Does Anyone Read "The Last Psychiatrist"?

[mr.jp]

I read it.

I think both the critique and defence in this thread is not exactly on point. Yes, that example with the math and game theory was a piece of bad writing, there is no point in defending it.

But that’s not the thing to get out of the blog, a piece of succinct, rational discussion. It is a ride. His (or her?) mind goes in a lot of different directions, many of them interesting. I like how he talks as if he is inside other people’s heads, and I think he is extraordinarily good at it. It’s not an easy thing to do.

And yeah, he talks way too much in declarative sentences. But don’t take everything as a statement that should be completely defensible, it’s not about that, it’s about whether the declarations are interesting.

[pallas]

@njtt

If what HMS Irruncible is indeed the intended interpretation (and who can really say), it is not an argument at all, it is simply a metaphorically expressed assertion disguised as an argument.

I think Last Psychiatrist is a misogynist, based on the initial Hunger Games review. The way he (I think it’s a he) attacks feminists for not defining feminism or empowerment on his terms with lines like this :

So either a) she has an unconsciously cynical view of women in general; or b) she has been tricked by the system about what it is to advance as a woman, i.e she’s in The Matrix.

“The standard adulation for The Hunger Games is that it has a strong female protagonist who is, and I quote, “a badass.” Is she more of a badass than Alice from Resident Evil? Come the zombie apocalypse, do you go Team Katniss or Team Alice? Not who it’s cooler to say you’d pick; assume you have a 5 year old daughter with one hit point left whose life depends on your selection. Because I’m arguing that it does.”

It’s actually hard to pin Last Psychiatrist on a position- because there’s a lot of hand waving and magical thinking, and no real attempt as a systematic or coherent argument- but there seems to be a sneer at women who do not define success in their lives by how close they fall into a certain stereotyped unrealistic male-power-fantasy character models.

Apparently feminists have been delivered marching orders- they all need to start fantasizing about being Arnold Schwarzenegger in a schlock action film.

[Lakai]

@pallas

Apparently feminists have been delivered marching orders- they all need to start fantasizing about being Arnold Schwarzenegger in a schlock action film.

Alice from Resident’s Evil is just one example TLP gives of how Katniss isn’t heroic. I don’t see how you can extrapolate from that example that TLP thinks all feminists have to be male-power-fantasy character models.

TLP gives several reasons why Katniss is not heroic.

[pallas]

@Lakai

Alice from Resident’s Evil is just one example TLP gives of how Katniss isn’t heroic. I don’t see how you can extrapolate from that example that TLP thinks all feminists have to be male-power-fantasy character models.

TLP gives several reasons why Katniss is not heroic.

I don’t think the things he says are true though- or even if they are they are not actually relevant in whether she is heroic or badass or empowering. For example he claims that she doesn’t save anyone in the movie, but she clearly saved two people. Actually he writes:

"In the actual Games, Katniss is continuously saved by men-- Haymitch, Peeta, Peeta again, Thresh-- but you don’t notice that she saves no one, including herself, you think she saves herself all the time. "

Well I have no idea what “in the actual games mean” it seems like she clearly saved her sister and the love interest in the movie.

It just seems like he sets up these artitrary goalposts of what it means to be feminist or heroic and then knocks down the goal posts he’s created, but since the goal posts are not relevant criteria or just based on arbitrary nonsense, the whole exercise struck me as questionable.

It just seems to me like there’s some unstated reason Last Psychiatrist wants to sneer at the feminists on Jezebel- and these weird magical thinking goalpost qualifiers like “in the actual games” whatever that means- or “this scene wasn’t heroic because it was self defense and self defense is not heroic because I say it isn’t” are just this hand-waving pretext.

The idea that always seems to run in these blog posts are people are stupid and don’t know their own minds, but Last Psychiatrists knows what feminism is better than feminists (for example), because of Freudian magical thinking. (Or as he puts it, the feminists are all in the matrix)

I think he’s the “last psychiatrist” because psychiatrists in real life have largely abandoned freud in favor of empirical research rather than magical thinking, but that isn’t what Last Psychiatrist is about.

[pallas]

That bit I quoted a moment earlier, as I think about it, may be among the stupidest things I’ve ever read on a blog. I mean this bit:

“The standard adulation for The Hunger Games is that it has a strong female protagonist who is, and I quote, “a badass.” Is she more of a badass than Alice from Resident Evil? Come the zombie apocalypse, do you go Team Katniss or Team Alice? Not who it’s cooler to say you’d pick; assume you have a 5 year old daughter with one hit point left whose life depends on your selection. Because I’m arguing that it does.” "

This is my parody of it:

“People claim Kadnass is a badass, but can she transform into a 50 foot pickup truck and stomp on evil robots? If Megatron came a calling, who would you ask to defend your daughter’s life, Katniss or Arcee the girl transformer from Transformers: The Movie?). Remember, your daughters life is at stake here! I don’t think Katniss could defeat even a 20 foot robot, let alone Megratron!”

It’s just completely irrelevant criteria disguised as thoughtful Socratic questioning.

[Lakai]

@pallas

I don’t think the things he says are true though- or even if they are they are not actually relevant in whether she is heroic or badass or empowering. For example he claims that she doesn’t save anyone in the movie, but she clearly saved two people. Actually he writes:

"In the actual Games, Katniss is continuously saved by men-- Haymitch, Peeta, Peeta again, Thresh-- but you don’t notice that she saves no one, including herself, you think she saves herself all the time. "

Well I have no idea what “in the actual games mean” it seems like she clearly saved her sister and the love interest in the movie.

Here is when TLP mentionsKatniss’ sister:

The Hunger Games has this same feminist problem. Other than the initial volunteering to replace her younger sister, Katniss never makes any decisions of her own, never acts with consequence-- but her life is constructed to appear that she makes important decisions. She has free will, of course, like any five year old with terrible parents, but at every turn is prevented from acting on the world. She is protected by men-- enemies and allies alike; directed by others, blessed with lucky accidents and when things get impossible there are packages from the sky. In philosophical terms, she is continuously robbed of agency. She is deus ex machinaed all the way to the end.

@pallas

It just seems like he sets up these artitrary goalposts of what it means to be feminist or heroic and then knocks down the goal posts he’s created, but since the goal posts are not relevant criteria or just based on arbitrary nonsense, the whole exercise struck me as questionable.

It just seems to me like there’s some unstated reason Last Psychiatrist wants to sneer at the feminists on Jezebel- and these weird magical thinking goalpost qualifiers like “in the actual games” whatever that means- or “this scene wasn’t heroic because it was self defense and self defense is not heroic because I say it isn’t” are just this hand-waving pretext.

TLP’s “goalposts” are that for most of the movie, Katniss doesn’t make her own decisions. She’s continuously robbed of her agency, and most of the people who admire her do not notice.

I think that stays consistent through his article, and the rest is TLP questioning the answers people give to justify why they believe Katinss is heroic.

The idea that always seems to run in these blog posts are people are stupid and don’t know their own minds, but Last Psychiatrists knows what feminism is better than feminists (for example), because of Freudian magical thinking. (Or as he puts it, the feminists are all in the matrix)

The entire blog is essentially about the defenses people use to avoid seeing the truth. There is a lot of questioning of peoples minds, and if you read any cognitive behavioral textbook you’ll see that “people are stupid and don’t know their own minds” is a common criticism. The goal is to make you question why you believe something.

TLP does not define feminism. He makes you question what you think feminism is.

He only criticized one definition of feminism, quoted here:

Katniss, in this season of woman-hating, is a stunning example of feminism at its finest hour. She is compassionate, yet strong. She cares deeply about her family. While she is tempted to run away with Gale, instead of leaving her sister and mother to fend for themselves, she stays to support them.

The above is quote from another article that TLP disagrees with. Do you agree with this definition? Is this how you would define feminism?

[Lakai]

@pallas

That bit I quoted a moment earlier, as I think about it, may be among the stupidest things I’ve ever read on a blog. I mean this bit:

This is my parody of it:

“People claim Kadnass is a badass, but can she transform into a 50 foot pickup truck and stomp on evil robots? If Megatron came a calling, who would you ask to defend your daughter’s life, Katniss or Arcee the girl transformer from Transformers: The Movie?). Remember, your daughters life is at stake here! I don’t think Katniss could defeat even a 20 foot robot, let alone Megratron!”

It’s just completely irrelevant criteria disguised as thoughtful Socratic questioning.

That’s one reason Katniss is not a badass. Can you tell me why you think she is a badass? Under what definition of badassery or feminism do you think she qualifies?

[pallas]

@Lakai

That’s one reason Katniss is not a badass. Can you tell me why you think she is a badass? Under what definition of badassery or feminism do you think she qualifies?

I’m not going to pull out a dictionary and argue what feminism should be defined as. (Nor does Last) I think if the feminist community is embracing Hunger Games, that creates a presumption that she is in fact a feminist character, and its really isn’t my job to start delivering a lecture on feminism 101 starting with a dictionary definition or whatever.

On the specifics of the film:

It’s been a while since I saw the film, but Katniss seeks to rescue her sister and try to stay alive and rescue the boy and the little girl.

She accomplishes two out of three, through a combination of athletic ability and forming alliances with other characters and her own intelligence.

She’s both heroic, intelligent, and capable, and able to rescue people in a dystopian environment due to these traits.

She also tends to do things that are traditionally coded male, like battle in a tournament, hunt with a bow and arrow, and rescue a girl (her sister). This would appear to be a character showing that women can accomplish things traditionally that were boys work.

But really, a lot of feminists have celebrate the character, is my understanding, I don’t really think I’m the one making an outrageous claim. (And btw its my reaction solely to the first film, I haven’t yet seen the second)

For Last, the problem seems to be that she isn’t Clint Eastwood in the Dollars Trilogy, killing a million people single hand-idly through ridiculous shooting ability. Pow pow pow, 10 guys dead. (Even though nobody could do anything like that in real life, and soldiers in the real world do in fact rely on comrades to help them in a war zone, Clint Eastwood go it alone types would quickly be dead).

So basically, “She’s too realistic or cooperative or something, why can’t she just be Clint Eastwood?” Seems to be his critique. It has a lot to do with male power fantasies, but not much to do with feminist.

But of course Last tends to not communicate clearly, and uses Freudian rhetorical games, (you think you think this but you are wrong) so it’s hard to pin down what he’s saying.

But really, Last is the one making the out there claim, that the plot of the movie didn’t involve rescuing her sister and she doesn’t rescue the boy, or even though she did it doesn’t count somehow? That everyone is secretly deluded for unconscious reasons about that film they just saw, and are in the matrix?

[pallas]

Sorry I misse your other post

"TLP’s “goalposts” are that for most of the movie, Katniss doesn’t make her own decisions. "

Katniss decides to rescue her sister. It’s just strikes me as completely illegitimate to say she has no agency. That’s basic hero journey 101 stuff, the accepts the heroes journey to enter the hunger games, and he has to invent an arbitrary claim that she didn’t have agency the “right” way to draw that conclusion.

“The entire blog is essentially about the defenses people use to avoid seeing the truth.”

Right, but the premise of the blog is that Last Psychiatrist can perceive the truth better than the poor deluded people of the world, and he knows people’s minds better than they do.

It’s not really based on trying to enter into a dialogue with people to try to understand their motives- because those people are deluded, who cares what they have to say? Last psychiatrist doesn’t have to talk to anybody or even ask them what they are thinking- he’s lecturing at them. About politics, feministm, morality, or whatever.

All things being equal, I don’t find him plausible as a perceiver of the world. He does sometimes make very interesting points, I must admit, he does sometimes stumble on ideas worth considering. But he seems so vile a person, so clearly out of touch with other human beings, so unwilling to listen to other people rather than talk at them, that I couldn’t keep reading it.
I mean, we disagree, that’s cool. But if I disagreed in the way Last disagreed, I’d claim you like the blog because you see him as a father figure, because of deeply held sense of inferiority you need someone to tell you what to believe. You’re in the Matrix.

Now that would be wayyyyyy dickish and unfair, but that’s the sort of thing he does there! I find it vile.

Cognitive psychology really has nothing to do with the blog, I mean, literary criticism is not a science, and what Last does in that post is literary criticism, mixed with Freudian style Socratic dialogue.

[Doctor_Why_Bother]

Double post.

[Doctor_Why_Bother]

[Quote=Lakai]

That’s one reason Katniss is not a badass. Can you tell me why you think she is a badass? Under what definition of badassery or feminism do you think she qualifies?

[/quote]

Personally, I think she’s a bad-ass because when she was flung into a jungle with 23 people trying to kill her, she didn’t just completely freak out, have a nervous breakdown, and go cry under a tree somewhere, which is what 99% of people would do. People think she’s a bad-ass because they recognise that if they were in her position they wouldn’t do anywhere near as well. That’s all the reason you need.

