Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 51 to 59 of 59

Thread: Undoing the Dis-Education of Millennials

  1. #51
    Quote Originally Posted by simpleman View Post
    Ron Viejo de Caldas is made out of sugar cane juice.
    Jeebs, sugar is as complicated as petroleum chemistry ... knowledge everywhere ...

    I don't know what "molasses" is...
    Spanish Wikipedia calls it "melaza", and it's obviously not panela, because melaza is sugar can juice with all the sugar taken out, leaving only the colouring.


    Yes, if you can manage to tax things really people need, like salt, water, petrol, houses ... you'll never run out of money ...

    Hope all goes well with your terrible customer.


    M

  2. #52
    Fap, fap, fap, fap ...fap
    "Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one" - Charles Mackay

    And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; It tolls for thee. - Donne

    "What we are seeing in this headless misandry is a grand display of the Tyranny of the Underdog: 'I am a wretchedly longstanding victim; therefore I own no burden of adult accountability, nor need to honor any restraint against my words and actions. In fact, all efforts to restrain me are only further proof of my oppressed condition.'
    "It is the most perfect trump-card against accountable living ever devised." - Gladden Schrock

    "What remains for most men in modern life is a world of expectation without reward, burden without honor and service without self" - Paul Elam

  3. #53
    Administrator Grumpy Old Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Pacific North West
    Posts
    5,069
    Rep Power
    25
    [QUOTE=Manalysis;222776]


    No.
    SM isn't disrupting anything. If you look at SM's history, he came to post takedowns of MSM articles.
    He's from a different place than the majority of posters here, so there's going to be some Culture Wars.
    But he only ever gets into a dogfight if he's attacked by a dog.
    His tactics are to foil and frustrate, and the less aware the oppo, the easier to tease them into escalation.
    AFAICS, you are one of half a handful who don't get that.
    Whenever you try to nail him because of some position, he will sslip away by saying that "this is not my position".
    You never manage to secura a grip.
    He's teasing you.
    His coffeee mug says "Bathing in Matrix tears".


    Interesting you point this out. SM comes from a country I presume he'd rather not be, to a country he rather not be, to critique on a forum he does not like. You know, all those posters and all, It gets boring, or rather he is a boor. Then there are his enablers who facilitate the game. You know, to never be real, to never engage on a personal level, to manipulate...to slip away. To tease and throw backhanded insults under the guise of intellectual superiority. Tell me why with your admittance here he gives any value.

    No one is fooled, we see this shit loud and clear.
    ethikē aretē--phronesis--eudaimonia
    virtue of character--practical/ethical wisdom--human flourishing

    It is not a battle to win but an attitude to share.
    AVFM Mission Statement

  4. #54
    Quote Originally Posted by Grumpy Old Man View Post
    Interesting you point this out.
    Maybe so. On seeing this post, I noticed how I've ended up Defender of Deplorables, yet again.
    Idk if that makes me a champion of justice, or doubly deplorable.
    From my POV, I argue for diversity of opinion in the forum, even at the cost of harbouring some who are 'unpopular'.

    Apologies in advance to SM; I'm going to have to say nice things ...

    SM comes from a country I presume he'd rather not be, to a country he rather not be
    I haven't made it a point to delve into his background.

    to critique on a forum he does not like.
    Perhaps he doesn't like it. It's still one of the few forums that also people like him can turn to to vent frustration at feminism.
    Which is what he came here to do, AFAICS; again going by his posting history.

    That is his primary persona. His secondary persona turns up when someone attacks him.

    So, he comes from a different background than many others, has had his basic values and opinions and style shaped by different influences;
    perhaps so much so that he seems alien to some. OK, he doesn't like feminists, but for all the wrong reasons. or he dislikes them the wrong way. Whatever.
    For some reason, a few other posters here seem to think denigration is the appropriate way to engage with people who hold opinions they do not share.
    It's so relentless from some, it has taken on the character of a crusade.
    These people do not understand what he is doing - which is why I picked it apart for them - and they are miffed that this causes all their attacks to fail.
    And this leads to all the sputtering anger. But that wouldn't be here if no one had attacked SM in the first place.

