Riboflavin, the question man

The BBQ Pit
41

See? Right there: you’re obviously in love with him. You can’t even mention his name without fawning over him and throwing yourself in the way to defend him. It’s kinda cute actually, but I think he’s already taken.

Nope, Lib doesn’t. Lib provides the same non-answers and whacky-words to other people, and ignores anyone who calls him on the bullshit. Anyway, since you’ve ignored the direct argument part of what I wrote, you’re only getting flamage now.

No, actually, you don’t post enough that I’d recognize your name. Lib pops into pretty much every Libetarian thread to spout his nonsense, but I don’t really know who you are. Frankly, I just don’t give a rat’s ass.

“Press my lips tightly to his ass and maybe give him some toungue” doesn’t qualify as ‘questioning’ in my book. Did you ‘question’ him on whether you can actually opt-out of libertaria like he claims, on exactly how Libertaria determines who’s a parent and who’s a child and how it deals with kids no one wants to adopt, or any of the other big holes? Oh no, you toss him a few softballs and make sure not to break the seal.

Lib feels that everyone who doesn’t agree with him 100% is an opponent of libertarianism, you may as well brag that Fred Phelps considers you an enemy of morality.

Here’s a simple question: is the one who

Is it just me or are Doper-crushes annoying?

Instead, I’ll just participate in existing threads on libertarianism since I’m interested in them, and I’ll discuss my views there. If Lib wants to run crying like a baby because part of my views disagree with his, that’s his problem, not mine.

This thread. Hell, just your comment below shows it - you’re so in love with Libertarian that you actually think people that he calls ‘opponents of libertarianism’ is a small group!

Keeping in mind that Lib calling someone “an opponent of libertarianism” is not exactly earth-shattering. I’d personalyl call Libertarian one of the biggest opponents of libertarianism around.

I’m so proud of you, here have your cookie back.

[QUOTE]
Very GOOD Ribo! You get an A+ on reading comprehension and a cookie!

I’ll just leave that one in for the previous bit.

Looks like I know you pretty well, since it appears that all of my guesses were spot-on.

If ‘questioning Lib’s assertions’ is ‘acting like a dick’ in your world, then you’ve just provided even more evidence of how tight your lips are locked to his nether regions.

42

Well, I presume Lib didn’t choose to go to the pit because he wanted calm, reasoned debate…

43

I’m going to continue debating about libertarianism, so unless Lib finds a new trick I’ll continue to run across his absurdities and comment on them. I just don’t feel like posting a comprehensive list of the questions that Lib has failed to answer over and over and over and over again.

44

Ribo, I’ve got a bit of list of such threads about Libertarianism over in Lib’s Pit thread about me; nothing comprehensive, but it’s a start. Please do pay a visit and tell me if I’ve missed anything. And please bring pie.

45

Marshalling your rats, Dewey? Perfect.

46

It’s easier than re-typing the same unanswered questions over and over and over again.

47

Lib seems to have the habit of pitting people for difficult questions about quite a few topics, actually :slight_smile:

I can’t believe someone can get so upset and worked-up over people asking questions…

48

Phoenix Dragon

I see what you mean, and that makes sense until you know what the questions are.

Let’s call your philosophy of ethics Idiotism. It is clear to me that As an Idiotist, you advocate murdering children because you hold parents to be responsible for their children. And although you have said that Idiotopia has no gambling casinos, I’m going to just say that it must have them. Also, despite that the status quo has a prison population that is 65% black, with 54% of blacks being sentenced to prison for drug offenses versus 34% of whites, I’m going to posit that Idiotism will be more racially intolerant than the status quo because, well, I just am.

Now, my questions are these:

What do you do with the corspes of the children you murder? Are they buried or are they cremated? Who pays for it? Since Idiotists can’t coerce anyone, do their bodies just pile up on the streets? What if a neighbor is not an Idiotist? Can you murder his child as well, or only your own children?

Supposing that Idiotopia did have gambling casinos, does that mean that I can run around naked in them? Can I stand amongst the high-rollers and masturbate whenever I feel like it? What odds do your casinos pay on blackjack? Are there zoning ordinances that say where they can be buil? Are gambling casino owners allowed to murder children if they wander onto their property?

I reckon that your Idiot philosophy will result in 80% of the prison population being black. Since that will be case, does that mean that Idiotism is intrinsically bigoted? Will your gambling casinos have flashing signs that say “No Niggers Allowed”? Will your laws have special exceptions for murdering black children as opposed to white children, or do you just murder them indiscriminately?

And please hurry with your responses. There’s a full moon in Idiotopia tonight, and I need to know whether I can go to the casino, shoot a black child, and pull out my weenie.

That is what I have been subjected to from Dewey and his rat.

49

Dewey wrote:

Liar. You were pitted for debating in IMHO, not for asking your stupid questions. In the link you provided, the OP asks: “If you wanted a debate, why couldn’t you open a fucking GD thread?”

