Messages

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

121

The Polling Pit / Re: func( arg1, arg2 )

« on: April 13, 2007, 01:44:59 PM »

You just got trolled, dude.
Too easy!

Hey, d.... little inebriated right now, so I wouldn't think too highly of this "victory" of yours (got back from one of them crazy Japanese drinking parties, an enkai, about an hour and a half ago).  Try it on me again in about 9-10 hours.





(edit: trying to fix some drunken typos... let's see if I can do it without fucking up.)

122

The Polling Pit / Re: Voting

« on: April 13, 2007, 01:35:59 PM »

I should probably wait until I sober up to answer this, but that hasn't stopped me so far tonight:

It always is.  For some, it is a tougher decision.  And as I said I don't hold it against people who are too scared to.

Guess you didn't read. I'm in japan.  I dont have to pay taxes, legally.  How is evasion an option for me again?

(EDIT: and actually, if we REALLY want to get technical, I'm living more of a "principled" life than you right now.  I don't pay taxes...obviously because of the legality.  I don't use US government roads, I don't use Government subsidized utilities or services of ANY kind...well, that's not true... there is my Skype number, which I know kicks some fees to the US government for having a US number tied to the account.

I voluntarily signed a contract consenting to abide by the laws of Japan.  Perfectly within my "libertarian" right to do so..... I just "vote" for no-winner candidates and NO on every referendum and issue I come across, barring the repeal of a law or dismantling of a government office....which so far hasn't happened yet.)

Also, you completey dodged my point on your "counter-economics."  Why aren't you purchasing or providing forged documents that will allow yourself and other to circumvent the illegitamate state?  Why are you buying products from business who knowingly and willingly continue to pay licenses and taxes to the State because it's still a profitable venture for them?

I would hope that you could look critically at your actions and see that voting for politicians is an act of violence.  If that makes you angry, then you should probably ask yourself WHY.

First off, I've already clarified that I've only voted for libertarian candidates who've never been elected, so I really don't have anything to be angry about othen than "the principle" of this entire discussion.

Second off, it makes me angry because you're position is still inconsistent: and you have yet to answer this -

You've already conceded that voting in some respects is not "immoral" or "unprincipled" or whatever word you choose to use. So:

1. If people are going to vote anyway, and believe in the system.
2. Voting for a Libertarian candidate or someone who doesn't get elected isn't "murder"
3. Issue Voting "kinda-sorta-maybe-might-be-not-too-sure-because-maybe-I'm-more-of-a-realist-than-I'd-like-to-admit" isn't agression.

....then why the hell are you not telling people, "Hey, if you're gonna vote, why not vote for 'this guy' or 'just vote on the issues'?"

It makes absolutely no sense to me, none, and it tells me that you seem more interested in masturbating to the sound of your own voice while you stand upon Anarchist Soapbox high and engage in your sophistry of how "a principled libertarian" should be, rather than actually utilize all the tools at your disposal "NOW" to shrink the size of government,...even if your end goal is to eliminate it entirely.

Instead of worrying about how bad my words make you feel, maybe you should concern yourself with whether I am right or not.

Doesn't make me feel bad, it just makes me not like you.  Which I don't.  (EDIT:) I've also already taken responsibility for my voting, which I've also outlined for you what I've done, and I've also raised questions about your "openess" to issue voting and voting for nonsensical candidates.

rather than looking for a way to simply dismiss everything I've said by calling me a "whiny bitch who needs to grow a sack," you might also take some of your own advice and really look at what I've been saying.... particularly that paragraph up there with the numbered list.

I am going to look at what you did and say, "Hey the guy you voted for came to office...and now he is taxing me.  Why are trying to install your leader over me by force?  Isn't this exactly what you are trying to prevent?"

You would never be able to know that unless I told you.  Try again.

Because this post was the most crybaby BS I have read in a long time.

Maybe, or maybe I'm once again illustrating the point about how your presentation of the your message is tuning a potential ally to your cause out.  I've already pointed out that I'm sure with enough questions, I could find something where you didn't live up to your "principled"..... principles.

Which reminds me, you never did tell me if you went to college or not.

More proof you aren't really interested in liberty...your feelings get hurt and so now you won't help promote liberty to "show me".  I guess it isn't that important to you in the first place.

I'm all for promoting liberty, I'm just not interested in helping you.  I'll be more than happy to help other people with their anarchist pet project, I just plain don't fucking like you.  Maybe you can get one of your friends to call me and I'll still show up.





...keep fappin' off to your principled dream, Mr. Agorist Man.

(edit: and if you think I'm really offended,... look for a post of mine that basically sums up how I look at everyone on the BBS.  I'll give you a hint; Pictures and Words.  Just take a moment and think about that.)

(2nd edit:  ...and if you think I haven't been thinking about your position, and my position about voting.... well, whatever.)

123

General / Re: Christian Anarchy is the only sensible answer...

« on: April 13, 2007, 12:25:27 PM »

It's pointless to talk to Gene about the evolution of morality when he denies that evolution even happens.

That doesn't excuse, rationalize or give a pass to what I percieve as undeserved crap behavior, particularly when I have gone out of my way to be respectful, understanding and "tolerant" to his chistio-centric worldview,...which I find amusing given his calling the show to chastize Ian about the virtues of "tolerance."

(maybe I better just stop posting while I'm under the influence....everything just seems to be pissing me off.)

124

The Polling Pit / Re: func( arg1, arg2 )

« on: April 13, 2007, 12:01:44 PM »

Hence the use of the past tense in relation to your job of managing the work of others.

Coders are artists; you can't manage them like blue-collar workers.

First off, I am a coder, and an artist by education and profession.

Second, you have no fucking clue as to why I decided to no longer keep employees for MY business.  (hint: had a lot to do with payroll taxes and regulations, than with my ability to manage.)

(EDIT: you also have no idea if the case I gave was the one I used for my business.... which it wasn't, so you might want to consider it a hypothetical situation before you pass judgment, Mr. Coder as Artist)


...Might want to consider what you say before you open your god damn mouth.

(2nd Edit:  and yes, I've had a bit to drink tonight, so I'm probably a bit more irritated at this post than I normally would be when sober.)

125

The Polling Pit / Re: Voting

« on: April 13, 2007, 11:59:02 AM »

http://bbs.freetalklive.com/index.php?topic=13033.msg231611#msg231611

126

General / Re: Christian Anarchy is the only sensible answer...

« on: April 13, 2007, 01:10:34 AM »

Wasn't "yada yada yada" the dirty part of the events that were being explained?  Or did I completely lose my mind?  Sorry.  Had to ask.

I never watched Sienfeld... or Network TV as a whole for that matter.

127

General / Re: Christian Anarchy is the only sensible answer...

« on: April 13, 2007, 12:54:00 AM »

yada yada...

Jerry Seinfeld...

Antisemite...

Pretty unimpressive, Gene.  I think I've always been pretty respectful to you, and now you're giving me this...

128

General / Re: Christian Anarchy is the only sensible answer...

« on: April 13, 2007, 12:48:42 AM »

Ah.  I see.  You and I are speaking different languages, and we're having the discussion "about nothing", are we?  Okay, that's fine.  I won't bother anymore.

129

General / Re: Christian Anarchy is the only sensible answer...

« on: April 13, 2007, 12:30:59 AM »

No, you should take this as "yada yada..."

Well, "yada yada..." can be taken a lot of ways, generally the most common is "this is just talk, and I've stopped listening."

Care to clarify?

130

General / Re: Christian Anarchy is the only sensible answer...

« on: April 13, 2007, 12:18:55 AM »

yada yada...

Amusing.  Shall I take this as you are tired of talking about the sensibility of Christian Anarchy and all the related issues that entails?


....on "your own" thread?

131

General / Re: Christian Anarchy is the only sensible answer...

« on: April 12, 2007, 11:46:15 PM »

You have revised my thinking a bit.  I think those that are most advanced (from an evolutionary perspective) are those who can convince others of a strict moral code while at the same time convincing them that because of their personal position, heritage, etc. they are somehow exempt from this morality, and any violations of that they must commit of that strict moral code is for the greater good, national security, etc.

Hmmm.  It's an interesting hypothesis, but I would say this could also have as much to do about humanity's apparent instinctual response to accept authority, which I have made the assertion that this very well could also be an evolved behavior/instinct, as a lot of human "growth" has resulted form the centralization of leadership and the specialization of tasks within a population.

Such people have the best chance of passing on their ideas and genes.  It seems to me that all the rest of this is nothing more than a lot of yada...yada.

I would also point out though, that societies where this happens is often doomed to mass "unhappiness", revolution, restructuring, recentralization, mass "unhappiness", revolution, restructuring, recentralization....ad infinitum.  While it's very true that the "genetic success" of the few do indeed happen in this particular time, this comes as the cost of "genetic success" of a larger group of people in the population, something that Rillion points out eventaully get "punished," since in essence this can be a kind of "social cheating."  Who knows though, I'm not an anthropologist nor psychologist by education.

While I can see the arguments made, I think one of the problems we have is that there is no long-term verifiable "test cases" where we can see, measure and observe a society of a group of individuals that collectively share this "proper morality," and therefore cannot draw any real conclusions based on actual observable evidence.  As this thread illustrates, we're dealing mostly in the academic abstracts of hypothesis, hypotheticals and conjecture.


(EDIT: changed "humanities" to the proper "humanity's")

132

The Polling Pit / Re: Voting

« on: April 12, 2007, 11:23:41 PM »

I didn't give them the money....they took it.

You still voluntarily and knowingly put yourself in a positon where you would allow the government to take your money.  If you can argue to Lindsey that she's reponsible for candidates who break their "verbal contract" and change their platforms because "she knew this would likely happen"... then turnabout it fair play.

Again, where the hell's the "counter-economics" you keep talking about?  Buying your car on the black market? "Phony" registration, tags, SMOG?

The problem with advocating a 100% principled stance is you'll never ever, ever be able to live that principle 100%.  It's a great guideline, sure, but sometimes "you gotta do what you gotta do."

Have they saved taxpayers 270 billion dollars a year yet (and thats just federal tax evasion)?

And the government is still growing, still passing more and more legislation to give themselves more and more control, giving more and more power to the fewer and fewer people that will enevitably particpate in the system. They continute to grow their ability to take more and more money from the people who do pay, (and they will, even if just for the FEAR of having their door kicked in), and from businesses who will continue to pay the fees because it's still profitable for them to do so.

Money which you help fund when you buy products on the "legal market."  So where's your "counter-economics?" in all of this?

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I live in Japan currently (if thats not obvious from all my other posts), I don't have to pay taxes here because of the tax treaties between Japan and the US,... so really what can I do to spread the message of liberty in my home country, one of the few that actually has the best chance to be free?

• Tax evasion is not an option
• I can contribue to FTL, and I do.
• ....and I can vote NO on state referndums from California (my state of residence for the purpose of voting) to hopefully try and stem the tide of government spending/growth where I can.
• I can encourage people, particularly those of the "if you don't vote, I don't care what you think" mindset to at least steer the voting in the direction of shrinking/dismantling the state by getting them started in the right direction.... maybe over time they might become more and more liberty-minded, but to call them a "socialist" and a "muderer" immediate short-circuits these efforts.

....and you're calling me and everyone else who does this a, "different degree of socialist" and for intents and purposes an accomplice to Murder for doing one of the few things as my disposal to actually try and make a difference.

Fine.  I guess I'm an accomplice to murder and a "socialist"....and you know what, I'm gonna keep doing it because the reality is that to fix this imperfect system that we have to live in, I'm going to have to use an imperfect solution, which includes but is not strictly limited to voting.

Nice going.  Hope you're real proud of yourself, and if there is anything that you can take away from this is that I hope you realize that your methods for communicating your "principled-not-gonna-happen-in-reality" position, including the labeling, is only going to be counter-productive to your goals.

...and when you need activists for whatever anarchist pet project of yours that you may or may not have in the future, be sure you call someone else....after all I'm just a socialist.

------------------------------------------
Feel free to address this post should you have any other "thoughts" you want to share with me:

http://bbs.freetalklive.com/index.php?topic=13033.msg231611#msg231611

------------------------------------------

...and I still contend your whole stance on voting is inconsistent given your concessions regarding issue voting and voting for nonsensical candidates.

133

The Polling Pit / Re: func( arg1, arg2 )

« on: April 12, 2007, 09:45:45 PM »

As a former employer who paid people to do this, I'll make this easy:  If you're gonna code for money, and you're part of a development team, your code better follow whatever readability standards your company has set. Period, end of story.

If that means I want you to use white space, tab-indent your code 4 spaces, camelize your variable names, provide pre-conditions and post conditions for your functions and comment explicitly enough so that it actually describes what code is supposed to be doing as well as log any edits that you make to the code...

...then your ass better do it.

If you're coding for youself, who cares?  I don't have to read your code, so do what you want.

134

The Polling Pit / Re: Voting

« on: April 12, 2007, 09:22:57 PM »

Oh, look at this, the hypocracy ensues:

Vince:

Yes, but don't you know backstabbing will occur before you vote?  Don't you understand that there is a high likelyhood (more like a certainty)_ that the person you are voting for is a liar?

but wait a minute,... isn't this what I was arguing about buying a car?  About using government services?  About going to college?  About paying rent?

"Oh, but I'm not responsible for this because the government intiates force through theft, even though I know that buying a car will result in money going to the government"....fap...fap..fap...."an agreement under duress is no agreement at all, even though I voluntarily and knowingly put myself in a position to put under duress"....fap..fap...fap..."voting just means your a different degree of socialist"....fap..fap..fap..."but I don't know about issue voting, and I'll completely avoid this little 'contradiction' in my position"....fap...fap...fap..."everyone who's principled needs to drop out and engage in the counter-economics of agorism"....fap...fap...fap...

What has voting done for you so far?

Why don't you ask Ian, Mark and the FTL crew what their voting has done in New Hampshire... particularly when they stopped a school funding measure, and are working to prevent the state from centrallizing education.

Oh wait, actually don't.... they're responsible for murder and aggression because they support voting.

So let's see:

Your Tax Evasion cost the government - maybe $10,000 (and I'm being GENEROUS because I don't know what you do for a living)
Their "voting" cost the government - millions of dollars by denying them the ability to raise property taxes to pay for a school grant.

135

General / Re: Christian Anarchy is the only sensible answer...

« on: April 11, 2007, 11:19:08 PM »

I'm not sure why we are talking about animal behavior, but as long as we are, what happens to old or weak members of these "socially evolved" species?  What happens to young sexually mature male members of these groups?  What happens to other tribes of the same species that pass into their territory?  How do they treat similar species.  Yes, even mobsters can have tender moments with their offspring, but I would not want to adopt their moral code.

There was a logical progression here that led me to bring this up.  I'll distill it because it obviously wasn't "obvious":

-----------------------

• Markuzick: Man's proper morality is learned through reason and experiences because of man's need to survive in the most optimal fashion.
• Christian Anarchist:  I don't see how morality comes from a survival need, and "might over right" prevails in an Amoral atmosphere.
• theCelestrian:  "Not neccesarily, we have some examples of animals (amoral) in an Amoral atmosphere exhibiting some signs of not strictly adhering to a 'might over right' social strata all the the time.  I'm not claiming this is morality, but it does raise questions about your assertion."

------------------------

Does that help?  I never made the claim that this was "morality"... I think in fact, I said no less than 3 times that I wouldn't call it morality because no one can be sure.  I brought it up because I think it sheds some light that indeed it IS possible for certain behaviors we consider "moral" can arise out of an Amoral environment....which is what it does anyway.

1. The Natural World is Amoral.
2. Upon birth, a human child is Amoral.
3. It's only as a result of "learning habits" and which habits are "right" or "wrong" in their community does one learn "morality."

(note: Mark is claiming that the "proper morality" is the one that encourages the best possible success for man's survival, which includes the respect for the liberties of the individual and all that entails)

4. Moralities are different from community to community (ex. a muslim morality is not equal to a christian one or an atheist one, right?)

The only different between us, and these Animals, I contend, is the fact that we have a higher-functioning rational mind.  This allows us to do quite a few things that these animals so far, have not been proven to be capable of, such as "think ahead" about the consequences of our actions,  even consequences beyond our lifetimes, or dissect information for use in the abstract, and then re-apply the newly synthesized information in reality.

So the mobster analogy isn't quite accurate.

(EDIT: changed repetitive word "to" to "do", and cleaned up "think ahead" to read more coherantly.)