    You know, all those posters and all, It gets boring, or rather he is a boor.
    I don't know, I find that he picks up some interesting stuff, and brings some original arguments, from time to time.
    I think his argument against why gynocentrism should be biologically necessary is a MRA gold.

    Then there are his enablers who facilitate the game.
    Do you mean the people who by attacking him derail entire threads into fruitless polemics?
    Or do you mean e.g. me, who, it seems, is the only one who has been able to converse with him, although allowing for remaining guarded, in an unfailingly polite and respectfull way? If that is 'enabling', while throwing frothy-mouthed keyboard invective is 'not playing games', then, I'm sorry, I'm all for enabling.

    You know, to never be real, to never engage on a personal level, to manipulate...to slip away.
    Again, if this is directed at me, pls let me know, then I'll engage on a personal level.

    To tease and throw backhanded insults under the guise of intellectual superiority.
    First of all, who here is not acting from a (more or less self-declared) position of intellectual superiority?
    A vast majority of people who post here are all convinced they know what the truth is; some so much, they get abusive when others disagree.

    However, SM doesn't do that. Under the guise of intellectual, and other, inferiority, he lets people run headfirst into walls they have built themselves.
    I agree that it is a little bit uncharitable, and you will see that I have mentioned this to him on one occasion.
    And what did he do? He stopped posting in that thread, AFAIK.
    And I must say that I much prefer that approach, as it is far more elegant than throwing hamfisted insults out of a totally undisguised intellectual inferiority.

    Tell me why with your admittance here he gives any value.
    Leave the man alone, and let him post his reflections on modern day feminism.
    That is more value than 98 % of all registered forum members contribute.
    Whatever threads he starts are usually on topic. If forum traffic drops as it has compared to one year ago, we should be glad to have him.

    If there is too much polemics, give him a slap on the wrist - but give that to _all_ who engage in polemics.
    These days, there are some others whose contributions and tone would be well served with a little, as it were, moderation.

    No one is fooled, we see this shit loud and clear.
    OK, you had already made up your mind, then.
    So ... tell me what you really think.

    M

  5. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by Grumpy Old Man View Post
    Interesting you point this out. SM comes from a country I presume he'd rather not be, to a country he rather not be, to critique on a forum he does not like. You know, all those posters and all, It gets boring, or rather he is a boor. Then there are his enablers who facilitate the game. You know, to never be real, to never engage on a personal level, to manipulate...to slip away. To tease and throw backhanded insults under the guise of intellectual superiority. Tell me why with your admittance here he gives any value.

    No one is fooled, we see this shit loud and clear.
    In that case, my apologies for the inconvenience I caused.

    It was never my intention to be this boring.

  6. #56
    Administrator Grumpy Old Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Pacific North West
    Posts
    5,069
    Rep Power
    25
    Maybe so. On seeing this post, I noticed how I've ended up Defender of Deplorables, yet again.
    Idk if that makes me a champion of justice, or doubly deplorable.
    Despite the attention you are about to give me, I do appreciate your standing up for SM.

    From my POV, I argue for diversity of opinion in the forum, even at the cost of harbouring some who are 'unpopular'.
    I'm on board with diversity of opinion, the allusion here is that those who may not agree with SM are lock step in agreement with each other, They are not. I view it more as someone who often has an ax to grind more than not.


    *********


    I always enjoy a wall of texts, but I'll keep to my style and be short and succinct:


    I haven't made it a point to delve into his background.
    Neither do I. SM has told me everything I know about his personal life, his story is sitting right here on these pages for all to see and no special delving is necessary. Only attention to detail.


    Perhaps he doesn't like it. It's still one of the few forums that also people like him can turn to vent frustration at feminism.
    Which is what he came here to do, AFAICS; again going by his posting history.
    Good to see we are doing our job.

    That is his primary persona. His secondary persona turns up when someone attacks him.

    So, he comes from a different background than many others, has had his basic values and opinions and style shaped by different influences;
    perhaps so much so that he seems alien to some. OK, he doesn't like feminists, but for all the wrong reasons. or he dislikes them the wrong way. Whatever.
    OK? But to many here, he pushes his political ideological agenda equally with his anti-feminism. I suspect his anti-feminism isn't what is causing him problems most of the time.

