Latest Diablo 3 News
DiabloWiki Updates
Page 5 of 13 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 130
  1. #41
    IncGamers Member jmervyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    12,934

    Re: Board of education claims intellectual ownership of pupils' school work... ehh wh

    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    Anarchy is against rulers, not rules.
    Quote Originally Posted by krischan View Post
    Anarchy is against rules as well. It's more about acting out of a common conviction of a certain kind without the needs of rules. Rules are what's made by rulers, the term itself says it.
    Kris is correct here; it doesn't matter how many layers of lipstick you're attempting to apply to that particular pig.

    Oh, and thanks for establishing that you're of the craven, hypocritical, malevolent second variety - "rules for thee but not for mee".

    Quote Originally Posted by krischan View Post
    Anarchy is a nice idea, but it will never happen, except humans evolve into something else then they are today and I'm not sure if that's desirable.
    It's not even nice, really. The Founders recognized how destructive actual anarchy is, even in their explicitly moral populace - bear in mind that all the states bordered the "Frontier", which wasn't so much wilderness as the lawless Appalachian Mountains and beyond (it was known land, partially settled and populated). It's why they made statements that support the "Christian Nation" claim; if you have an immoral populace (as we now do) there's no reason for it to not scavenge itself, particularly if it can't turn outwards or 'upwards'.

    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    Anarcho-capitalists (of which I consider myself) still believe in rules and the enforcement of same, we just don't believe that a monopoly on violence should be given to an elite group of corrupt and well-connected sociopaths.
    Firstly, you explicitly stated that you were an <anarchist>, rather than that stupid contradictory label you use now. Secondly, the reason anarchy contradicts capitalism is that there's no reason for commerce in a world where "might makes right".

    I despise you for that sort of self-serving, contradictory thinking, and always will. I may be a hypocrite in working for "The Man", but you desire to crap on your fellows without paying the penalty.

    I think I will have to read Auberon Herbert, who's mentioned in the first link. He supposedly 'went beyond' Rothbard's thinking; I'll need to see for myself.

  2. #42

    Re: Board of education claims intellectual ownership of pupils' school work... ehh wh

    Quote Originally Posted by jmervyn View Post
    Oh, and thanks for establishing that you're of the craven, hypocritical, malevolent second variety - "rules for thee but not for mee".
    Not sure I understand this "critique". Can you elaborate?

    Firstly, you explicitly stated that you were an <anarchist>, rather than that stupid contradictory label you use now.
    Anarcho-capitalism is a subset of anarchism (as opposed to anarcho-communism, for example). I am also a libertarian, voluntaryist, and probably a few other terms floating about. There is nothing contradictory about these definitions.

    Secondly, the reason anarchy contradicts capitalism is that there's no reason for commerce in a world where "might makes right".
    Might no more "makes right" in an anarchist system than it does in the current system.

    you desire to crap on your fellows without paying the penalty.
    Again, I'm not sure where you're coming form here. Elaborate?

  3. #43
    IncGamers Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    3,687

    Re: Board of education claims intellectual ownership of pupils' school work... ehh wh

    Quote Originally Posted by krischan View Post
    I won't read these books, but which mechanisms are meant to assign leadership to certain people? I'm pretty sure that any working mechanism supports sociopaths to a greater extent than "good guys". Anarchy is a nice idea, but it will never happen, except humans evolve into something else then they are today and I'm not sure if that's desirable. The interesting thing about all the theories of anarchy and similar societies is how to achieve that evolution. How is it meant to be achieved in those books?
    It's all explained in the first minute of this video.


  4. #44
    IncGamers Member jmervyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    12,934

    Re: Board of education claims intellectual ownership of pupils' school work... ehh wh

    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    Not sure I understand this "critique". Can you elaborate?
    Sure. When you call me a coqsucker because I'm defending your rights, and then proceed to deny the accurate terminology of the political view you claim membership of, I can consign you to the hypocritical, despicable category which I mentioned earlier:

    "Those are people who think anarchy is great for them, yet are reliant upon the civil obedience of the larger body politic. It's those people who are nothing better than parasites (similar to my mention of Atheists as parasitic upon the moral standards of the larger society). This mindset speaks to the arrogance and selfishness of the individual professing the belief - their "evil", if you will."

    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    Anarcho-capitalism is a subset of anarchism (as opposed to anarcho-communism, for example).
    As shown in the earlier link (from an actual Anarchist's view, no less), it is masturbatory fantasy to pretend that anarcho-capitalism is in any way valid thinking.
    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    I am also a libertarian, voluntaryist, and probably a few other terms floating about. There is nothing contradictory about these definitions.
    You're apparently the President of the "full of shyte" club as well. IF you were Libertarian, you wouldn't claim to be an Anarchist. Anarcho-Libertarians may have a hard row to hoe, but at least they have a logical if stupidly arrived at stance. Likewise Voluntaryist (which, while IMO similar to the wanckier true Anarchist view, at least holds some moral water). Therefore, you're the cancerous tumor safely ensconced in the rule-following society.
    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    Might no more "makes right" in an anarchist system than it does in the current system.
    That's about the biggest load of crap I've seen you shovel, and I've seen you shovel quite a bit. In Anarchy, Might inherently makes Right. It's my right to take your stuff because you're a little crapweasel and I can kick your arse, therefore you don't have any legitimate claim otherwise other than self-defense. In other systems, such as Libertarian-oriented ones (but not so much Voluntaryism) the concept of fair dealing is enforced by some agreed-upon mechanism, generally considered akin to "Law" or "Rules". Anarchists, which you claim to be, DON'T HAVE RULES.
    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    Again, I'm not sure where you're coming form here. Elaborate?
    Well, I could <actually> call you a crapweasel, as you previously claimed I suck my own genitals as part of my Oath - but that hardly seems legitimate by OTF standards. Plus it would be an insult to weasels.

  5. #45

    Re: Board of education claims intellectual ownership of pupils' school work... ehh wh

    We simply seem to have different definitions of anarchy, and I'm sure we'll continue to disagree on that issue. That's all fine and dandy, but to pretend this has some weight of argument for or against any particular idea is nothing more than rhetorical masturbation, so let's step back a bit from the labels (that we are obviously not going to agree on) and start from a different spot:

    I know that you, to your credit, are opposed to the government take-over of healthcare in this country. Explain to me, using as many philosophical and/or utilitarian arguments as you can come up with, why this is.

  6. #46
    IncGamers Member jmervyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    12,934

    Re: Board of education claims intellectual ownership of pupils' school work... ehh wh

    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    We simply seem to have different definitions of anarchy, and I'm sure we'll continue to disagree on that issue.
    That's because you pretend it is something it is not. I'm using the textbook definition.
    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    That's all fine and dandy, but to pretend this has some weight of argument for or against any particular idea is nothing more than rhetorical masturbation, so let's step back a bit from the labels (that we are obviously not going to agree on) and start from a different spot:
    No. Any mental or verbal fapping is yours and yours alone. Perhaps that's why I didn't take kindly to your calling me a genital-gobbler? I do not believe you and yours have any credibility, and that you're nothing but a bunch of poseurs - not substantially different from the OWS cretins, except that you're slightly less likely to eventually be in my cross-hairs.
    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    I know that you, to your credit, are opposed to the government take-over of healthcare in this country. Explain to me, using as many philosophical and/or utilitarian arguments as you can come up with, why this is.
    Nice - so you lose credibility, look like the gobshyte you are for calling me names when I point out the chestnut from the very Tree of Liberty associated with keeping America free, and yet <I> have to defend the latest gob of feces you throw at me to distract?

    Sorry, won't play in your monkey cage. John Stossel or CATO have plenty of completely legitimate answers for you; go ask them to dance. I'm disgusted.

  7. #47
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    51

    Re: Board of education claims intellectual ownership of pupils' school work... ehh wh

    I decided to..., in lack of better words, bite the bullet, and read through this topic, thinking I may have misunderstood something. I personally am all for discussing and reading about opinions regarding intellectual property, but that's not what this topic is about at all, which my resume will illustrate: Topic - Intellectual Property / First few post about subject / Saro posts a link / Jmerv Disagrees with the message / Saro Disagrees with Jmerv's disagreement. // So far a nice and interesting topic // LoZ comments further on Saro's statement / Jmerv Disagrees // Quote War over a disagreement which has nothing to do with the topic between Jmerv and LoZ // Jmerv refers to Steve / Steve goes "what?" // Off Topic Quote War between Steve and Jmerv about politics // I comment about the thread trend, noticing how Jmerv is part in every off-topic quote war in this thread, basically ruining it, at least for those who wants to discuss intellectual property // Some off-topic discussion between Krischan (moderator!) and stilman based on an, for the topic, irrelevant example // Jmerv tries to start a quote war with me and Saro, manages to do so with Saro... funny note, Jmerv writes in a thread about Intellectual Property
    Quote Originally Posted by Jmerv
    Intellectual Property? Who T.F. cares about intellectual property? I'm talking survival
    Quote War between Saro and Jmerv, where every post starts with a disagreement upon what they're actually discussing!!! This is not including the use of words Jmerv uses, words which would get him send out of class if he was in public school, not something I think anyone deserves to read. But it's not only Jmerv, because you all accept the quote wars he offers, and makes the thread semi-unreadable for every other participant, even if they've interest in whatever off topic stuff you start discussing... As such I've decided that this is not a place for me, it's great you guys have a lot of stuff you like to discuss, and I'd like to discuss them with you, heck I could even ignore that you tend to go way too much into detail missing the big picture and tend to quote single points in stead of writing an opinion based on the topic, but when you're selfishly forcing your own interest into topics which have nothing to do with them, then you're basically taking a dump on someone's thread, and I won't be part of such debating style. Though I got to ask, what makes you guys come back here?

  8. #48
    IncGamers Member jmervyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    12,934

    Re: Board of education claims intellectual ownership of pupils' school work... ehh wh

    Quote Originally Posted by KrimLjubljana View Post
    Though I got to ask, what makes you guys come back here?
    First thing that came to <my> mind was, did Kris die and leave this thread to you in his will? I'll have to send flowers.

    However, since you're apparently enough of a stranger to both the forums and paragraph structure, despite having a join date of 2010, I'll cut you some slack. This is what happens on the OTF. YOU may have decided this thread is about IP, but that's not the only issue that Kris was discussing. Plus, we've done the IP issue to death over the years (I happen to be one of the "free" advocates, as a supporter of FOSS) so this was just as easily a thread about the blatant stupidity of the American public education system as it was about IP.

    As it happens, Saro opened the ball with turning the topic to considering others to be tools, as is his wont, with his YouTube clip. You didn't join the discussion until the second page, and did so with a personal attack against me. Yay! Considering how many people have come & gone on the forums, I imagine you don't realize just how pointless and hollow your threat about storming off in a huff really is in the grand scheme of things.

    Lastly, I like the way you claim we're forcing our own interest into topics that have nothing to do with them. We've discussed the term "sophistry" in another thread; shall we discuss "irony" in this one? Or do you have something at all worthwhile to contribute rather than biatching about my posts? There's no reason in the universe you couldn't have steered the topic to IP, but instead you chose primarily to complain about my argument with Saro and incorrectly claim that he didn't fancy himself an anarchist.

    Who's better, the person who makes, argues, and defends statements, or the person who complains about the other person? You sound very much like posters in the incgamers GuildWars OTF; rather than defend their own views in the rough & tumble of argument, they whinge and blame and cry foul.

  9. #49

    Re: Board of education claims intellectual ownership of pupils' school work... ehh wh

    Quote Originally Posted by jmervyn View Post
    Perhaps that's why I didn't take kindly to your calling me a genital-gobbler?
    You were, so to speak, tooting your own horn. But if I really offended you that badly, I apologize. I think you know that your posting style rubs me the wrong way completely, but I'm going to make a concerted effort from here on out to stay more civil than I have been in the past. Call it a new year's resolution.

    I do not believe you and yours have any credibility
    Credibility in what sense? Do we agree that 2 and 2 make 4? Does my saying it make it less so?

    and yet <I> have to defend the latest gob of feces you throw at me to distract?
    Defend what? I'm fairly certain you and I agree on the issue of government-run healthcare, so it seemed like a good place to start and work backwards form there. I wasn't looking for a dissertation or anything; just a quick list off the top of your head.

  10. #50
    IncGamers Member Stevinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    chicagoland
    Posts
    5,003

    Re: Board of education claims intellectual ownership of pupils' school work... ehh wh

    Quote Originally Posted by jmervyn View Post
    Sure. Point being, the Democrats have exploitation nearly being part of their Party platform, all the while shrieking about non-existent examples of it on the part of the GOP.
    http://www.democrats.org/democratic-national-platform
    Please quote where that is, because i missed it, and all that happy talk is making me want to puke.


    the South didn't suddenly 'stop' being Democrat any more than it suddenly stopped being racist.
    http://www.politico.com/2012-electio...resident/2012/

    Results seem to say otherwise. Red=GOP

    I adore the way your vile bias seeps from every pore. Say, did you know that the Democrats are the ones who generally practice politics from the pulpit?
    Both parties do, its absurd that you think only one does. Also, since the status quo is that you need those churches to win, the churches will continue to get special tax privileges that they shouldn't. We can quibble over whether that's corruption or just life in a system where everything has a price, but it's not untrue.

    All the old racists are Democrats. Only one of them can even be remotely labeled conservative, and that was Zell Miller.
    I'll grant you that there are many Black Democrats that use an inverse racist rhetoric to garner votes. It's part of the same affirmative action BS that says I, someone who never owned a slave, who's family never owned a slave, should be disadvantaged for someone who can trace part of their lineage to slavery, because someone else abused their ancestors. I'm not denying that Democrats use race. I am disagreeing that democrats use the type of racism you're accusing them of. It's not the Dems that generate headlines like these:

    http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog...heir-own-words
    Same story. different source
    http://www.katv.com/story/19753982/r...y-arkansas-rep

    Also for the record, I reject both appeals. The goal is a colorblind society, where all races and are treated equally in the eyes of the law.


    Well, I can quote chapter & verse examples of ongoing Democrat racism, but there's not enough room in the thread. The link isn't handy, but one of my favorite recent examples was when some stupid mainstream Left media twat claimed that ethnicity was a social construct - that "feeling" black is as valid as "being" black.
    I can't say i understand what that means. "feeling black"? WTF?!


    It is fair, however, to say that welfare is racist because it was INTENDED to trap black people. Since it was, welfare IS racist.
    There you go again....

    (another kooky conspiracy theory)

    False again - and I even have a fitting personal anecdote. My wife applied for welfare once, and not only was denied but got the stink-eye from the welfare queens plus the bureaucrats running the office.
    Are you contending that she didn't get it because she was white (or non-black)?

    I was going to call her too classy for welfare here, but I was worried you'd take it as a sarcastic rip on you. Anyway, your wife is almost positively an incredibly impressive woman for putting up with you. i hope you don't fisk her as you do me. oh, and since it's V-Day, hope you two have a happy one. Seriously.

    Go watch the Kardashians; maybe there's a 'wardrobe malfunction' scheduled tonight.
    YOu really do bring up the kardashans a lot. i think you're developing an fixation.