@pallas

All things being equal, I don’t find him plausible as a perceiver of the world. He does sometimes make very interesting points, I must admit, he does sometimes stumble on ideas worth considering. But he seems so vile a person, so clearly out of touch with other human beings, so unwilling to listen to other people rather than talk at them, that I couldn’t keep reading it.

Personally, I just can’t get over what a bad writer the guy is.

[Doctor_Why_Bother]

@me

Personally, I just can’t get over what a bad writer the guy is.

I should elaborate on this. The reason I think this guy is a terrible writer is not because I disagree with his ideas (although I do) it’s because he seems constitutionally incapable of writing clearly. I don’t say this lightly but I honestly feel that he frequently approaches ‘Time Cube Guy’ levels of obscurantism.

When one is writing fiction, clarity is just one of a number of concerns. One also has to think about characterisation, tone, atmosphere, prose style, and several other things. By contrast, when one is writing an essay, particularly a psychoanalytical or philosophical essay, literally the only thing that matters is clarity. It seems like every time this guy has a choice between being clear or being a smart-arse he makes the wrong choice. I think that’s one reason why a lot of people find his blog to be so frustrating. That’s definitely the main reason that I do.

[Lakai]

@pallas

Katniss decides to rescue her sister. It’s just strikes me as completely illegitimate to say she has no agency. That’s basic hero journey 101 stuff, the accepts the heroes journey to enter the hunger games, and he has to invent an arbitrary claim that she didn’t have agency the “right” way to draw that conclusion.

If you read my quote from the blog, you should know the complaint is that through most of the movie Katniss has no agency Not no agency, but not enough agency.

I was concerned by how little agency she had compared with the typical action hero. If it doesn’t bother you, then that’s fine, but you can’t use that to say TLP’s claims are illegitimate.

Right, but the premise of the blog is that Last Psychiatrist can perceive the truth better than the poor deluded people of the world, and he knows people’s minds better than they do.

You have the premise half right. TLP does claim to know people’s minds better than they do. Isn’t that the purpose of psychiatry?

As for answers/truth, TLP does not always claim to have it. Some problems are too difficult to figure out, but that doesn’t mean we can’t criticize those who think they have.

It’s not really based on trying to enter into a dialogue with people to try to understand their motives- because those people are deluded, who cares what they have to say? Last psychiatrist doesn’t have to talk to anybody or even ask them what they are thinking- he’s lecturing at them. About politics, feministm, morality, or whatever.

Why do you say there is no dialogue? The article you quoted had TLP answering a lot of criticism to his premise.

All things being equal, I don’t find him plausible as a perceiver of the world. He does sometimes make very interesting points, I must admit, he does sometimes stumble on ideas worth considering. But he seems so vile a person, so clearly out of touch with other human beings, so unwilling to listen to other people rather than talk at them, that I couldn’t keep reading it.

I mean, we disagree, that’s cool. But if I disagreed in the way Last disagreed, I’d claim you like the blog because you see him as a father figure, because of deeply held sense of inferiority you need someone to tell you what to believe. You’re in the Matrix.

Now that would be wayyyyyy dickish and unfair, but that’s the sort of thing he does there! I find it vile.

Cognitive psychology really has nothing to do with the blog, I mean, literary criticism is not a science, and what Last does in that post is literary criticism, mixed with Freudian style Socratic dialogue.

I could ask you for examples of how TLP dickishly used Freudian logic to discredit others, but to save time I’ll venture an assumption that you don’t like it when TLP says what someone else is thinking, or why they’re thinking it.

I guess I don’t mind when he does this because I don’t think he’s talking about everyone, and I don’t think he’s always talking about me. The point is for the reader to question whether he or she thinks that way. It’s a limitation of the format he’s using. He can’t guess how every individual is thinking, but an article has to talk to everyone at once.

And most of the time I find his answers reasonable. If you have a specific example, then I can discuss it with you in more detail.

[Cudgel]

@Doctor_Why_Bother

Personally, I think she’s a bad-ass because when she was flung into a jungle with 23 people trying to kill her, she didn’t just completely freak out, have a nervous breakdown, and go cry under a tree somewhere, which is what 99% of people would do. People think she’s a bad-ass because they recognise that if they were in her position they wouldn’t do anywhere near as well. That’s all the reason you need.

When the standards have been lowered, and the words revalued, we begin to treat simply not having a nervous breakdown as something to aspire to rather than it being the norm. Hence, the Last psychiatrist, psychiatrist to the Last man. In other words, a person who expects more from you than you apparently expect from yourself.

On another note, it’s interesting that anybody is bothered by Doctor_Why_Bother’s “criticisms.” Note that none of them address the ideas of the blog in any way and focus instead on irrelevant points like writing style and “esoteric” references. Not to mention the slightly conspiratorial accusation that he’s trying to come off as smarter than he is (complete with an axiomatized list!). Reminder that presumption and prejudice do not make for a good argument, which are the crux of D_W_B’s points. When prodded for an example of “real scrutiny”, he clumsily analyzes a metaphor in terms of its math. “It’s not my fault he’s a bad writer!” You don’t like his writing, that’s perfectly fine. But let’s not pretend you’ve made any substantive points.

But before I’m accused of being a minion, I’ll freely admit that TLP is not a blog that lends itself easily to first time visitors. Most people have a defensive reaction when they first read him. And most people stick around. It’s hard to tell where exactly Alone is coming from if you haven’t read anything else by him. This post (not written by me) does a good job at trying to put it all together.

Cheers.

[Speak_to_me_Maddie]

Holy crap, I’ve been lost in this blog all day. Thanks. This is great stuff.

[Doctor_Why_Bother]

@Cudgel

When the standards have been lowered, and the words revalued, we begin to treat simply not having a nervous breakdown as something to aspire to rather than it being the norm.

But if you’ve been thrown into a giant death trap where you’re almost certainly going to be slaughtered in a matter of hours, not having a breakdown is something to aspire to! The one revaluing the word bad-ass is TLP! He’s redefined bad-ass to place all the emphasis on “agency” rather than on things like stoicism, courage under fire and other things which most ordinary people associate with bravery. How much “agency” does a soldier have? Pretty much none at all, right? Chain of command and all that. I guess TLP thinks there’s no such thing as a bad-ass soldier.

@Cudgel

Hence, the Last psychiatrist, psychiatrist to the Last man.

Christ, even the title of his blog is unclear.

@Cudgel

In other words, a person who expects more from you than you apparently expect from yourself.

Well…I return the favour. From him, I expect coherence, cogency and straight-forward ness, such that I can understand his essays without having to rely on interlocutors on a 3rd party message board. I remain disappointed.

@Cudgel

On another note, it’s interesting that anybody is bothered by Doctor_Why_Bother’s “criticisms.” Note that none of them address the ideas of the blog in any way and focus instead on irrelevant points like writing style and “esoteric” references.

You’ve misunderstood. Those. “Criticisms” you list (which you presumably got from my post no.7) are not so much criticisms as they are tools that TLP uses to intimidate his readers into thinking he knows more than he actually does. It’s an easy trick to pull. The reason most people don’t do it is because most people have more respect for their audiences.

@Cudgel

Not to mention the slightly conspiratorial accusation that he’s trying to come off as smarter than he is (complete with an axiomatized list!)

It’s not “conspiratorial”, it’s bleeding obvious! I know, because I used to pull the same shit in school when I was a teenager, writing like I knew everything and never had to justify a word. If I could go back in time and apologise to my teachers I would.

@Cudgel

When prodded for an example of “real scrutiny”, he clumsily analyzes a metaphor in terms of its math. “It’s not my fault he’s a bad writer!” You don’t like his writing, that’s perfectly fine. But let’s not pretend you’ve made any substantive points.

And let’s not pretend that this is a rebuttal to my point, regardless of its substance, or lack thereof. And clumsily paraphrasing my opinion of his writing skills doesn’t negate the validity of the observation. The guy is working in a written medium and he can’t write. This is a problem for him.

As for the example that I chose, I chose it simply because it happened to be the very first one that I came across. Since then, I’ve also discussed the wisdom of using “agency” as a criterion for bravery, which, as I understand it, is one of the main points of his essay. Of course, I may well not be understanding it, and if I’m not that’s his fault.

@Cudgel

But before I’m accused of being a minion, I’ll freely admit that TLP is not a blog that lends itself easily to first time visitors. Most people have a defensive reaction when they first read him. And most people stick around.

You can’t possibly know if most, or even a fraction, of the people who read his blog stick around. And as for the alleged defensiveness…well, it’s just human nature to disagree with disagreeable people.

[cilla]

Why Bother indeed…

I am a dedicated reader of TLP ever since I stumbled across his blog god knows how, some months ago… and having read many of his recent posts, have grown tired of waiting for new ones and have begun reading from the very beginning, in 2005.

