be a less valid statement than two plus two equals five. Well either you’re wrong or the language is empty. You can’t have both which is what you seem to want. I mean sure you can, but then you’re not communicating with others. Which seems to be something most people have given up on with you. But excuse me for having a tender heart. So yes an argument for something can be perceived as more valid. But if it leaves the agree upon rules of determining validity, then it empties the forum for achieving validity itself of any validity. It’s like saying the sky is falling. Either the sky is falling or you don’t mean the words in the sense agreed upon. This can be interesting. Well except in your case. I really don’t like using all these insults, but i thought i’d show you that either way you want to take this you’re not getting anywhere i haven’t already been. And no, i don’t decide the values of language. We all decide it together, it defines itself through us in some sense, in that our needs inform it, our needs bring us together, and our perceptions of language change as our needs change. Language, however isn’t something which is completely free. Don’t delude yourself. It has rules in the mind. The words can change, but the syntax is relatively common throughout cultures. There are verbs and nouns and adjectives. All very useful things. So if one perceives one argument better than another, they should at least have a reason justfied by the system that led them to this conclusion? do you see? if you’re going to take for granted the logic which led you to a perception, you must take for granted the logic of the system that envelops it. The majority of your readers can’t follow your logic, because there isn’t any logic to follow. You jump to conclusions, aggrandize unrepresentative metaphors, and all and all break every rule of formal and informal logic. Your language is defunct. It consists of hoping the associations surely have with your words will rub off on the ones they cannot possibly have. That is by calling me a baboon you hope they’ll see how wrong i am in saying that you too have human centric values. For instance when you use a word like socio-political agenda? how the hell does that tie into the rest of your argument? you don’t support it at all and leave it out there like a butterbean left hook. You make comparisons to other blatherskites and call that logical? That completely depends on personal interpretation. Your arguments lack validity because they do not follow the rules which establish a word or a propositions validity. Your logic lacks validity not because someone else doesn’t follow it, but because it could only be followed by another at about as well as random chance predicts, since it does not exist at the standardized level where arguments must if they are to be translatable back into the personal. No no, there is no proof between the universe in the context you described it and my parents. Yes we are both subsets of it, but i never argued against that. Certainly that isn’t a strong enough correlation parents actions and the whole of the universes interactions for my parents to be misconstrued as the universe. In psychology they call that an insignificant correlation. In psychology they call you an idiot. See, you appropriate the context of a word as it suits you for your current argument, but for a word to have strength in an argument which relates two propositions to one another, the meaning of the word, (sadly enough as i’m sure you worked relly relly relly hard on that crayon drawing big guy) must be consistent throughout. When one says: “all men are horny. Plato was a man. Therefore Plato was horny” the word men and the word horny can’t suddenly mean different things. In the first one it can’t mean gender and the second one sex. Otherwise the final statement means nothing! YES NOTHING. it says something, it takes up space, but it is a conceptual void. A curiosity which describes the limitations of the system. But you’ve demonstrated enough limitations to me for one lifetime my friend. And you cannot deny that you used universe in two entirely different contexts in those arguments. In one it was the general sum of all things, and in another it was a specific pinpoint of existence. If my parents were the universe in the way you meant in the first case, well arguing with me about the universe’s values would be quite silly. I already know my parents values, but please ask me about them. (opportunity for a joke, don’t disappoint me.) Now you can claim that i misunderstood what you meant by universe, but then you would be copping out no doubt? or are you the only one who gets to completely understand things, well you and fifth graders? You see how you’d once again be arguing against your own point? You’d be saying in effect that words can be misunderstood, but also that the personal interpretation is what is most important. Obviously there is a moderate compromise. You’ve haven’t argued it either. A strong closer would be nice, but you seem tired. I’m only letting you go on because i want to win more material. I look forward to more unfounded insults and assumptions. 021019 ... nocturnal just thought I'd let you know you can relax, daf. I may be a blood-thirsty aries bitch, but I also have a bad case of a.d.d. all the ritalin in the world couldn't keep me interested in this. sorry. I had the best of intentions to keep you on your toes, though. 021019 ... ????????????? For the reason that this page takes an eternity to load, and because this blathe has drifted considerably from its original topic, please continue your arguments here: stork_daddy_vs_dafremen 021019 ... Doar holy shite! 050624 ... Death of a Rose and i apologize to everyone for bringing this blather back to life (give me 200mg STAT.....IT'S ALIVE....IT'S ALIVE......MWUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHahahah.....cough....hack...sorry bout that), I just couldn't help putting my finger into the pudding. . 050624 ... oldephebe "...putting my finger into the pudding." SWEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEET!!!!! 050625 ... Doar this is still one of my very most flavourite blathes.... fingers aside. . 100106 what's it to you? who go blather from