    For some reason, a few other posters here seem to think denigration is the appropriate way to engage with people who hold opinions they do not share.
    Why do you think that is, is this your experience or is it specific to SM?


    It's so relentless from some, it has taken on the character of a crusade.
    Certainly has failed at making friends and influencing enemies.


    These people do not understand what he is doing - which is why I picked it apart for them - and they are miffed that this causes all their attacks to fail.
    I'm inclined to agree. This is often the case when one is disingenuous or strategically/purposefully illusive in discussion and people are frustrated with it. How do you characterize my position with SM?


    I don't know, I find that he picks up some interesting stuff, and brings some original arguments, from time to time.
    I think his argument against why gynocentrism should be biologically necessary is a MRA gold.
    I don't disagree.


    Do you mean the people who by attacking him derail entire threads into fruitless polemics?
    Or do you mean e.g. me, who, it seems, is the only one who has been able to converse with him, although allowing for remaining guarded, in an unfailingly polite and respectfull way? If that is 'enabling', while throwing frothy-mouthed keyboard invective is 'not playing games', then, I'm sorry, I'm all for enabling.
    What I mean is there is clearly a cross in communication which only SM can work out with others on this forum. I see him extending no peace feathers. What I have observed is an engagement in esoteric discussions around the conversations/disputes to which you participate in. Leading to no resolutions with the conflict and sidestepping any disagreements.


    Again, if this is directed at me, pls let me know, then I'll engage on a personal level.
    read my last comment.


    First of all, who here is not acting from a (more or less self-declared) position of intellectual superiority?
    A vast majority of people who post here are all convinced they know what the truth is; some so much, they get abusive when others disagree.
    We all do. I know I have tried to engage reasonably and what I get back is a lot of scrambling of my message, less than charitable.

    However, SM doesn't do that. Under the guise of intellectual, and other, inferiority, he lets people run headfirst into walls they have built themselves.
    I agree that it is a little bit uncharitable, and you will see that I have mentioned this to him on one occasion.
    And what did he do? He stopped posting in that thread, AFAIK.
    Yup!

    And I must say that I much prefer that approach, as it is far more elegant than throwing hamfisted insults out of a totally undisguised intellectual inferiority.
    "Game playing." There is more than these two choices!


    Leave the man alone, and let him post his reflections on modern day feminism
    .

    This is a two-way proposition.

    That is more value than 98 % of all registered forum members contribute.
    Whatever threads he starts are usually on topic. If forum traffic drops as it has compared to one year ago, we should be glad to have him.
    I understand how you feel about "98%" of the forum members. Forum traffic tends to ebb and flows with what is going on on the main page.

    If there is too much polemics, give him a slap on the wrist - but give that to _all_ who engage in polemics.
    These days, there are some others whose contributions and tone would be well served with a little, as it were, moderation.
    Been working that.


    OK, you had already made up your mind, then.
    So ... tell me what you really think.
    I just did.
    ethikē aretē--phronesis--eudaimonia
    virtue of character--practical/ethical wisdom--human flourishing

    It is not a battle to win but an attitude to share.
    AVFM Mission Statement

  7. #57
    Administrator Grumpy Old Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Pacific North West
    Posts
    5,069
    Rep Power
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by simpleman View Post
    In that case, my apologies for the inconvenience I caused.

    It was never my intention to be this boring.
    Hi, my name is GOM and I'm interested in men's issues.
    ethikē aretē--phronesis--eudaimonia
    virtue of character--practical/ethical wisdom--human flourishing

    It is not a battle to win but an attitude to share.
    AVFM Mission Statement

  8. #58
    Quote Originally Posted by Grumpy Old Man View Post
    Despite the attention you are about to give me
    ... I disagree with you sometimes, but has that ever come across as, Idk, that I'm out to 'get you'? I hope not.

    I do appreciate your standing up for SM.
    I'm glad to hear you say it.

    I'm on board with diversity of opinion, the allusion here is that those who may not agree with SM are lock step in agreement with each other, They are not. I view it more as someone who often has an ax to grind more than not.
    I agree, I don't think there is a 'team'. It's more that some people react to SM in a similar way.

