Lib's 'Innocent Comments'

Right. You can claim to have cornered the market on principle and reason to the same extent and with the same justification you can claim all the esteemed individuals listed above are Libertarians – which is to say, to no extent at all.

Since you’re so fond of the non-coercion prinicle, I must warn you that you’re coercing me into concluding you’re a gasbag who makes indefensible gross generalizations rather than responding reasonably to something that was originally a very minor – and justified – criticism.


Jodi

Fiat Justitia

Lib, I have some comments that are tangentially related to this discussion, but which, frankly, I’d rather discuss in e-mail. I, as a moderator, can get access to your e-mail address (I already have it, in fact, because I was going to e-mail you about something officially board-related which got straightened out before I had a chance to actually send the mail). However, I am hesitant to use it for something like this for obvious reasons. If it is ok for me to e-mail you on this subject, please let me know here (or e-mail me). If you would prefer to discuss it here instead, I can do that as well.

Please let me know.

David:

I don’t mind if you e-mail me, but I won’t be able to pick it up until in the morning.

Jodi:

I was only kidding. C’mon. Isn’t that statement (I can’t help that Libertarians are the only people who operate from principle and reason) obviously ridiculous?

Yep, it sure is. The ridiculous is quite often offered up in all seriousness around here, however, so I don’t think ridiculousness alone is enough to clue people in that you’re kidding. If it was, my response to manny posts would be a simple “WAHAHAHAHAHA!” Perhaps you comment could have benefitted from a more obvious inclusion of humor, or – dare I suggest – the dreaded smilie? Not that toothy one, though; it creeps me out.


Jodi

Fiat Justitia

You’re right, that statement is ridiculous, but people have, do and will believe things that are ridiculous.

Take public property, for example. It was you or some other libertarian who stated either that there really is no such thing as public property or that there should not be any such thing. (If you haven’t stated this, I apologize in advance.)

I do all my posting at the Public Library. So I guess that means you will ignore all my postings in the future? BTW, it was Benjamin Franklin who proposed the establishment of public libraries. He recognized that this small investment in taxes could do much to promote the dissemination in information and help defeat ignorance.

Which is why we’re all here, right?

(BTW, I was going to respond to a question you asked me over in GD, in the Atheism thread, but I just simply forgot to do so!) :o


>< DARWIN >
__L___L

If Phaedrus were here, he’d say “That’s proof that jab1 and jodih are one and the same! They posted near-identical comments at nearly the same time! Give me a month and I’ll explain why I don’t have time to explain my reasoning!”

I said I’d never directly answer Phaedrus again. I did not say I would quit taunting him! :stuck_out_tongue:


>< DARWIN >
__L___L

David:

I am going to go ahead and send you an e-mail from where I am so you can go ahead and e-mail me whatever it is you wanted to. I would like to go ahead and see it this afternoon. Can you send it right away? As soon as this posts, I’ll click on your e-mail thing.

This above is my idea of a response with punch. Lets get off of poor libs back and read posts like this where we can learn something.

Rufus sed:

What about Limpy the Three-Toes hawk? Or Jim, the North Dakotan Dipsomaniac hawk? Hudson Hawk? Stringfellow Hawk? Hawkeye Pierce, or Max the Circus Sideshow Hawker, or the Seattle Seahawks? Or that guy hawking a sticky green-clam lung-butter projectile lands-in-the-hair-and-stays loogie on the corner every day at noon? Do you know anything about them? How do you know they don’t use handsaws?

I know hawks. Until you’ve known hawks, which obviously, by your ignorance, yin that ou’ve failed to delve into the intrinsic socio/psychological morass which is the kindgom of hawkdom, you don’t, you’d better back off and leave me alone.

…and you’d better not notice my asinine typo, either!!!

Or anyone else, for that matter!!!

WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT TYPOS, ANYWAY?!?!!?!?

Rotten, rotten people everywhere, and not a drop to drink.

Jab said:

Yeah, like there’s some guy around here who actually believes he saw that Newlywed Game where a contestant said… Ow! Hey! Who’s throwing those tomatoes? I hate tomatoes!

David:

There was no e-mail here this morning from you at my registered address, nor did I get anything yesterday afternoon from you at the address that Edlyn and I use at her house, which I e-mailed to you, unless you didn’t send it until well into the evening after I left.

Thanks, Firefly, for ruining my SD experience

Even Phaedrus had the decency to forward me an e-mail through TubaDiva when he had something personal to say to me. But you elected not to take the decent route. Instead, you projected your own psychosis onto me, saying that I put you “in the position between letting your ideological did stand unchallenged, or disrupting a thread that has nothing to do with your remark in order to contest it.”

Not only did you imagine some sort of dig on my part, but you blamed me for your own petty struggle with your conscience that ensued.

So, you dragged me over to the Pit and opened a thread with my name in it for the purpose of taking shots at me. But it wasn’t enough for you to take shots by yourself, otherwise you would have forwarded an e-mail. Nope, you wanted the reassurance of what you were doing by making your grievance public so that you could be joined by others to make a public record of Lib’s flogging.

You were so unsure of yourself that you needed the confirmation of others. Gaudere understood, as she expressed in one of the threads in GD, that I see the world — see the world, Firefly — through my libertarian glasses. But you didn’t, so you started a thread in the Pit. Poly understood my remark about trespassing from the citation you made in the OP. But you didn’t, so you just had to haul off and make a mountain out of a molehill, hoping that you could summon an army to back you up.

Then, just when I thought your moral masturbation might be finishing out, David B put up an ominous post, saying that he had something so dreadful to say to me that he would rather say it privately.

I was struck immediately with a galvanizing anxiety that has hung over me like a bad flu ever since he posted it. Disarmed, I told him to go ahead and e-mail me. I couldn’t imagine what it might be. Is there some skeleton in my closet that I cannot remember? Will he inform me of some awful fact? Has he decided that I am not worth the trouble he went through for me in the “Up the Butt” thread? What?

Is there any greater anxiety than being told by someone you admire, “I need to talk to you later.”? Hardly. You wait, and you wonder, and you go over thing after thing that it might be. Could it be this? Could it be that? So, after considering it a bit, I went ahead and e-mailed him from Edlyn’s home computer, and asked him to respond that afternoon.

But he didn’t. So, after a sleepless night I come into my office at about 5:30 AM to retrieve the dreaded e-mail.

Nothing.

So, I’m still waiting. Still anxious. Still tied up in knots, not knowing what horrible news or fate might await me. I can’t post anything anywhere on GD because I’ve lost the heart for it. I’m just waiting. If he sends it here after I leave, then I won’t have access to it until next week. If he sends it to Edlyn’s, then I won’t have access to it until this afternoon.

Anyway, I suppose there is some balance in the whole thing. My anxiety is no doubt offset by your vindication. My dubious position by your glorified one. My sadness by your joy.

I can forgive you for this. After all, even the Crusaders and the Inquisitors thought they were doing God’s work. I suppose I just need to spend some time in prayer, which is something I rarely do, except that presently, I am in daily prayer for something I am doing for Glitch. Maybe this is all a part of that, for all I know.

So bang bang you shot me. Now I’m falling. You got what you wanted. Is it over now, or will you want to kick my corpse?

Lib said:

I did. 9:34 PM Central Time. I’m not sure why you haven’t yet received it as of 6 this morning, though. I replied to the e-mail you sent me, so it went to that address…

But, jeez man, it ain’t worth losing sleep over! :slight_smile:

I mean, lots of people get to be the subjects of Pit threads. Hell, I’ve had at least 3 or 4 of 'em, and they weren’t nearly as nice as folks have been in this one! Yet I’ve never lost a moment’s sleep from any of them.

David:

Okay, I guess Edlyn already picked it up last night. I told her it might be coming. I tried to pull it in here this morning by setting up her account, but nothing came in, so she must have picked it up. I have a feeling I’ll be leaving work early today. I love you, David, and I hope that whatever it is, I’ll be able to salvage myself in your eyes.

Lib, I think you are misinterpreting RT here. You are generally well-liked and respected on this board, but RT (and some others) thought you had a habit that was quite annoying. They brought it up, not to say “Libertarian is a horrible person” but to say “This is how you can improve your debating style.” RT is not some evil mustachioed villain cackling over your misery, and just because he objects to a single trait of yours does not mean he objects to you.

I am sorry you have been so upset. Truly, try to see this thread as a sign of respect. If you were not, aside from this one little thing, and excellent and thoughtful poster, who would have bothered to bring any of this up? We do not try to improve the debate style of those whom we genuinely think are irredeemable jerks, only those whom we think are worthwhile.
“The more we love our friends, the less we flatter them; it is by excusing nothing that pure love shows itself.” - Molière

Gaudere:

Two issues have arisen here about me, as I see it. I might be wrong, but my understanding is that (1) I am to stop making comments that are filtered through my ethic and (2) I am to stop being so bullyish with my delivery.

Number 2 I can fix (notice above paragraph), but number 1, I’m sorry, but I just can’t do anything about that. You said in GD that you thought I could have made the observation I made without any reference to the Noncoercion Principle. While you might be right, I could see no way to make the point that God does not coerce without making the point that God does not coerce.

Do you see what I mean?

Right now, I’ll just be glad to get to Edlyn’s house and dispense with that e-mail. I thoroughly dread it, and it scares me to death. But just like I knew when I was a kid what Daddy would do when he got home, I’ll just have to wait for the minutes to tick by. God is so lucky to be an eternal being.

Oh, don’t worry about what David might have said. He’s not scary, really. He’s like the rest of us, he sometimes gets peeved about something someone else does and takes them to task. If David or RT or I were ever perfect then perhaps you might have reason to feel really terrible about a rebuke, but this is simply one flawed human saying to another, “Hey, check out this flaw!”. You are perfectly free to rebuke us, too, and if some others chime in and agree that the problem you have noticed is significant, then we should attempt to fix it. I wish I could somehow help you see that someone pointing out something you do that they object to is not a terrible attack on you as a person!

I don’t think it is as much an issue with the way you see the world, although I am afraid that you focus on libertariansm so much that you cannot see the merit and point of views of other people’s political systems. The problem seems to be that you try awfully hard to get your little digs in. My favorite time was in the “infinity” thread, where you for some reason felt compelled to post “I don’t see how an atheist can believe in infinity; it’s just so mystical.” I mean, it’s a bit of a stretch to work in a dig at atheism in a MATH thread, fercrisesakes! It would be like me commenting in a “psychic powers” thread “I don’t see how a Christian could disbelieve in psychic powers; I mean, that’s the logical position to take.”

Lib, I’m going to ignore everything you said above except one.

I had intended to resolve this through email. You didn’t list an address. I didn’t know, at the time, that moderators would consider forwarding an email to an individual whose address wasn’t in their profile. So I moved the discussion here, rather than mess up the GD thread that spawned it.

Make that two, Lib: you appear to be blaming David’s email on me. I haven’t had any communication of any sort with David since the beginning of this tempest-in-a-teapot. I haven’t asked him to say anything to you, nor do I have any idea what he’s emailing you. He didn’t ask me about it, and I didn’t ask him to act. He just is doing whatever he is doing, in his role as moderator. OK?