User talk:AD

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Archives for this talk page: <1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, (new)

Contents

[edit] Booooooooooks!

A favorite blogger of mine has interesting post on "difficult books" that I thought you'd like. Star of David.png Radioactive Misanthrope 22:55, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

I read the Millions post on this same subject; I agree with the criticisms here. Thanks for the link!--ADtalkModerator 23:41, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
What, no Principia Mathematica? No Twilight? Weaksauce. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 11:32, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
I think it's assumed that it's not simple difficulty, which is an easy thing to take out of bounds (like by trying the Braille section). Principia is not really a "book" in the sense I'd mean - which is, I suppose, a text read for pleasure. I think, anyway.
Twilight is the most painful book to read!
For myself, I think that the first list just demonstrated a lack of depth from the writer - those aren't particularly representative of books that are worthwhile yet difficult. It looks likely that they just happen to be difficult books that the writer had read.
Any top ten list like this should just be Finnegan's Wake, ten times.--ADtalkModerator 13:01, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Books redux

You said a while back that you were open to recommendations for books on the Israel-Palestine conflict, so here I am. I've finished reading The Accidental Empire, by Gershom Gorenberg, and The Bible Unearthed, by Israel Finkelstein. (Both are available for the Kindle as well as more traditional dead tree formats.)

I liked Accidental Empire. Really liked it. It was my first exposure to a history book outside of a textbook, and I was struck by just how good the writing is. Gorenberg also makes historical figures seem like flawed, living human beings, rather than carved chess pieces in a game we already know the outcome to. But it also made me uncomfortable. Even after years of being an atheist and hearing by brother's rants about Israel, the impression of Israel as the Holy Land was not completely killed until I was partway through this book. The Israeli settlements were born in a legal and moral gray area, a product of zealots, old men reliving past glories, misplaced priorities, political games, and calculated brutality. I actually had to take a break from reading it every few pages, I couldn't bear the destruction of so much of the Israel mythos I'd been raised with. I think that's what makes it a good book.

I enjoyed Bible Unearthed, though not without qualification. After the exhaustively sourced and carefully-thought-out Accidental Empire, it's a bit much for me to swallow Finkelstein's assertions that such-and-such Biblical story is a metaphor for the relationship between two specific ancient nations. There are moments where he comes across a touch breathless (though it's the breathlessness of an academic who's spent years building a body of evidence for his hypothesis, not twelve-year-old-who-just-met-their-favorite-band breathless — it's an amusing contrast to an interview I found of him where he sounds like a grumpy old man). The book's prose feels bland compared to Accidental Empire, and Finkelstein's recaps of sections from the Bible are the most skimmable paragraphs I've come across in a long time, but at its core, the book is a fascinating exploration of the archeological basis for an ancient Jewish kingdom. I appreciated how, in the process of discussing the development of Judea and Israel through history, Finkelstein utterly demolishes the historical argument for Israel's modern borders (an argument that unfortunately sees much more use than it deserves). But mostly, I enjoyed the book for how it echoes the more modern history in Accidental Empire — in both ancient and modern Israel, zealots with messianic delusions twisted history and politics to expand the borders of a nation, only to be stalled by war and foreign pressures.

I highly recommend The Accidental Empire, even if you're not especially interested in Israeli history. It's a discomforting exploration of the messy politics, strategic apathy, and acceptable brutality that defines so much of human affairs. I mediumly recommend The Bible Unearthed, as an interesting history of ancient Israel and the development of the Bible. Star of David.png Radioactive Misanthrope 09:51, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

P.S. Sorry for dumping this on your talk page, but I had no one else to share this with. I really need a blog... Star of David.png Radioactive Misanthrope 09:51, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

If we're doing book recommendations, I'd say: Zionist: Michael Oren's Six Days of War Anti-Zionist: Norman Finkelstein's Beyond Chutzpah. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 10:02, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the post, Stabby! I'll keep an eye out - right now my reading list is a mile long, but there's always room for something to slip in! I have gotten a little bit into some history of Israel, although mostly centered just around the 1967 war - mostly because that's the center of conflict. Weirdly, my interest in history usually ends just before WW2, perhaps as a function of my skepticism of anyone's ability to be even-handed with a more recent topic (unfair bias on my part, I admit).
Your comments are interesting and well-put. You should definitely get a blog if they're the kind of thing you frequently turn out. Just make sure you do it for yourself, otherwise it'll be hard to keep up. I get maybe 500 readers on a good week, so don't anticipate big numbers.--ADtalkModerator 11:03, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Wow