    Neither do I. SM has told me everything I know about his personal life, his story is sitting right here on these pages for all to see and no special delving is necessary. Only attention to detail.
    Yes, so to rephrase: I haven't given any attention to detail on this, I hadn't really seen the relevance.

    ...But to many here, he pushes his political ideological agenda equally with his anti-feminism.
    Mea culpa, another area with little attention to detail from me.
    IIRC he was embroiled in argument over Charlotteville; this being internal US politics, I did not engage, so I may have missed someting there.
    He's not clearly left or right on day to day politics, except he's certainly no leftist and he doesn't like big Government.
    Apart from that, my impression is that SM is mainly MGTOW.

    Why do you think that is, is this your experience or is it specific to SM?
    I have no idea why some people think they're entitled to do a little channeling of Roland Freisler (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roland_Freisler).
    As you will know, there were some posters, like e.g. Maxx and Plummer, who denied themselves little in dealing with opposition.
    There's less "fuck you" and "brainwashed" in the forum now, but yes, particularly SM seems to inspire some to carry on the legacy.

    How do you characterize my position with SM?
    I can't see that you have a position, as such. I haven't tracked any conversations you've had with him, and can't rightly say I remember you two having any extended ones, really. Perhaps I missed someting more?

    What I mean is there is clearly a cross in communication which only SM can work out with others on this forum. I see him extending no peace feathers. What I have observed is an engagement in esoteric discussions around the conversations/disputes to which you participate in. Leading to no resolutions with the conflict and sidestepping any disagreements.
    I have to agree on this. Some of SM's antics are unnecessary.
    OTOH we're not a sculling team, it's not like the forum only works if we all row to the same beat. The price of diversity, so to speak.

    We all do. I know I have tried to engage reasonably and what I get back is a lot of scrambling of my message, less than charitable.
    I take your word for it.

    "Game playing." There is more than these two choices!
    Agreed.

    This is a two-way proposition.
    Agreed.

    I understand how you feel about "98%" of the forum members. Forum traffic tends to ebb and flows with what is going on on the main page.
    OK.

    Been working that.
    OK.

    I just did.
    OK.

    M

  9. #59
    Administrator Grumpy Old Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Pacific North West
    Posts
    5,069
    Rep Power
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by Manalysis View Post
    ... I disagree with you sometimes, but has that ever come across as, Idk, that I'm out to 'get you'? I hope not.


    I'm glad to hear you say it.


    I agree, I don't think there is a 'team'. It's more that some people react to SM in a similar way.


    Yes, so to rephrase: I haven't given any attention to detail on this, I hadn't really seen the relevance.


    Mea culpa, another area with little attention to detail from me.
    IIRC he was embroiled in argument over Charlotteville; this being internal US politics, I did not engage, so I may have missed someting there.
    He's not clearly left or right on day to day politics, except he's certainly no leftist and he doesn't like big Government.
    Apart from that, my impression is that SM is mainly MGTOW.


    I have no idea why some people think they're entitled to do a little channeling of Roland Freisler (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roland_Freisler).
    As you will know, there were some posters, like e.g. Maxx and Plummer, who denied themselves little in dealing with opposition.
    There's less "fuck you" and "brainwashed" in the forum now, but yes, particularly SM seems to inspire some to carry on the legacy.


    I can't see that you have a position, as such. I haven't tracked any conversations you've had with him, and can't rightly say I remember you two having any extended ones, really. Perhaps I missed someting more?


    I have to agree on this. Some of SM's antics are unnecessary.
    OTOH we're not a sculling team, it's not like the forum only works if we all row to the same beat. The price of diversity, so to speak.


    I take your word for it.


    Agreed.


    Agreed.


    OK.


    OK.


    OK.

    M
    Maxx has not been on the forums for months now, compared to SM or the rest of us he has had much more impact on encouraging discussion and provoking thought. If your criteria are eliciting conversation and challenging discussion I suspect you miss him too. Plumber is an old member who is steady as she goes. He visits us relatively consistently, and goes about his business.

    But we've lost many members, on many sides of the discussion.
    ethikē aretē--phronesis--eudaimonia
    virtue of character--practical/ethical wisdom--human flourishing

    It is not a battle to win but an attitude to share.
    AVFM Mission Statement

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •