From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Mon Aug 18 2003 - 11:59:32 MDT
Date sent: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 10:43:36 -0600
To: virus@lucifer.com
Subject: virus: In Support of Reason
From: "Hermit" <hidden@lucifer.com>
Send reply to: virus@lucifer.com
>
> When it is Dees calling people names or posting material that his
> reputation (37th out of 37) makes clear the list is not interested in
> pursuing, he is "only responding". When others respond in kind, he
> calls for their banning?
>
> As thinking rational people we should perhaps have ignored his
> trolling, even though that has previously lead to him increasing his
> volume and obnoxiousness in his desperate quest for acknowledgement.
> But why should we? Is this Joe Dees' forum more than the majority of
> Virians? Joe Dees "knows" that we know this, and "knows" that the CoV
> is comprised largely of a group of well educated "Idiotarianists" (For
> definitions, see [ Joe Dees, "On Fascism", Reply #3, 2003-08-14 ]
> (http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=32;action=display;thread
> id=29032)). Knowing this, he elected to make his "aggressive"
> nomination of Cheney as "The Prophet" on the public list, knowing that
> Cheney has frequently been accused of being a lying, conniving,
> self-serving, public trough guzzling nogoodnick. Presumably Joe Dees
> realized that his nomination of somebody who was central to the
> creation of the problems of the energy market in the USA, as "The
> Prophet" would be opposed and rejected. Jake!
> Sapiens' response, "A really entertaining piece of hypocrisy. How
> interesting to see that you value this Virian sin in your so-called
> "prophet", Joe. Do you have any more examples of this kind of banal
> sinful behavior which you want to offer for the heroic charge it
> imbues you with? Feel free to keep to yourself next time." was mild
> in comparison to Dees' trolling effort, and you will note, did not
> contain any untoward comments about Joe Dees.
>
> Since then Jake Sapiens has made a total of 5 posts, each in response
> to Joe Dees' increasingly strident complaints about Jake Sapiens, a
> valued member of our community, whose "Karma" has increased throughout
> this episode, reflecting general approval of his stance. Against this,
> Joe Dees' karma has nosedived, even as he flooded the list with 9
> posts demanding the silencing of Jake Sapiens.
>
> Let's look at some history.Joe Dees has a problem with a. The list is
> driven crazy by a flourish of posts. Whether whining, insulting,
> irrational or irascable, all bear the deadly stigmata of poor
> formatting and excessive volume. Joe Dees has a problem with b. The
> list is driven crazy by a flourish of posts. Whether whining,
> insulting, irrational or irascable, all bear the deadly stigmata of
> poor formatting and excessive volume. Joe Dees has a problem with c.
> The list is driven crazy by a flourish of posts. Whether whining,
> insulting, irrational or irascable, all bear the deadly stigmata of
> poor formatting and excessive volume. Joe Dees has a problem with d.
> The list is driven crazy by a flourish of posts. Whether whining,
> insulting, irrational or irascable, all bear the deadly stigmata of
> poor formatting and excessive volume. Joe Dees has a problem with e.
> The list is driven crazy by a flourish of posts. Whether whining,
> insulting, irrational or irascable, all bear the deadly stigmata of
> poor formatting and excessive volume. Joe Dees has a problem with f.
> The list is driven crazy by a flourish of posts. Whether whining,
> insulting, irrational or irascable, all bear the deadly stigmata of
> poor formatting and excessive volume. Joe Dees has a problem with g.
> The list is driven crazy by a flourish of posts. Whether whining,
> insulting, irrational or irascable, all bear the deadly stigmata of
> poor formatting and excessive volume. Joe Dees has a problem with h.
> The list is driven crazy by a flourish of posts. Whether whining,
> insulting, irrational or irascable, all bear the deadly stigmata of
> poor formatting and excessive volume. Joe Dees has a problem with i.
> The list is driven crazy by a flourish of posts. Whether whining,
> insulting, irrational or irascable, all bear the deadly stigmata of
> poor formatting and excessive volume. Joe Dees has a problem with j.
> The list is driven crazy by a flourish of posts. Whether whining,
> insulting, irrational or irascable, all bear the deadly stigmata of
> poor formatting and excessive volume. ... Joe Dees has a problem with
> z. The list is driven crazy by a flourish of posts. Whether whining,
> insulting, irrational or irascable, all bear the deadly stigmata of
> poor formatting and excessive volume.Is there a pattern here perhaps?
> Do we begin to realize that there may be some common denominator?
>
> I suggest that if Dees wants to be a trolling memebot, let him play
> the memebot troll. We cannot prevent this. If Dees wants to piss on
> anyone in his proximity, I say let him do so if it makes him happy and
> he can find participants in his "water sports". We cannot prevent this
> either. But what the hell entitles him to behave this way in our
> forums. We offered him an alternative, which he adamantly opposed and
> rejected, yet despite apparently wanting to remain here, he continues
> to piss in our pool. As previously suggested, such behaviour can only
> be characterised as "dog in the mangerish". What is with the angst
> about acting? There are solutions. There is a sheriff in town.
>
> For so long as we permit Dees' antisocial behaviour to persist,
> without taking appropriate action, we are guilty parties. Not Joe Dees
> alone, for I suggest that he is merely behaving according to his
> vitriolic memeplex. It is the nature of the beast. The onus is on us
> to act. He cannot.
>
> So if our "reputation" system is worth anything, if our "karma" system
> is worth anything, and if "The Law" is worth anything, then we should
> be taking action to preserve our forums from Joe Dees' repeated
> onslaughts. David Lucifer, you have our support, our trust and our
> hope that you will act , preferably permanently, against Joe Dees, who
> apparently deluded into considering that his voice outweighs all other
> considerations, or perhaps deeming himself as having nothing to lose,
> seems hell-bent on making the CoV untenable for everyone else.
>
> Hermit, Kharin and Rhino
> (and assuming Jake Sapiens will subscribe to this request, represent
> an effective 21% of the equity in the CoV. If you agree with this
> motion, 33.29% support this request without any other support being
> required).
>
> PS Others who choose to join their voices to this thread, please make
> short supporting or opposing posts.
>
> PPS Don't blame Kharin and Rhino who might have been gentler, for the
> wording. The documented was drafted by Hermit who accepts full
> responsibility for any errors or excesses.
>
Oh, Puh-LEEEZE! Is it reasonable to attack a post merely for being
correct if your memeplex dogmatically refuses to allow a despised
individual (in this case, Cheney) to be right about ANYTHING? And to
further misrepresent the post and to slander the messenger/poster? If
this is what these members of the list calls reason they have most
clearly lost all contact with the concept.
Truth has nothing to do with popularity. If it did, then the leading US
philosopher would be Oprah Winfrey. And it is precisely the truths that
people find unpalatable that they need to face, for the sake of their own
personal growth.
> ----
> This message was posted by Hermit to the Virus 2003 board on Church of
> Virus BBS.
> <http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=54;action=display;thread
> id=29080> --- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to
> <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
--- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Aug 18 2003 - 11:58:35 MDT