A mod...moderated! Good werk! C®ackeЯ

How do you get that he "moderated". he looked at the page and redeleted it. we all have opinions, his no better than mine. yours no worse than mine. Green mowse.pngGodotRIP original "muahahahah". 1...2....3...4...muahahahahah 21:27, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Godot is correct, as is usually the case.--ADtalkModerator 21:35, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Jebus Godot, I was referring to his demoting Tisane to autopatrolled and unblocking him. But thanks for jumping the gun. C®ackeЯ 00:23, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Moneyball

Let's just say that Lewis used a bit of poetic license in places. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 21:45, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Awww.... damn it. Way to burst my bubble.--ADtalkModerator 23:45, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

[edit] RW G+ page

So yeah, about that... ТyJFBAA 02:29, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Given that many (All?) users on G+ use their actual names, I can't say I'm surprised no one goes to the RW page. --TheLateGatsby (talk) 02:35, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Nah, there's a pocket community there. The thing is that the page itself is as dead as a post. ТyJFBAA 02:37, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
The Facebook page is fairly active, so that's not the problem. Peter Rapidly running out of marmite 02:39, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Gah, the FB page is practically too active to keep up with recently. Scarlet A.pnggnosticModerator 09:31, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Adding you as a manager. They finally added that functionality.--ADtalkModerator 09:15, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Cool. I've got a decentish idea on what to post (new articles that have lasted a day or two and gold/silver articles). ТyJFBAA 16:36, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Election hangout

Yes? No? Maybe? Cheesecake? ТyBother me 21:40, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Very possibly. The hour when results start coming in, EST, is in the afternoon for me here. So the timing works.--ADtalkModerator 22:03, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
Alrighty then. ТyBother me 22:09, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
Do not think we will be doing this, now that it's apparent that the election will probably not be called on election day. Too many absentee ballots in swing states.--ADtalkModerator 21:04, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
alright then. Evil fascistoh noez 21:24, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
i'll put up a starbucks gift card (had to think of something internet possible) that it will be called on tuesday, and rather early all things considered. Green mowse.pngGodotCalibrated! let the voting begin! 21:33, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
Oooh.... damn, hmmm.... not sure I am willing to put up money, since I have low confidence in this prediction.
How about this? I'll wager you a $20 donation to the RWF that the election is not called on election day, but instead crosses over to at least the next day, by at least one of the following news organizations: NBC, CNN, FOX, ABC, or CBS. That way, no matter who loses, the RWF wins.--ADtalkModerator 21:38, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
You're on. And i must hold this position, if only cause of my sanity! i don't think i can survive another Bush v. Gore year.--Green mowse.pngGodotCalibrated! let the voting begin! 21:54, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
Course, that does not include the 8 million lawsuits (especially in Sandy hit areas) that we all know are going to be set by the loser. Colorado already has several legal teams in place to protect itself. not Rep or Dem, just "we did not lie and cheat, you idiots'.  ;-) Green mowse.pngGodotCalibrated! let the voting begin! 21:54, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
I don't think lawsuits over legitimacy would hold up the networks from calling it, don't worry.--ADtalkModerator 22:05, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
Looks like I'm going to be making a donation.--ADtalkModerator 03:10, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Fake computer stuff and politics

I know they're not the same thing, but I remember that fake program you made for Mitt Romney, and thought of you when I saw this. (Also, as a teacher, if you ever wanted to express your frustrations as an adventure text game...) Star of David.png Radioactive Misanthrope 08:35, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Hahah thanks man! Reminds me of the little bit of Zork I once played.--ADtalkModerator 10:37, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

[edit] "You cannot edit a quote to make it say something different"

Really? Please point out the difference:

"published during ... [Shakespeare's] lifetime and attributed to 'William Shakespeare', yet nobody thinks that they belong in the [Shakespearean] canon..."

"published during ... Shakespeare of Stratford's lifetime and attributed to 'William Shakespeare', yet nobody thinks that they belong in the [Shakespearean] canon..."

There is no appreciable difference, and the use of a bracketed synthesis to shorten an unnecessarily lengthy sentence is a standard practice. I taught college English for a time, I’ve made my living by writing for the past 15 years, and I’ve been published in peer-reviewed literature journals, so I think I have some small expertise in this. I’m not going to revert because it’s too trivial a matter (my only purpose was to shorten the sentence, not "make it say something different"), but next time pause a moment before you accuse someone of trying to distort the meaning of a quotation. Cheers. My master (talk) 01:39, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

The original quote said "Shakespeare of Stratford, specifying "the Stratford man," as he is called in anti-Stratfordian circles. Your edit changed it to "[Shakespeare]", and I don't think that it is a suitably exact replacement. Nor is there any real reason to make the change - it does not improve the grammar or composition of the sentence, nor make it much more concise. All it does is change slightly the sense of her statement, which purposefully refers to "Shakespeare of Stratford." And finally, for some reason you remove a comma from her statement. Is there some sort of reason you felt the need to make these changes to a direct quote? Did the comma make it too long?
My edit summary was not meant to be disparaging, nor does it accuse you of distorting meaning, but rather more blandly states that you "cannot edit a quote to make it say something different." If you felt this was a personal attack, I apologize for any curtness.--ADtalkModerator 02:49, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Crimes against art

Hey, remember that Mr. Bean movie you hate so much? Well, it happened in real life. Star of David.png Radioactive Misanthrope 07:55, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Do try and keep up Stabby, that was over a month ago. Redchuck.gif ГенгисmaraudingModerator 08:29, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
It takes an extra month for non-political news to trickle out to me. Star of David.png Radioactive Misanthrope 08:38, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
I heard about this funny new trend where you send people to a Rick Astley video, unexpectedly. It is cutting edge.--ADtalkModerator 08:45, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
Astleybombing? Star of David.png Radioactive Misanthrope 08:59, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
Having been reminded of Mr. Bean, there will be no sleep for me tonight.--ADtalkModerator 09:13, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Sockmaster

Apparently, reverting the same mess means that I am now your sockpuppet. It's impressive that you/us have managed to live simultaneously in Chicago and NZ, especially since you/we have managed to be successfully married in both jurisdictions. I'm going to assume that this means that you/we will take over the job hunt from me/us. Good luck. — Unsigned, by: ORavenhurst / talkDo You Believe That? 14:15, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Blocking

Strictly speaking, PC's block of 1 day was the second term in the Fib sequence. Redchuck.gif ГенгисevolvingModerator 14:05, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Strictly speaking, yo' mama.--ADtalkModerator 02:58, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

[edit] I hope you're happy

Ace McWicked has removed your moderator rights. This must be how he spends his Saturdays.--"Shut up, Brx." 13:49, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Hm. Just got back from a weekend away.--ADtalkModerator 04:27, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
There's a lot of cleaning up to do. Redchuck.gif ГенгисOur ignorance is God; what we know is science.Moderator 04:31, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Short version: I ran amok, abused mod rights and de-modded everyone after a protracted edit war. Acei9 04:32, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Cool. Well, if you're stepping down, it's already mostly sorted, I'd imagine. Although apparently Abd was also being a twat?
Too many logs!--ADtalkModerator 04:43, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Hm. Just got back from a weekend away. Next time you go away come to Wellington. We can run amok together. Acei9 04:38, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
That's the plan for January! Went to Riverton this weekend, but in December my wife and I are going to sell all our shit, fly to Wellington, rent a car, and see the north island.--ADtalkModerator 04:43, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Riverton is an awful, horrible place filled with gypsies....or maybe that was somewhere else with a similar name...? Anyway, I am around in January so hit me up by email/facebook before hand. I can show you around the city and we can hit a few pubs. Yeah, I mentioned Abd on the ATIM page so no need to discuss it here. Acei9 04:46, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Sounds like a plan.--ADtalkModerator 04:49, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
If you are going to come through Hamilton (and there really is no reason why you would see this shithole) drop me a line and I'll buy you a beer. --DamoHi 08:08, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
To clarify, this particular post to your talk page was an impromptu criticism of your leniency towards Ace McWicked, inspired by the events I was witnessing at the time. It wasn't a cry for help because by that point, I had figured you were away. The cry for help took the form of several emails, early on, to prominent, reasonable users I felt might have been capable of ending that goddamn edit war on my talk page while at the same time letting me conceal frot.jpg--"Shut up, Brx." 06:14, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
And if I had taken a minute to think it through, I wouldn't have made the post in the first place. --"Shut up, Brx." 06:15, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Live and learn. -- Nx / talk 08:12, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

[edit] 74k or am I reading that wrong?

You are one highrolling English teacher--"Shut up, Brx." 01:49, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

That's a decimal pt, not a comma. Even in this country a teacher will probably, in their lifetime, earn at least a little more than US$235. Peter Subsisting on honey 03:35, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Jesus Christ that is some shitty pay. I am already above a teachers top pay and I am only 32. Acei9 03:40, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Yeah... I actually don't have a teaching job here now that the semester is over, so I work with developmentally disabled kids instead, for even less pay. Hot tip: do not go into education expecting big bucks.--ADtalkModerator 07:48, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Right. In some places, a decimal point fulfills a comma's function, and vice versa. In France, for example, 75.56 would be rendered 75,56. That was the source of my confusion.--"Shut up, Brx." 04:48, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

"Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward." — Matthew 6:2. Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 04:59, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't fault AD for putting his donation count up on the page. As I see it, he just put it there to encourage others, and perhaps to silence any doubts as to his commitment. Or he's a vain fucker. I prefer the latter former [ corrected text ]. Less cynical.--"Shut up, Brx." 05:02, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
The former. The former is less cynical. Peter Subsisting on honey 05:07, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Brx is right, incidentally. I do want to demonstrate my commitment and encourage others to do so.--ADtalkModerator 07:48, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks, bye.

JzG, Hipocrite, and David Gerard. I just needed to make sure that telling a user to "go back to raping your kids," and encouraging users to violate standards, and keeping the confusion of how to respond to talk page deletion, was acceptable here. Thanks for making it clear, it saves me a great deal of trouble, I'm glad I went to ATIM rather than the Coop. As to your time, AD, you are fully compensated by gaining JzG and maybe Hipocrite as users. Bye. --Abd (talk) 19:19, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Think like a rationalist, now that you're a LW reader. We don't enforce a slavish obedience to the rules the same way jaywalking is seldom prosecuted: frequently, it's better for everyone to just roll our eyes and move on, rather than bog down in every dispute. This is particularly true for someone who so obviously enjoys these affairs like yourself - be it from a love of argument or (more likely) pride in idealism.
It is unfortunate that you feel that you have been ill-used, but considering how badly you irritate so very many people, I count it as a mark of pride that you are storming away in a huff of your own volition, little-harassed and free to speak.--ADtalkModerator 06:36, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
  • I've been thinking "like a rationalist" for well over fifty years, AD. I write experimentally, and review the results. I got the information I needed. I'm not "storming away in a huff," that's your own confirmation bias talking. I concluded that RatWiki is a stirred cesspool, and that site management likes it that way. I have far better things to do than read this wiki, much less help with it. See also response to Blue.
  • Freedom to speak is useless if there is no listening, and hostile response to the speaking. I've always been free to speak, and RatWiki site policy and my status here have not increased that freedom. Other than tests, I move my "speaking" to places where it's more useful. This was only a test. --Abd (talk) 15:06, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
I am sorry to say that you are a shockingly poor communicator, unable to stop yourself from a logorrhea of endlessly sloshing proportions. It takes you ten bucks of text to express a nickle's worth of content. You must be aware of this fact by now. But despite this, people on article talk pages engaged in long exchanges with you, and both Blue and myself went to lengths to understand and reply. I don't regret that effort, because even a poor communicator might have useful ideas or criticism, but every time I went through such contortions to understand, I discovered nothing but an arcane delight in procedural fairness rather than an interest in outcome.
Eventually, yes, people stopped listening. I don't blame them, any more than I'd blame them for dismissing the arguments of someone who insisted on commenting in Esperanto.
You certainly did a lot of testing here, but it was of our patience and tolerance. But whoever is in the right, I certainly agree that you are not a good fit for RW. You will, of course, continue to be welcome. Have a nice day.--ADtalkModerator 22:23, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
I wonder what name I'm trolling LessWrong as. Be careful, I'm coming for you there now, Abd. BOOOGABOOGABOOGA! Hipocrite (talk) 15:53, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
That would be difficult. The karma system keeps trolls near-invisible, and they happily ban people who are at all disruptive. It is a strength of their infrastructure (although it is matched by commensurate weaknesses).--ADtalkModerator 22:23, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, AD. The biggest difference with LW is that they have no intolerance of length, per se, some of my most popular contributions have been quite long, and it's easy to tell how I'm doing. I'm planning on engaging with a recent Yudkowsky post, where he raises some important issues, but ... I have to study first. Study lots. LW participation is challenging. There are obvious issues with the community, but also a great deal that is of value. A troll like Hipocrite could do minor damage, using socks, and I don't know what countermeasures they have in place. I do see the strengths of RatWiki, but ... I also see that what RatWiki is producing is unstable and unreliable. Good luck. --Abd (talk) 00:52, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
Challenging indeed.--ADtalkModerator 01:01, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
Well, I guess I'll keep up with you, AD, unless you prefer not. I've written far more (kchar/day) on LW than anywhere else. I've been downvoted on certain topics, most notably discussion of rationalist Islam (and I reached a nadir of about -40 karma, I'm now up to zero net. I've seen a lot of dithering in the numbers, so I think there are people liking and disliking, in some cases.). I see little or no correlation between length of post and downvoting. Some of my most popular posts have been quite long. The two most normally controversial topics (were so on Wikipedia and here), I've been upvoted on mentions, so far, i.e., cold fusion and low-carb diet. Perhaps RW should have an article about cascades, a very damaging social phenomenon that particularly hooks pseudoskeptics, but I'm not likely to waste time on it. The LW voting system encourages me to quickly adapt to the community. It could also be improved, and I was upvoted on suggestions (among other things, I suggested reporting separate up and down, not just net. (+0 -1) is very different in significance from (+50, -51). The LW community is a mixed bag, but I've not encountered anyone vicious there, so far. --Abd (talk) 17:45, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
Their system is based on Reddit, so the capability already exists to display controversialness. They have chosen not to turn it on, probably because that's not useful information for their purposes. Downvoting is intended to occur when someone makes a bad argument or breaks other social norms, and this is actively encouraged.--ADtalkModerator 21:25, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
I was curious to see if you actually had been discriminated against on RW. But it seems as though this was not the case, since you are still in negative on LW. I would urge you to now take this opportunity to try to change your behavior.
For comparison: myself. I joined and began posting almost at the same time.
Seriously: doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result, is the definition of insanity.--ADtalkModerator 11:23, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Importing

Try giving it a whirl. Evil fascistoh noez 23:52, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

I would be very opposed to any user articles being ported over. User history is in the contrib logs and it isn't necessary to bring over user profiles. Acei9 23:53, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
Truth be told, I think the main problem with RWW is that it's a separate entity. The user-database is not a good idea, but a section on RW for RW history is smart. And if here, it will be accountable, mature, and responsible - or at least moreso than now.--ADtalkModerator 00:04, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
And there shouldn't be any negative awards, for anyone. That just lowers the tone and opens it up for grudge bearers. Acei9 00:07, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
I don't care about the awards thing much, one way or the other.
Not even sure where to start with the articles, yeesh.--ADtalkModerator 00:10, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
I've done a few where I've removed links and templates, User:Blue/RWW. Picon small.pngAcer Blue 01:26, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
Awesome! Do you mind if I add to that?--ADtalkModerator 01:34, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Anything else you need? Evil fascistoh noez 21:32, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

I looked through, and it seems pretty set. I don't know RWW as well as others, of course.--ADtalkModerator 22:11, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
You and Blue got most of the important stuff. Evil fascistoh noez 22:14, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Listicles

You hate lists? How do you manage when grocery shopping? Star of David.png Radioactive Misanthrope 09:41, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Lists in articles! They're often lazy and lousy. Not always, but often. I like lists in general. Umberto Eco wrote a wonderful book about lists that you should check out, if you like them too.--ADtalkModerator 19:39, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
But... but... I wrote a list in an article.  ;__; Star of David.png Radioactive Misanthrope 23:27, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
I'm sure your lists are very nice. Not all lists are bad.--ADtalkModerator 23:48, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Yay! Star of David.png Radioactive Misanthrope 23:55, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Internet libertarians

Someone actually wrote a whole book on them. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 01:00, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Hahaha whaaat?! Going on my list!--ADtalkModerator 01:12, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, the ideology promoted by the likes of LW was (and still is, really) highly concentrated in Silicon Valley and a small group of cutting-edge tech schools (one of its primary expositors being Marvin Minsky of MIT). Read "The Californian Ideology" for the tl;dr version. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 01:19, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Censorship

Please look at how all my contributions are undone. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/RationalWiki:Saloon_bar#Sweet_Fucking_Holy_Jesus_Christ The fact is the greatest opponents of homosexuality are religion (sin) and psychiatry (mental illness). See http://www.amazon.ca/Deviance-Medicalization-From-Badness-Sickness/dp/0877229996 Can you explain why Theory has undone my comments here? http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/RationalWiki:Saloon_bar#Sweet_Fucking_Holy_Jesus_Christ Is my view not 'valid'? Not 'worthy' of any discussion? Thanks Dirk Steele (talk) 01:22, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

I can. Because you're a boring troll. Theory of Practice "Now we stand outcast and starving 'mid the wonders we have made." 01:26, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Haha!
Yeah, remember that it's a hard road to acceptance. Your previous actions convinced a lot of people that you're a single-issue crank, so if you want to be effective here, Dirk, you'll have to be patient and overturn the appearance you've spent the past weeks building up. Keep at it!--ADtalkModerator 01:46, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Psychiatry is no longer an "opponent" of homosexuality. I believe it finally stopped considering it a mental illness decades ago. Sam Tally-ho! 02:02, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
I know it is a hard road to 'acceptance'. Any student of human behaviour understands the bullying, the ostracism and the scapegoating necessary to create a 'community' by maltreatment of a minority viewpoint. (Think Jews in National Socialism. Think Newspeak in 1984).It can be explained fully by evolutionary psychology. Yes, I am a single issue crank. Why not? I know a lot about a little and not everything about everything. Surely you would prefer experts in their field? Think of me as the Rationalwiki therapist. Trying to drag along all of you to keep to the scientific method despite the confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance that currently prevails. What appearance have I built up? Only a disagreement to the cultural groupthink that is required to mold a 'community'. My arguments are scientific. You have become a religious society ('denialism' is the new heresy) and I will use all of my my intellect to stop this happening. Otherwise you are no different from creationists. Think about this please. Now tell me exactly and specifically why my comments were deleted by TheoryofP. Thanks. Dirk Steele (talk) 02:20, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Let TheoryofP tell you himself, exactly and specifically. It's not your "minority viewpoint." I barely skim your posts and give them little thought at all -- I sometimes can't remember if your the psychiatry crank or the cold fusion crank, or the anti-vaccine guy. whatever, it doesn't matter. It's not your viewpoint at all. It's the sheer lack of manners you display, and the pigheaded and obnoxious way you dominate our public forums without contributing to the basic upkeep of the place -- when't the last time you edited an article for typos, or fixed some links, or added a category? You're abusing this community and giving nothing of value in return. Worst of all, you're boring. You're not funny. You're a drag to be around. Nobody likes that in a party guest, especially when you hijack the conversation. That's why I erased your post. Theory of Practice "Now we stand outcast and starving 'mid the wonders we have made." 02:31, 16 December 2012 (UT
You barely skim my posts and give them little thought - why undo them then?

You do not know if I am anti-psychiatry or a cold fusion crank or anti-vaccine? Why undo my comments then? Lack of manners? Look at the plank of wood in your eye. I have edited many times (especially spelling and grammar for User:) I have attempted to contribute to many pages but every change I have made has been undone. Like you have done to every attempt I have made to even discuss. You erase my post because you have the power over me to do it. And you love this power. And I think you abuse it. You prefer censorship over debate especially when you do not have the knowledge to express a valid opinion. Dirk Steele (talk) 02:51, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Homosexuality was liberated from psychiatry because of a political campaign. This 'condition' was voted out. My question is how it was accepted in the first place. Imagine measles or cancer undergoing this process - being voted out!. Science or fraud? It will not and cannot happen in true medical science. Drapetomania and Hysteria also disappeared due to political and societal pressure. Blacks and immigrants became 'schizophrenic' in the 1960s. http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/side-effects/201005/how-schizophrenia-became-black-disease-interview-jonathan-metzl The fact is that psychiatry deals with the moral issues of cultural groupthink and has nothing to do with medical disease. You have been fed a myth as potent as any religious belief. Of course modern myths are difficult to untangle because of our 'socialisation' as children in the same way that our religion and political viewpoint is due to genetics. I do not believe this pseudoscience. How come for a few hundred years people persecuted witches? Have our brains evolved so much that we are all rational now? No. Astrology - the idea that we have a personality that can be categorised, (I am creative and stubborn - diagnose me with Taureanism), and mind reading are pseudosciences. As is psychiatry. I cannot believe that rational people cannot see this obvious fact. Dirk Steele (talk) 02:51, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

If I'm interested in power, it's not to use it on some marginal website. Get this: YOU ARE BORING. If you want to advance a particular point of view, find an engaging way to do it, and consider learning how to adapt to the norms of the communities you attempt to engage with. Theory of Practice "Now we stand outcast and starving 'mid the wonders we have made." 02:57, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Are you advising me that I should adapt to the 'norms' of creationism, homeopathetic or even anti-vaccine communities. I don't think I will but I do appreciate your advice and thanks for all the fish. Dirk Steele (talk) 04:24, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
No. I am advising you to adapt to the norms of good manners and being a cool person to hang around with. Theory of Practice "Now we stand outcast and starving 'mid the wonders we have made." 04:31, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Broken arm

You have a broken arm? What happened? Star of David.png Radioactive Misanthrope 09:22, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

He broke his arm. SophieWilder 10:25, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
I know that. What I want to know is how many people he took out before going down. Star of David.png Radioactive Misanthrope 10:45, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Cycle accident. I went flying over handlebars, landed flush on elbows and face. Face ok, one arm is not. Right arm, dominant hand. No typing yet. Very annoying. Causing poor grammar with many fragments. Cannot abide.--ADtalkModerator 12:06, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
I understand your pain. I type with one arm whenever holding an adorable kitty that I don't want to put down. Though I imagine that's not an option for you right now :-) Star of David.png Radioactive Misanthrope 12:35, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Sterile for mod

Sterile.

[edit] Campaign

No campaigning this year? I feel so lonely. sterilesporadic heavy hitter 05:07, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

My thesis is due in a month, and my arm necessitates I conserve my limited typing time. But I will oblige!--ADtalkModerator 06:49, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

[edit] You are now a Mod

While you have been going round informing others, nobody has had the decency to inform you that you are also still a moderator. Congrats. Redchuck.gif ГенгисmutatingModerator 09:43, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm fairly certain AD is a mod for life. Commiserations. --DamoHi 10:07, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
It's the only way I can sate my lust for power.--ADtalkModerator 11:09, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

[edit] Name

Could my name possibly be changed from kreJ to Krej, please?--Krejtalk 23:17, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Done.--ADtalkModerator 23:27, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you!--Krejtalk 01:38, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

[edit] Godwin's Law logic

Your comment espouse identical views to your own is used to create the fallacy often present in Godwin's Law arguments. I assume that was not your intent. ఠ_ఠ Inquisitor Sasha Ehrenstein des Sturmkrieg Sector 00:42, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Commas and prepositions are also used in Godwin's Law arguments. I was pointing out that your ideas were identical to those of another group.--ADtalkModerator 00:54, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, I see that. Good point. I wasn't suggesting that you were name calling, though it seem like maybe that was it. Anyway, those people are idiots. I don't understand the whole anti male circumcision thing anyway. I believe it's even reversible by adding a dreamcatcher to the end of the canon or something. ఠ_ఠ Inquisitor Sasha Ehrenstein des Sturmkrieg Sector 00:58, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

[edit] swapped wives with Ace yet?

Gonna happen sooner or later — Unsigned, by: MarkusKikero / talk / contribs 2013-02-16T10:54:19‎

Nah, not my thing.--ADtalkModerator 11:03, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

[edit] Another impromptu book review dump

Economist Dean Baker has a couple of free ebooks out, The Conservative Nanny State and The End of Loser Liberalism: Making Markets Progressive. I'm about halfway through Conservative Nanny State right now.

I've always thought Baker's writing style felt hurriedly to-the-point since I started following his blog, but I previously assumed that was because he's too busy with non-bloggy work to write better. Then I started his books, and it turns out he just writes like that. His writing feels weird compared to, say, Debt: the First 5000 Years. Debt spends whole chapters carefully building its case, while Baker barrels through his points like a freshman on a deadline.

In The Conservative Nanny State, Baker covers how ostensible free-market proponents work to privilege certain economic transactions and entities above others (mostly large businesses). This is probably nothing new to you or someone like Nebuchadnezzar, and I was already aware of the purposeful unfairness of the current system, but I at still appreciated the additional examples he provided.

Baker is also extremely critical of free trade practices, pointing out how they explicitly disadvantage less-educated workers, while extending protections for more educated workers like doctors, lawyers, accountants, and professors, and force extensions of intellectual property on other countries.

Unfortunately, Baker's method is to make several assertions (assertions I agree with, admittedly), cite some examples and maybe drop a tiny footnote somewhere, but never really discuss his sources or explore any processes. While I sometimes find more in-depth explorations of a subject like Debt exhausting, that doesn't mean I like no extended coverage of material. He can also be repetitive, and I grew tired of hearing him list "doctors, lawyers, and economists" over and over again as examples of jobs protected from free trade (though I suspect he keeps listing economists because he doesn't like members of his own profession very much).

His books' contents are definitely food for thought if you haven't previously been exposed to more critical economics approaches — it's just not very filling food (as opposed to, again, Debt: the First 5000 Years). But they're free, they're short (a couple hundred pages together — and they read even faster because of Baker's style) and they're intelligently critical of the economic status quo, so I do recommend them.

Even if his books are just okay, I still highly recommend Baker's blog, Beat the Press, which critiques economics reporting in the US media. It's something I check every day. Star of David.png Radioactive Misanthrope 17:52, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

I started reading this blog! I'm a fan now.--ADtalkModerator 10:03, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

[edit] Im having problems with the article creation process

Hello!

I was trying to add a debate page on the topic of misandry, but I was unexpectedly halted by continuous captchas. I correctly answered them over 5 times and it still didn't post. Any reason for this? The Commander (talk)

Men have to go through 10 captchas. Women only have to do three. Let my inspiration flow/In token lines suggesting rhythm. 18:03, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Sometimes the captcha can get a little touchy. If you continue to have this problem, please contact Rationalwiki:Technical support.--ADtalkModerator 10:02, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

[edit] WAPF

Hi. You don't know me, but I've read your essays, and I think you might be interested in having a look at the Weston A. Price Foundation, and maybe seeing if there's anything you want to add to the article. Basically, it's a pro-meat, anti-veggie organization. The otherwise reasonable readers over at Ars Technica seem to be fans of it. (One commentator refered to it positively as "an organization that openly promotes animal foods as healthy").--Кřěĵ (ṫåɬк) 12:17, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

I'll check it out, thank you.--ADtalkModerator 22:12, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Huh, seems to be broken. I'll check again in a few days - or maybe they're out of business!--ADtalkModerator 23:38, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
The site's up for me.--Кřěĵ (ṫåɬк) 02:11, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

[edit] Moderated

Would you mind running again? Please? Peter mqzp 20:37, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Ok. Thank you for the notice.--ADtalkModerator 01:50, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Community
Toolbox
support