50

The first sentence of your OP in that MPSIMS thread: “I’ll try to answer any questions I can.”

All I did was ask questions.

You’re so cute when you try to rationalize.

51

You really are adorable when you’re angry.

I already admitted I was a bit difficult on the public nudity question (though I still have some issues with it w/r/t what in the real world would be called nusiance law), mostly because the jokes were totally worth it. But that’s really the only example where I’ve refused to take an axiom of Libertaria as given (in that case, the complete absence of private property).

Outside of that one example (which was what, two or three responses to you in a multi-page thread?), I’ve asked a gaggle of perfectly legitimate questions that do not change the fundamental axioms of Libertaria. Questions which you either dodge or just ignore outright.

(PS, in my prior post, that should be “IMHO” thread. :smack: )

52

I haven’t read the linked thread, but I’ve come across Riboflavin before, and s/he has earned a Guaranteed 100% Knob-End sticker from me.

53

Dewey:

Well, at least now you’re calling it Libertaria. If that sort of progress continues, I’ll read your list of questions one day.

54

:rolleyes:

Well at least now you’re suggesting you’ll read my questions. We can only hope that you’ll deign to actually try to answer them. The world waits with bated breath.

55

At last, I get to make my point. You are not the world.

56

I’m impressed, Lib. I can’t tell where the ad hominem ends and the strawman begins. In any case, it resembles Dewey’s posts in no way except that it uses the same language, and has questions in it.

The questions I’ve seen Dewey posting seem quite reasonable, and the only way they seem to be lacking is when your statements and answers are so vague that more questions have to be asked just to figure out what you meant without having to assume parts of your possition.

I also think “Libertopia” is actually quite an apt name, and not one that sounds derogatory. It seems to make a very valid statement; In an ideal world, a libertarian government would work perfectly. Unfortunatly, that’s not saying much; In an ideal world, communism would work perfectly, too. So would anarchy. The government you’re proposing seems to have some serious flaws, and the questions about those flaws seem to be the ones you’re balking at. You do present “Libertaria” as an ideal, perfect government, but there are still so many questions about perceived flaws that aren’t fully adressed

You’ve been blowing your top a lot lately. Please, try to calm down a little. Of course people are going to debate your ideas if they don’t think they’re right, but that doesn’t mean they’re out to get you.

57

Must…resist…urge…to…parody…USA for Africa lyrics…

58

Phoenix Dragon

Nope. Never.

I’ve said many times that libertarianism does not make any pretense at solving peoples problems for them, but merely seeks to provide them a context in which they can solve them for themselves.

Many, many times.

To say that I present Libertaria as a prefect government is simply either wrongheaded or dishonest. In your case, I hope you’re simply wrong.

I don’t think there are. You put a different standard on me than you do on Dewey. I asked him about the children in America, for example. I gave him four links that showed children abused, neglected, and even completely lost and unaccounted for, not just as anomolies, but as rampant nightmares prevalent in a crippled system of social services. His response? The system isn’t perfect. After that brush-off, he proceded with the same old tail-feather display.

Do you think that if I opened a thread on status quo political ethics and asked a bunch of questions that Dewey would answer them?

I answer all questions that I see from people I believe are sincere. You cannot deny that, at least not honestly. I have hosted whole threads on the topic that I stayed with until people like Dewey and Danielinthewolvesden (now banned) crashed them, not to ask questions, but to derail the discussion.

If you ask me a question, I’ll answer it. But I owe him nothing, and am not required even to read his questions.

59

Lib, I’m curious about something. If, say, I’m talking to someone who doesn’t know much about, say, the Atlanta Braves, or Bruce Lee, or why IMO the american school system is inherently problematic, and they keep asking me questions about it, generally unless they insult me directly or show me they’re not listening to what I’m saying I’ll keep going as long as w’re both interested in discussing it. In the libertaria threads I’ve seen DCU in, I don’t see him as having directly insulted you or purposefully asking questions you’ve answered before unless A) he didn’t see the answer before or B) he had some disagreement with the answer.

That being in mind, what criteria do you have for being willing to continue a debate or IMHO thread or whatever and where do you feel that criteria have not been met by either DCU or Riboflavin? Because I have to say that unwillingness to keep answering questions asked in earnest is a rather poor reason to open a pit thread, IMHO.

60

Certainly, I respect no one more than you, Pun. I believe that I’ve spelled out what I require: simple respect. You say that you do not see disrespect from Dewey, and yet that is all that I have seen since his very first post to me. Here it is in its entirey, from this thread:

It was a response to this post from me in answering Hamlet’s questions:

As you can see, I answered all of Hamlet’s questions. And as you can hopefully see, there was nothing in my post to deserve the derision from Dewey.

Instead of “Soooooooo Lib, what you’re saying is I have an unfettered right to trot about in public naked?”, he might have said, “Can you address issues of behavior on public property?”

Anytime someone starts a response with, “Sooooooooo, what you are saying is…”, it rings a loud bell that a strawman is coming.