    Anyway, Dmac's ladyfriend doesn't watch that. She makes us watch what I'm asuming to be the worst shows on television. "shahs of sunsets" and "Mob wives". UGH. I generally go upstairs or play on my ipad until it's over. Complete mind rot.


    Not at all, for those of us who actually have open minds.
    No i meant it's surprising that Ann who i've only seen rambling on about her faith and writing books that go after the left would be pro-*** marriage. It's also a bit weird that you're proud of her for it when you hold the...positions that you do on that topic. I feel like I missed a punchline or something.

    Here's a sampler. Of course, people such as yourself like to remain ignorant of the heavy loading Google and Yahoo! do against "right"-leaning sites; I had to wade through four pages of Leftist pus before I found that extremely mild and nondescript personal blog entry.
    *groan, yes, Google's algorithm is a vast left wing conspiracy. But don't blame Larry and Sergey, it was the contrails that made them do it.



    An Atheist, of course, and of course you did, and I prefer hummus anyway.
    Actually, I think you can spell it couple ways, because when i google mine version it works. I've heard both are very good for you, and super tasty. shove them both in a pita with some grilled chicken thighs (lazy person's shwarma) and you have a great summer meal that's really easy to make. i even went to caputos last summer and grabbed some tahini and made that sauce too. not as good as the rest of it, but still, super easy and tasty. i never got stuff like that when i was a kid.

    Anyway, PPPBBBTTTT! to your sass.

    She was actually demonstrating the inconsistency of Leftist thought; the motivation doesn't matter whether it's a "hate crime" or whether "the Devil made you do it". Motivation should not be admissible regarding culpability, and frequently not even regarding the sentencing phase.
    Well, I dunno. I kinda agree, kinda don't. If you think the devil made you kill someone, you're crazy, and I would treat you as such. I'm not saying you still don't get the death penalty, but whatever we do with you, you're never getting back out on the street.


    If you killed a home invader, you won't be found guilty of the same crime as popping a cap in a bodega clerk, but as far as Leftists are concerned the former deserves a death sentence and the latter deserves dismissal of all charges.
    i know where you're going with this, but I think you should be able to kill a home invader, even if they are unarmed. That's not a crime, in my mind. Once you've broken into my home, you're a clear and present danger to anyone there. It's essentially self defense--even if you're defending someone else, or the possibility of defending someone else.

    Shooting someone during a robbery is at least 2nd degree murder. Really first because you had to have intent to bring the gun. i suppose it's possible they had a gun and you took it from them and killed them, that would be second i guess, but either way, you're never getting out.

    I should have realized you couldn't grasp any comedy other than that issued to you by the State. Here, I'm sure you think Chris Rock is hilarious.
    Obama is NOT my boss.

    More fool you. Why do you think I throw out that disclaimer every so often? I can be jailed, or at least fired, if I don't openly support it.
    ?


    In short, women have been 'in combat' often, there's already an extensive quota regimen that is publicly denied (including extensive first-hand evidence), women do not and will not meet the same standard, and enlisted women generally weasel out of their responsibility using sex as an excuse. This issue is being pushed almost exclusively by the Leftist "feminazis" who want to destroy our military effectiveness in the name of social experimentation. Unlike the false comparison they generally make with civil rights, minorities were in front line combat for decades prior to changes in the U.S. Army's official position. OTOH, the foul N.O.W. types who are pushing this will ensure that it remains on an unequal footing, because if women become eligible for the draft then suddenly their gravy train screeches to a halt.
    If you say so, but that's not my position. Just like the firefighters, I think there should be a bar set, and everyone, black white, male female, should be tested against that one bar. Any separate standards would be "separate but equal". If women can't meet the physical requirements, then they don't get those jobs. That's not discrimination, that's life.



    Dogcatchers don't count.
    Really? You know who I voted for? I doubt you could fill it in even if I told you which district--which i'm not.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •