GENIUS FORUMS

Yeah, I bet that hurts coming from a guy who calls himself Prince.

Cory Duchesne wrote:Millipodium wrote,

The people over there prefer to villainize instead of engaging honest debate.

From what I read, it didnt seem they were so much trying to villanize you, but they just recognized you as someone who wanted to be villainized. It was clear to them that you were not there to seriously learn and teach, but to piss people off and stir emotional reactions.

Your style Mill is that you come on sadisitically and then get off on the masochism of being crucified by the people you sadistically provoke.

But sure, I still think your funny - but at the same time I know you value emotions more than you value logic.

And so it's hard to take you seriously.

No. Being rational just feels like an attack for these critical thinking impaired nihilistic posers, so they feel it's ok to call me a nazi, or make up fictitious musings re: my backrground.

unwise wrote:mini-podium,

Perhaps you were banned for being a cretin.

I find nothing wrong with Thomas. He's a gentleman. What is wrong with a philosophy collection? Philosophies are like a collection of deserts or photos or bracelets. All pretty and a little different. Makes no difference to the enlightened one. Life is a collection of gems.

You will do well here where arrogance, meanness and vulgarity is prized. It is like a mud fight between boys in knickers and caps at boarding school.

It's called free speech, you dictator-wannabe.

Mil,

You should teach American Government...

mini-p,

Your posts have a certain smell to them. I get smells off people. You remind me of a guy we use to have out here in Seattle. He would dress up in all-black Nazi gear with boots and the hat - the whole bit. He carried a bull horn and a large
Bible with a Gothic silver cross on the front. He also road a black motorcycle with a sidecar. He'd set up all over town and 'preach the word' out of his bullhorn.

I really like it and thought it was a 'bit' - especially after I learned he was gay. Then I met him for a talk which I thought would be very amusing and found out he really WAS insane.

Steven Coyle wrote:Mil,

You should teach American Government...

I do. I just don't get paid, or recognized in any way. And nobody really listens. Hey. this is like public school. You are ALL intelligent, because athletic skill is intelligence these days, according to the multiple intelligences fraud. Being a drama queen is "emotional intelligence", being good at sports, is "athletic intelligence." Being a complete moron, is "idiotic intelligence". Being intelligent according to the actual definition of intelligent means you're a white nerd who deserves to die.

unwise wrote:mini-p,

Your posts have a certain smell to them. I get smells off people. You remind me of a guy we use to have out here in Seattle. He would dress up in all-black Nazi gear with boots and the hat - the whole bit. He carried a bull horn and a large
Bible with a Gothic silver cross on the front. He also road a black motorcycle with a sidecar. He'd set up all over town and 'preach the word' out of his bullhorn.

I really like it and thought it was a 'bit' - especially after I learned he was gay. Then I met him for a talk which I thought would be very amusing and found out he really WAS insane.

It's called the perfume of truth, justice, and the american way.

you're a christian?

Hahaha, wow. Anyone who's not following "The Genius Forum" thread at Thomas Knierim's forum should check it out.

Watch as "namtso" magically transforms from someone who asks one-sentence questions of Dan into someone who can't handle the answers he receives.

See the amazing philosophers shake fists at David for throwing out "sky" (aka "psyche") for altering her posts, and not throwing away "millipodium" for doing nothing, really, when you come to think about it.

Gasp as the astonishing Knierim shows off how, unlike Genius, his forum has rules, and also unlike Genius, they're very careful about "ad hominem" (aka harsh language and insults, which aren't ad hominem at all, which you'd know if you happen to be one of the rare people who know what ad hominem actually is [using irrelevant facts about a person's life to disprove or discredit his argument. Relevant facts, offensive statements, and analogies are logically permissable.]).

It's all happening now at thebigview.com Discussion Board! Don't miss it!

Trevor Salyzyn wrote:Hahaha, wow. Anyone who's not following "The Genius Forum" thread at Thomas Knierim's forum should check it out.

Watch as "namtso" magically transforms from someone who asks one-sentence questions of Dan into someone who can't handle the answers he receives.

See the amazing philosophers shake fists at David for throwing out "sky" (aka "psyche") for altering her posts, and not throwing away "millipodium" for doing nothing, really, when you come to think about it.

Gasp as the astonishing Knierim shows off how, unlike Genius, his forum has rules, and also unlike Genius, they're very careful about "ad hominem" (aka harsh language and insults, which aren't ad hominem at all, which you'd know if you happen to be one of the rare people who know what ad hominem actually is [using irrelevant facts about a person's life to disprove or discredit his argument. Relevant facts, offensive statements, and analogies are logically permissable.]).

It's all happening now at thebigview.com Discussion Board! Don't miss it!

Yes. yes. Step right up.

Hear the egos of the pseudointellectuals crack as they are faced with their own stupidity.

Smell the matter running down the theighs of the mentally feeble as they twitch in fear of being exposed as the frauds they are.

Hurry! Hurry!

It truly is a weird sort of place; no wonder Thomas hardly ever posts. I admit I was a bit shocked (though I know I shouldn't have been) by "namsto"'s seeming turn around. I actually thought there might be a decent convo developing there.

Their viewpoints are typically cartoonish, which is what you get from "religious" Buddhist types.

I definitely feel the same way about TheBigSpew, yep we sure are superior over here at Genius Forum aren’t we boys? Hey I have an idea! Let’s all form a big circle and chant “we are superior!” in the direction of TheBigSpew and we’ll see if those Buddhist girlie men all wet their pants…

Because there’s nothing I enjoy better then witnessing a little urine dripping down a flamboyant Buddhist robe.

Ryan Rudolph wrote:I definitely feel the same way about TheBigSpew, yep we sure are superior over here at Genius Forum aren’t we boys? Hey I have an idea! Let’s all form a big circle and chant “we are superior!” in the direction of TheBigSpew and we’ll see if those Buddhist girlie men all wet their pants…

Because there’s nothing I enjoy better then witnessing a little urine dripping down a gay Buddhist robe.

Is that how enlightened "boys" talk? Is it how "boys" seeking enlightenment talk? Or is it just how little boys talk?

Tell me, oh "superior" one.

Ryan,

Let’s all form a big circle and chant “we are superior!”

I'd rather if everyone formed a big circle around me and chanted "Trevor is superior".

TBV was interesting to read only as long as Dan was participating. But they hooted and booed him away, each and every one convinced that they know what enlightenment is without a single one admitting that they themselves are enlightened, or even interested in enlightenment.

Now Marsha's the spectacle. She's found a new audience to throw all her best lines at. But she doesn't represent Genius forum in the way that Kevin, David, Dan, James, Sue, Steven, Cory, Leyla, or any of the regular main forum posters that my poor memory can't remember, do --- nor does she claim to.

The thing that distinguishes Genius forum from other forums is that almost every person here is willing to believe himself superior, spiritually, to the run-of-the-mill person. I can't imagine someone being attracted to this forum unless he either wants to be superior, or believes himself to be -- and is willing to change his life beyond mere academic beliefs to accomplish/prove this. It may be arrogance, but if so, it's an arrogance that's willing to strive, if necessary, to justify its own arrogance.

Elizabeth wrote:

Is that how enlightened "boys" talk? Is it how "boys" seeking enlightenment talk? Or is it just how little boys talk?

Tell me, oh "superior" one.

Settle down now, It was a joke Elizabeth, I was exaggerating arrogance for comic affect, but I do see the fact that Genius forum is higher quality in terms of the content of philosophy than TheBigView. The quality of the posts are better at Genius Forum because many of the thinkers here are psychologically advanced.

Trevor wrote:

The thing that distinguishes Genius forum from other forums is that almost every person here is willing to believe himself superior, spiritually, to the run-of-the-mill person. I can't imagine someone being attracted to this forum unless he either wants to be superior, or believes himself to be -- and is willing to change his life beyond mere academic beliefs to accomplish/prove this. It may be arrogance, but if so, it's an arrogance that's willing to strive, if necessary, to justify its own arrogance.

I agree with you Trevor, I think their board is a lesser board based on the quality of thought happening there – my joke was exaggerating the arrogant attitude for comic affect. There is a difference between simply seeing that fact of one’s own superiority without emotion compared to gloating in an overly emotional way over one’s superiority.

Both boards have qualities and characteristics that are different from each other, but I could hardly call one superior to the other any more than I could say that a dog or a flea is superior. Humans may prefer dogs over fleas, but the flea can jump hundreds of times its height and does not have to perform tricks or please anyone to get its dinner. The boards, like dogs and fleas, just are what they are.

I must admit that I was surprised by the lack of quality in Thomas Knierim's forum. Given Thomas's personality and love of academic discussion, I was expecting there to be plenty of intelligent, articulate, worldly individuals engaging in robust debate. Instead, the place is almost entirely filled with little babies who can barely string a coherent sentence together.

It is as though Knieirm is running a nursery, which looks very odd.

-

Okay, update.

Sky-aka-psyche's gone back to singing songs that nobody reads.

And namtso is trying to be clever & deceptive again, except this time his trap is more hastily laid than the one he laid for Dan. I've half a mind to jump in and spring the trap myself, then check-mate the guy in three moves*, but I think it'll be far more interesting to see how David handles this.




* Here's the run-down of what it would look like if I got involved:

Move 1 (me): I go for the bait and spring the trap.

Move 1 (him): He is caught off guard by this new arrival. Still on the offensive, he tries to do a cold reading of my character (I don't believe he's careful enough to do enough research for a hot reading). He attacks and misses.

Move 2 (me): Now that he's off-guard, I easily make his attacks look wild and idiotic, and before this post is done, I hit the most glaring of his pressure points (his fragile ego). I even use examples, and go so far as to say it's his biggest roadblock to understanding anything about enlightenment.

Move 2 (him): He's confused as to whether I'm being helpful or hurtful. Like dozens before him, he decides I'm an asshole: not only did I make him look like a fool, I pointed out his greatest weakness for the world to see, and then patted him on the bottom like he's a little child. God, he thinks unconsciously, at least Dan was polite. Falling back on the pseudophilosopher's defense, he claims that I used "ad hominem" (instead of just saying I hurt his feelings).

Move 3 (me): I explain what ad hominem actually is, for the umpteenth time in my life. I explain that I'm just a regular run-of-the-mill asshole who was insulting him, and there's no good reason for him to claim I did something as horrible as commiting a fallacy. Frankly, I'm insulted.

Move 3 (him): He says something to the effect of "you got that right, you really are an asshole". His clever trap sprung in his face, his fragile ego shamed and offended, he refuses to speak with me ever again.

Sounds like a plan, Trevor! Good luck!

milli, with those words of encouragement, I think I'll see if my plan goes flawlessly.

spiritual_emergency spoke up in the meantime and called Genius a cult and whined about the "QRS" treatment of women. I'll handle namtso, because he wants a dirty fight and I fight dirty. David'll have his hands full with s_e

Let the rumble begin!

Wow, round 1 was full of surprises. [Things that relate to round 2 appear in square brackets]

First, spiritual_emergency went after me [but she tried to disengage me by the end of her second post -- I wonder if she'll answer the questions I left in the air]. Clyde jumped out of nowhere and decided to make an unfounded claim about how enlightened people act [but he was easily, and almost accidentally, dismissed by my second post to spiritual_emergency. He had, like s_e, misinterpreted my misuse of the word "spiritual".].

Then there was namtso. I must not have seemed appetizing enough, because as soon as he saw me spring his trap, he attacked David. I can't tell if that's intelligent or not. Hmmm... I'll come up with an analogy, and let ya'll decide.

If you lay a deer-trap, and a rabbit jumps into it and sets it off, do you still attack the unharmed deer? Or do you settle for rabbit-stew?

Trevor Salyzyn wrote:milli, with those words of encouragement, I think I'll see if my plan goes flawlessly.

spiritual_emergency spoke up in the meantime and called Genius a cult and whined about the "QRS" treatment of women. I'll handle namtso, because he wants a dirty fight and I fight dirty. David'll have his hands full with s_e

Let the rumble begin!

Yes. It's a cult of free speech and toleration of opposing viewpoints.

millipodium wrote:

sschaula wrote:Disagree.

I think he's about the same as the rest of us. I wouldn't call him names, or make fun of his website. We're all just human..and stupid.

He's an intolerant tool who applies a different standard of enforcement to those who disagree with the brainlessness of his bevy of retarded posters.

I will call him names. I will make fun of his website.

Who do you think you are? You might have something intelligent to say, but the first thing I read was your insults of a fine person, making my first impression of you, extremely low. Not a good introduction to the the forums at all.

The moderators don't attempt to control the content of this forum. Here we want to be as open as we can, and most of us are at a level where insults are completely meaningless. They want the forum to be highly masculine in nature and with that comes a bit of juvenile masculine competition.

The above is just a couple of guys having a bit of fun, recognising that those they are talking about are doing the same, but may not realise it.

Why do you believe "Virtue is strength". Here we are amoral, which does not mean we are bad people, but that we choose ourselves what is the right or wrong action to take.

Jamesh wrote:Here we are amoral, which does not mean we are bad people, but that we choose ourselves what is the right or wrong action to take.

One can not turn morality on and off like a light switch. Morality pertains to conciousness. One may have a lapse in judgement which could be an amoral act in a moral person, but guys have been using this thread like a war room. They come in here, talk their plan of attack, go out, act like human beings, then come back to the war room for updates. In such a case, it is obvious that these behaviors are just "acting" like human beings.

People who think that people must choose sides with other human beings are often confused by me because I respond to behaviors rather than just bandy up with a clique or give allegiance to a mortal. I still love the people and will treat them accordingly, but part of that love is reminding them of the truth and spreading understanding. Truth and understanding do not occur as a result of taking on one demeanor in one thread and another demeanor someplace else.

Granted there are different expectations of decorum in different places, but that is quite different from morality.