I think it’s safe to assume that he is actually a psychiatrist, yes. Actually his more recent posts are much less directly related to psychiatry in their subject matter, so it’s somewhat understandable that you might suspect he is just posing as one.

However I do think YOU sir are a tad judgmental, beyond your jurisdiction. And let me preface this by saying that I am not trying to sound any more smart than I am, nor do I think TLP does, either. I am actually trying to express something, through the medium of writing yes because how else do you relay a message to be understood remotely? It would basically have to be either an auditory or visual method. So I’m not leaving you a voicemail, I’m writing the message. Forgive me, overlord…

My criticism of how you are coming off is that you read one post and decided to pass all these judgments. Note the subtitle of TLP (it’s relevant) – it’s German for “Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.” Think about it (don’t speak).

That article of his that you reviewed is just one sample, for one thing. The significance of a single standalone sample of a whole body of work or as a representation of an individual should be fairly obvious, as not heavily weighted.

Then there’s the title of the blog which you also went ahead and took the liberty to criticize/complain about, as being “unclear”. Maybe you should take a step back and realize first of all that you are not god, nowhere near, even. Everything is a matter of perception. That’s one thing. So what may not be clear to you… you know… It’s clear to me, for instance. The title “The Last Psychiatrist” never confused me one bit. I interpreted it as something along the lines of being the last true psychiatrist left to take his business seriously enough to apply logical thinking. Not literally THE ONLY LAST SOLE individual but at least one among the few remaining contrary to the nonsensical stupid masses, many of which still become psychiatrists or political figures or most anything.

Over the years his subject matter has shifted further from spot-on psychiatry, and I don’t see any reason to believe that the very act of blogging in itself and for a public audience may change a person at least a little bit, in the sense that the blog is an interface which like any other adds another dimension to reality. I mean this loosely… maybe not the person is changed (whatever that would mean) but his habits or interests in blogging… I’m not the most articulate and I can’t explain myself perfectly but hopefully you get my gist (or at least try and not just immediately resort to being a stuck-up asshole).

He does not claim to be a writer, anyway; he claims to be a psychiatrist. So I don’t know why you’ve got to dog on him for that shit. He’s supposed to be writing a book on porn, but plenty of people who are not “writers” write books, simply because they have something to communicate, document, transmit… And you know what? I think he’s a fine writer (like wine). Plus, you’ve got to take into account for any typos or missed apostrophes or whatever your issue with his writing is, that he’s (from what I gather) drunk most of the time, and bitter. But I think what you find wrong with his writing is more the substance, and the presentation. If he’s too verbose and you don’t buy it and it sounds artificial to you, fine. Perhaps you’re just not used to it. I read plenty (well I used to, not crap neither) hence my ability to BASICALLY write I guess, and I thoroughly enjoy TLP’s blog, obviously, I’m starting from the beginning of the archives…

But you know what the main point is that you are way too critical of something or someone you know way too little about, and you’re way too sure and defensive of your ill-informed opinion.

Which actually goes to show that you’re stupid, careless, full of your own shit. Try not hating without sufficient reason. It’s so not worth the energy.

This is why I drink daily and read TLP too.

You CAN know, it is ENTIRELY POSSIBLE, don’t go on making retarded declarations like you do like an ass – whether people stick around reading his blog. First think about how little is actually IMpossible or that we can be POSITIVE is IMPOSSIBLE. That’s next to nothing. Then – THINK, it doesn’t take much. Clearly you aren’t a scientist or anything. There are comments on his blog. Many of them state that they are long-term readers and discuss topics he posted earlier in relation to current ones or similar scenarios – ample indication of people “sticking around” for more.

Cudgel knows what I’m talking about…

If anyone seems disagreeable, you certainly do. Maybe you should bother with a doctor.

[BlackKnight]

Sir! Sir! My craze-ometer is registering over four hundred milli-timecubes! Requesting back up ASAP.

[joyfool]

Jah. That’s an impressive second post after a year. Jumps right in with calling people assholes and shit. Heh.

[Marley23]

@cilla

Which actually goes to show that you’re stupid, careless, full of your own shit. Try not hating without sufficient reason. It’s so not worth the energy.

cilla, you’re not allowed to insult other posters here. This is a warning: don’t do it again.

@BlackKnight

Sir! Sir! My craze-ometer is registering over four hundred milli-timecubes! Requesting back up ASAP.

I’m not issuing a warning for this one, but you can’t call another poster crazy either. Cut it out.