Forum Post: List of top forum contributors?
Posted 12 years ago on Aug. 24, 2012, 5:12 p.m. EST by sandysterling
(10)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Hi. My name is sandy. I am a journalist for a small magazine called Boston Politician. For the anniversary of OWS, I want to write a short article on the top forum contributors. I noticed you have scores after your names? What does that signify? Are top contributors the one's with higher scores? Who are your favorite writer's here?
To answer some of your questions.
This forum really does not have much to do with OWS. That is except for the posts on the main page are "calls for solidarity" with just about any protest on the planet. The rest of the posts are from the same group of about 15 people. You have alreay met the active ones shooz, DKAtoday, Underdog, ZenDog, MattLHolck. beautifulworld, VQkag2. Since there are really no controls on registering a profile (tied to an email) many of these are the same people with multiple profiles.
Sprinkled in between are Democrat pundits, Union folks, RonPaul supporters, Marxists, Anarchists, and the occasional right winger looking for an argument.
The numbers near a name represent how many people twinkle or stinkle your posts.
You will find that most here will not discuss the topic raised but rather promote their agenda by personally attacking anyone who does not agree with them 100% of the time. They already accused you of not being a good investigative reporter among other things.
In summary, if you are looking for a representation of OWS on the anniversary do not look for it here. Go to a protest. All you will find here is a bunch of arm chair protesters.
I always wonder how these fifteen or so individuals which you mention, have so much time on their hands to fill up this forum with their agenda; and then to say (which I fully believe) that some of these individuals are one in the same people?
Are they getting paid by somebody, are they just that much ate up with it, or else how do they do it?
I am quite sure that nobody is getting paid to post on this site. It would be a waste of money. They site does not get nearly enough traffic.
compared to
Oh I would say compared to several thousand forums or Fb pages out there.
zenhex.com, offtopic.com, jlaforums.com all have tens of millions of members.
The Sponge Bob Square Pants page has 36 million members.
anything political ?
The sites of Daily Show, Stephen Colbert, Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, MSNBC, Fox News, and Bill Maher to name a few.
Someone was suggesting that people might be paid to post here. I was saying that it would be a waste of money paying someone to post here. There are really not that many people posting and you will never change the mindset or vote of shooz, DKAtoday, Underdog, ZenDog, MattLHolck. beautifulworld, or VQkag2.
It is simple not an economically sound strategy.
The paid trolls have never been trying to change our minds. Of course, you are right, they'd never succeed at that. Their focus has been to divide and conquer, make the forum look nutty, aggravate and embarrass people, things like that.
And, of course there are organizations willing to pay people to take down this forum and OWS as a whole since it is the most threatening thing to the 1% and greed that this nation has ever seen.
Has there ever been a "traffic report" for this site? What are the numbers over time? Unless there are some serious numbers, then I do not believe anyone would waste the time to take down the site.
this forum looks clear and readable compared to the alternatives
He's just jealous, Matt.
I'm looking for a popular forum to post on
Good luck.
The reason US is in trouble is because of people like you who think that this forum is the most threatening thing to the 1%. You have lost track with reality. This forum does not threaten a fly. It's not even about anarchy anymore, it's about helping one of the 1%, namely Obama. The hits have dropped immensely.
Reality check: There are a lot of things more threatening than this forum to the 1%.
Whether we like it or not, the overwhelming majority of people in the streets don't read this forum as i have found out.
I didn't say the forum, I said OWS as a whole. You paid trolls are here because the movement is threatening. Period. End of story. Who do you work for?
I'm not paid, and I care about OWS. That's why I wrote an important post today that talks about helping save the forum. The forum is dying because you refuse to face reality. You treat OWS like a cult. You reject all criticism like a cultist would, and, as a result, you do not see the light.
I believe in the past you admitted to being paid. You work very hard for someone who is not paid. For instance, just thinking up that prank thread had to take a lot of effort.
It was abusive, and mean spirited too.
Kind of tyrannical.
Probably the sickest thing ever posted here and there's been a lot of crazy sick stuff, as you know. Sheer bullying for the sake of bullying. I will not forget it.
Just one more sick putz, trying to wreck a good thing, through abusive tyrannical behavior.
He says he don't give a crap about karma, yet he keeps voting me down.
Such a big bag of lies.
He cares a lot about points that is why he doesn't like DKA. I've been voting you up all day.
I think he just likes to see his useless threads at the top, so I'm done with him......At least for now.
I'm gonna go take out the trash. It's more fun.......:)
And more useful.
You are right, shooz. Here we are, trying to end economic tyranny, and what we have are tyrants trying to control and keep down OWS. Solidarity to end tyranny!
Drop your little plastic shield and loosen your hair a bit. Take your shoes off. Go barefoot. Feel the sand between your toes. Forget that you think I'm a troll. Just look at the idea I posted today for a moment. Really look. With all the honesty in your heart.
You don't think I'm right and that this forum needs to be connected with the protesters on the ground? Honestly? You don't find it strange that this forum has no connection at all with what is happening in the street?
Can you answer that with honesty before picking up your shield again?
I think the forum's connection to OWS is organic. I think it developed into what it is very naturally and to try and force it to be something else would be a mistake. How does it harm the protesters on the street, who, by the way, have largely been shut down, if the forum focuses mainly on ideas? The protesters use other social media, they don't need the forum to organize, but that takes nothing away from the forum.
Not just the protesters, but the ones doing activism. They are actually the same people. The problem is you are divided, there is no organic connection because there isn't even a connection. There's no connection at all. It's a problem. A big one.
Had to reply here. Yes our status here would negate any chance of that idea coming to fruition. lol
I have to agree with you electron the potential for this forum connecting with the "protesters on the ground" is being wasted. I sometimes feel like I belong to two separate entities...the OWS forum where partisan politics rules, and then the OWS protesters, and organizers who realize that there will be no sea change through the political system.
I realize that not all of us live near an active, thriving protest movement. But how cool would it be...just for starters ....to organize on the forum a 'Take a Couple of Protesters Out To Lunch Day.' We would have the benefit of listening to the perspective of a younger person in this rev who sacrifices so much....and all for the price of lunch, our minds would be expanded. Building community, and Solidarity is what this movement is about.
Great idea. Unfortunately, just because you said it and I agree it's great, people will think it's bad.
I find more information here than on the streets
If that is really how you feel then you need to chill. You're way too uptight about the forum. But, I can't help but think that this is just your way of kicking up the dirt.
And, there is no clique of 7. You've been talking to JoetheFarmer too much. LOL!
Team Twinkle. You don't know them? Those that worry about their scores and spend their days twinkling each other. They're all democrats, and they're all addicted to this forum. DKA's going to lose his wife and grandchildren if he doesn't cut down his time here. He's the first cyborg I believe.
Clique of 7 sounds like a conspiracy theory to me, Thrasymaque. Sounds a little paranoid. Who cares how many points anyone has? It is irrelevant.
I don't care about their points, they do. The problem is they are democrat plants. They are turning this forum into a place to discuss elections. It's counter-productive for Occupy. And, now that DKAtoday is a moderator, he bans anyone who he doesn't see eye to eye with, like Odin. The panoply of ideas is being reduced to a leitmotiv surrounding Obama.
you are consumed by your self importance. ows threatening? what a joke.
links ?
daily show forum shut down
http://www.glennbeckforum.com/ is a blog with single comments (not comparable)
Bill O'Reilly has no forum
MSNBC ...
I'm not finding any useful forums suggested
For Me? I am retired - and for other reasons this ( internet ) is my best avenue for outreach and education - for taking part - in a meaningful way.
seriously
that got 8 up votes
did we need someone to call us pointless ?
why are you still posting ?
Replying here. "I find more information here than on the streets." Yes true, but you don't have as many weeds in the streets, and there is no substitute for one on one, in person
Joe, you've been against OWS and posting here for how long? I have never had a moniker besides beautifulworld so good job putting out ill rumors about people. I actually don't think any of the people you listed have ever had other monikers. It is the trolls who have more than one moniker, maybe that's why you are so conscious of that. Very rude of you.
Thank you for proving my point.
I have never said anything against OWS. As I said when I do not agree with 100% of some people's agenda they say you are against OWS.
I believe the debate I had with you was concerning school choice, charter schools and vouchers which I am for. Since you are against those things you say I am against OWS.
No, Joe, I actually read the forum. I'm aware of your posts beyond our, maybe, one conversation. How many monikers do you have?
I am not sure what other disagreements we have had. I do know that I have spoken out against Democrats which some believe makes me a Republican troll. I do know that I have had argument about addressing the national debt.
I think we both agree that we need to end crony capitalism in this country, we need to protect our right to free speech and protest, robo signing of mortgage foreclosures is wrong, subsidies to private companies is wrong, and I certainly agreed with the original OWS rallying cry "Banks go bailed out we got sold out!"
Our biggest difference I believe is that you trust the government more than me. I think you see the government as the solution to all our problems and I see them as the root of many of our problems.
Government is important but its role needs to be limited to that of establishing Justice, ensuring domestic tranquility, providing for the common defense, promoting the general welfare, and securing the blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.
promoting the general welfare..: could be a big category of specifics, it is so huge.
could be almost anything.
education, libraries, welfare for unemployed, building roads and infrastructure.
"With respect to the two words 'general welfare,' I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.
If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions. It is to be remarked that the phrase out of which this doctrine is elaborated is copied from the old Articles of Confederation, where it was always understood as nothing more than a general caption to the specified powers."
--James Madison
Because the Constitution is a living document, as read by the Supreme Court; what is written is interpreted to current knowledge and circumstance, and sometimes it seems even political leaning of the court, as provided in the constitution.
The last paragraph below seems the key to "general welfare" as SC is the final interpreter.
A General Welfare clause is a section that appeared in many constitutions, as well as in some charters and statutes, which provides that the governing body empowered by the document may enact laws to promote the general welfare of the people, sometimes worded as the public welfare. In some countries, this has been used as a basis for legislation promoting the health, safety, morals, and well-being of the people governed thereunder (also known as the police power). Such clauses are generally interpreted as granting the state broad power to legislate or regulate for the general welfare that is independent of other powers specified in the governing document. wikipedia
United States Main article: Taxing and Spending Clause
The United States Constitution contains two references to "the General Welfare", one occurring in the Preamble and the other in the Taxing and Spending Clause. The U.S. Supreme Court has held the mention of the clause in the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution "has never been regarded as the source of any substantive power conferred on the Government of the United States or on any of its Departments."[2][3]
Moreover, the Supreme Court held the understanding of the General Welfare Clause contained in the Taxing and Spending Clause adheres to the construction given it by Associate Justice Joseph Story in his 1833 Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States.[4][5] Justice Story concluded that the General Welfare Clause is not a grant of general legislative power,[6][4] but a qualification on the taxing power[7][8][4] which includes within it a federal power to spend federal revenues on matters of general interest to the federal government.[9][4][10] The Court described Justice Story's view as the "Hamiltonian position",[4] as Alexander Hamilton had elaborated his view of the taxing and spending powers in his 1791 Report on Manufactures. Story, however, attributes the position's initial appearance to Thomas Jefferson, in his Opinion on the Bank of the United States.[11]
As such, these clauses in the U.S. Constitution are an atypical use of a general welfare clause, and are not considered grants of a general legislative power to the federal government.[12] Historical Debate and Pre-1936 Rulings
In one letter, Thomas Jefferson asserted that “[T]he laying of taxes is the power, and the general welfare the purpose for which the power is to be exercised. They [Congress] are not to lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please; but only to pay the debts or provide for the welfare of the Union. In like manner, they are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare, but only to lay taxes for that purpose.”[13]
In 1824 Chief Justice John Marshall described in obiter dictum a further limit on the General Welfare Clause in Gibbons v. Ogden: "Congress is authorized to lay and collect taxes, &c. to pay the debts and provide for the common defence and general welfare of the United States. ... Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States."[14]
The historical controversy over the U.S. General Welfare Clause arises from two distinct disagreements. The first concerns whether the General Welfare Clause grants an independent spending power or is a restriction upon the taxing power. The second disagreement pertains to what exactly is meant by the phrase "general welfare."
The two primary authors of the The Federalist essays set forth two separate, conflicting interpretations:
While Hamilton's view prevailed during the administrations of Presidents Washington and Adams, historians argue that his view of the General Welfare Clause was repudiated in the election of 1800, and helped establish the primacy of the Democratic-Republican Party for the subsequent 24 years.[28]
Prior to 1936, the United States Supreme Court had imposed a narrow interpretation on the Clause, as demonstrated by the holding in Bailey v. Drexel Furniture Co.,[29] in which a tax on child labor was an impermissible attempt to regulate commerce beyond that Court's equally narrow interpretation of the Commerce Clause. This narrow view was later overturned in United States v. Butler. There, the Court agreed with Associate Justice Joseph Story's construction in Story's 1833 Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States. Story had concluded that the General Welfare Clause was not a general grant of legislative power, but also dismissed Madison's narrow construction requiring its use be dependent upon the other enumerated powers. Consequently, the Supreme Court held the power to tax and spend is an independent power and that the General Welfare Clause gives Congress power it might not derive anywhere else. However, the Court did limit the power to spending for matters affecting only the national welfare.
Shortly after Butler, in Helvering v. Davis,[30] the Supreme Court interpreted the clause even more expansively, disavowing almost entirely any role for judicial review of Congressional spending policies, thereby conferring upon Congress a plenary power to impose taxes and to spend money for the general welfare subject almost entirely to Congress's own discretion. Even more recently, in South Dakota v. Dole[31] the Court held Congress possessed power to indirectly influence the states into adopting national standards by withholding, to a limited extent, federal funds. To date, the Hamiltonian view of the General Welfare Clause predominates in case law.
Glad we agree
Yeah, yeah. It means make sure the people don't starve, are not homeless, have health care, & are educated.
After that we can worry about pursuing happiness.
Ok?
That is not at all what "general welfare" means as mentioned in the preamble or Article 1, Section 8 of the constitution.
The states were joining together, they were worried about power of a central government being used for a local cause, group, or entity. It means that any actions or spending must be for the benefit entire population. The "general welfare" means for the benefit of all. It has nothing to do with healthcare, education, or other social programs. There were no such programs at that point in our history.
History of education in the United States
Not sure what that has to do with what general welfare means.
public education programs did exist at the time
OK I will give you that, there was a public school and probably more than one however that does change the meaning or intent of the words "general welfare" in the Article 1 Section 8.
It has nothing to do with healthcare, education, or other social programs.
Who cares what was goin on a quarter of a millenium ago? Are you serious.?
I'm tellin you what it means. I'm not askin what did the slave holding, indian killing low lifes think it meant when they wrote it!
It means make sure the people don't starve, are not homeless, have health care, & are educated.
After that we can worry about pursuing happiness.
No need to argue about it. We disagree. You are a conservative so you interpret it as meaning we shouldn't give a shit about other people.
I am a progressive and I interpret it correctly as meaning we MUST consider all people general welfare, (Food,housing, health,edu)
Simple.
Say what you will however that is not what promote the general welfare means. Not even close. As the states were forming a union they wanted to be sure that money collected from the states was spent for the benefit of all the states. That is what Article 1, Section 8 is about.
That said is is good and proper that we allocate money and resources for the needs of the population. It is paramount that we educate our youth, provide shelter for those without shelter, and ensure that nobody goes without proper healthcare.
We all do better when we all do better.
No reason to be selfish and greedy like those founding slaveholders right?
If by trolls you mean people hurting Occupy on a daily basis, then you must be talkin about DKAtoday who bans everyone who fails to agree with him. We lost Odin because he believed in anarchy instead of the democrats. Go figure. What joe says is true and needs to be heard. He's not against Occupy, he's talking about removing the weeds so it can grow stronger.
Odin did not believe necessarily that anarchy should be our goal, but he could appreciate having anarchists as our brothers, and sisters in our shared pursuit for systemic change.
He thinks that all great, successful struggles have had a radical element within in them. We and the anarchists amongst us in OWS need to remain the radicals.
He also wondered if the wars, and the degradation of our planet could ever be curtailed under capitalism.
Hmm....how would you know what Odin thought? Didn't he stop using the Odin username before you arrived on August 16th??
You're SO boring Renneye!!! Don't you ever stop looking for little conspiracies? What the bloody hell is wrong with you!
Victor/Victoriaaaaaaa!!! I missed you !! I thought you went to bed for the night without saying good night! I almost boo hooed!
I'm a lot of things...but boring isn't one of them.
Request for 'tech' ; How about adding some good functions to the site....like one of those trap doors with a chute that goes to an alligator pit when 'they' have decided your usefulness is finished. That's what the Oligarchs have in store for you trashy/Victor/iApril.
Well of course not Victor/Victoria! Why would I stop? How's about this....I'll stop looking for conspiracies....when the conspiracies stop ^.~
"You're SOOOO boring Renneye!!!"
No, you ain't.
"Don't you ever stop looking for little conspiracies?"
Nope.
"What the bloody hell is wrong with you?"
Nuttin'.
"Victor/Victoria." That's good. ;-)
P.S. You do know I was just kidding about not using my revisionist take on the wars, don't you? Feel free to share any of my ideas far and wide. I'd like to see one of them take off and achieve a life of its own.
Revisionist is just a more defined description of a free thinker...and that's me too!
I don't believe much of what's in our history books, particularly when it comes to the wars. Much of our illusory history is promulgated lies. So...revisionism has become, in a way, a term that is synonymous with 'setting the record straight"!
Agreed. That's one of the beauties of the Internet. Although you have to sift through to find real truths (but that's how it's always been, really), there have been some truly eye-opening things out here that, guaranteed, we never would have found out otherwise.
Truth. The disinfo is ripe though! More now, than ever. What an uphill battle we have to climb. But we'll do it.
I'm keeping an eye on television news as compared to some quality alternative news, and OMG! Even with the internet and more people than ever having access to the truth, the Oligarch owned msm STILL manages to infiltrate and obfuscate reality all over the globe. BS reasons for going into these countries and the masses actually buy it.. Millions dying because of their meddling.
These oligarch bankers/elite rulers have managed to do this to us because they think big....and so should we.
The forum is great of course, but there is way too much talk about smaller issues that won't get us far on the scale of things. This forum is drowning in a sea of 'issues'. Our FREEDOMS are all but lost....and we're talking about mortgage fraud. Mortgage fraud and other issues are important, no question. But our freedom and sovereignty trump them, hands down.
Lets take our freedom back. Once we have extracted the Oligarchs from the power they hold over us. Then we can get government back to the people... then the people can vote on the issues. FREEDOM and SOVEREIGNTY first.
Expose the Oligarchs!!!
P.S. I know people disagree, but I think it is healthy to question the effectiveness and intentions of this forum.
See, that's a tough problem, as you know. How to extract the oligarchs without violence? Violence would be the easiest, most expedient way, but is there another, non-violent way? Educating the masses would only be the very first baby step to achieving this. In fact, seeing as they've had a couple centuries head start on us, wouldn't violence be the only way?
Odin, Tenacity, and Trek19 were all banned for being independent thinkers. While the monikers have changed, his thinking, his truthfullness, and going with his conscience has not. ;-)
Gotcha...
Are you one of Joe's monikers? Just curious.
No, I don't know joe at all, but I agree with him 100%. This is your friend Thrasymaque. I came to present a much needed dose of realism: http://occupywallst.org/forum/on-why-this-forum-is-an-utter-failure-and-how-it-c/
Okay, Thrasymaque, prove yourself. Give me some of your old monikers. Tell me your wife's name. What do you do for a living? Honestly, I don't think Thrasymaque agrees with Joe re: politics at all, so, I don't think you are Thrasymaque.
I agree with joe's post at the top, I can't speak for anything else he's written. I'm not here to prove myself. I just came to post the the forum entry I linked above. I don't care if you don't believe me.
You are sandysterling too aren't you? I believe you are Thrasymaque now because I just saw your post and I can tell by your syntax. Have you received a raise yet for your work here? You're into your next season, due a raise I imagine?
I'm not sandysterling, and I never got paid a dime to post here. What I wrote in the post you just read is all true and you know it. I've always been here to help OWS even if you failed to realize it. The ones hurting this protest are the ones turning it into an election campaign. It's supposed to be activism. If you want to believe I'm paid that's fine. I'm only here to share ideas. What members of the forum end up thinking because of those ideas is not that important. In the end, I believe truth always prevails.
My problem with you has always been with your bullying tactics, bots, and your attempts to divide the forum with your anarchy, black bloc and conspiracy theory obsessions, and you know that.
Funny, the police says the same thing about occupiers and groups like Sea Shepherd. Activism isn't always nice and dandy. Honestly, I don't really care if you have a problem with me. I write and you can either read or not. If you disagree, comment, if not, then don't. I'm not here to get high fives or to make friends. In other words, I'm not DKAtoday. I'm pretty sure jart doesn't care if she offends the police when she's protesting. Likewise, Sea Shepherd don't care about people in nice clothes when they sink ships.
That's all well and fine. I don't give a crap what you think of me either. Go back to your 6th grade playground. This is an open forum and you are not in charge of it.
I never said I was in charge of this forum. And, no, the forum is not open. You get banned if you have views that contradict the views of DKAtoday. Odin was a wonderful poster who got banned because he still believed in anarchy.
I thought Odin was a nice guy too. :-)
I think Odin is a great guy too! Whatever happened to him - so not cool!
LOL! Hi Odin. I didn't know DKA had those powers. Perhaps you can forgive?
That was very sick what you did. No excuse. You taught us nothing. Absolutely nothing.
And, who are you kidding? You've always had a problem with OccupyWallSt because the articles never say who wrote them and you often have not liked the content.
What you did with that DKA post was beyond nasty. It was sick. I hope you get well soon.
I never said I didn't have a problem with OccupyWallst, I said I never dreamt of having that job. I still think everything should be transparent, especially since OWS accepts donations. I don't see why the users here are kept out of the loop when they could contribute so much to the protest and the movement. There's no reason this site considers its users as mere observers. And, disagreeing with some content posted by the news team is healthy, agreeing with all of it like you're a member of a cult is not.
DKAtoday deserved that little joke. He goes around abusing his moderation powers by banning great posters like Odin. A little poison his way does him good. Snakes can't be killed by their own venom, so another snake has to do the job.
Wow. That was your lowest moment. Ever wonder about your real karma? I guess not.
And, you have always wanted to be "OccupyWallSt." Did you get it out of your system with that post?
I never wanted to be OccupyWallSt, but I had to put on that mask for the joke to be effective. It worked.
Dka flat out hates me and i have yet to get banned or anything i guess he views me as no threat
Perhaps. Who knows. I usually get banned in one day, but I have been here four days now. Who knows.
How do you know DKA banned Odin? That's a big assumption. And, by the way, there is no Thrasymoque as a user. Banned users still show up under the search as users. Note that Odin is still there as is Thrasymaque. Oh, and I recall those pictures being posted under the Thrasymaque moniker.
There is no question in my mind that DK banned me, and the last time he did, he did so in a most unconscionable way...when he tried to drive divisions between me, and my family. I will never forgive him for that.
Nope, they weren't posted under the Thrasymaque character. There's a whole bunch of fake Thrasymaque characters out there. It might by trasymoque. I'm too lazy to check, and I don't care. Ask April, she remembers. I never once posted porn here. That's totally against my modus operandi.
It's not an assumption. DKAtoday is a moderator.
But, see, you take that personally, that jart doesn't post here. I don't. Jart does what jart does. That's up to her. I'm appreciative that she keeps the forum up and running. If she didn't care about it at all, she wouldn't do it.
Are you the person who posted that phony thread about DKA being chosen to represent the forum?
I don't take it personally that jart doesn't post here. That's her business and she can do what she wants with her time. What I'm saying is that it creates a problem because jart and zoe could help bridge the gap between this forum and the protesters if they posted more often. I'd like to know what they are up to. How the protests are going. Etc... The only link with the real Occupy world are the news articles, but, although we can comment on them, the writers of those articles never comment back. This forum is for observers. We observe what Occupy does and we agree or we disagree, but there is no conversation with Occupy. In a sense, I think this is jart and zoe's responsibility since they made the site. They should have helped create a conversation with the protesters on the ground.
Ya, I played the DKAtoday joke. I was laughing my head off all night. I still remember him typing.. OMG OMG... lol The point was to show that there is no connection between this forum and OWS, but that the users don't know it. DKAtoday believed it was true because he thinks his work here is very important for Occupy. It really isn't. Occupy protesters couldn't care less about what happens here, and if he writes letters to the President. You could all change that by connecting yourselves with the protests like I mentioned in my other post. That is what you should all do.
I loved Odin and do not understand what happened there. I mainly only see people get banned for spamming, racism, for using bots, using multiple monikers, and for sheer bullying (major ad hominem attacks - posting people's personal information, etc.)
Okay, you are not in charge, no one is! Including DKA! He just has his own style of contribution. That's the beauty of an open forum. Everyone has something different to bring to the table. Why be offended all the time and like a crazy person?
For April (we ran out of space). You didn't quote my list of reasons why people get banned. Those are legitimate reasons. People are free to say whatever they want here, including Thrasymaque and DKA, but going beyond to spamming, bots, multiple monikers, bullying, then not.
I love you too bw, and i appreciate all of your past support. You are the kind of person that this forum needs more of. Having said that though, I believe this guy electron is right about a lot of things here.
'DKA! He just has his own style of contribution. That's the beauty of an open forum. Everyone has something different to bring to the table.'
Well said. Do I need to point out the obvious extension of that?
Who's offended? DKAtoday is not like you nor me in that he's a moderator. But, that's OK. It's impossible to stop someone from posting his or her ideas here. I do it all the time. I wish I could always use the same username, but that's impossible and it doesn't matter all that much. I have to say that I rather like it that my posting get erased after a certain amount of time. I don't like the idea of having written something that stays on the net for decades.
As for Odin, he's still around. I won't tell you who he is now, but he's part of the underworld like me.
you consider belief in anarchy to be wonderful?
I wouldn't call myself an anarchist, but I think Occupy, as a protest, works best using an anarchic model. The government is an entirely different story, I'm talking about the protests. Certain, Occupy is based on anarchy and so it makes little sense to ban a user because he favors anarchy.
no 2 wrongs do not make it right. It was wrong.
I believe all of your original Thrasymaque posts are there in the archives, not sure about the ones that were banned under your other monikers. Tiouaise's are still there too. And, you seem offended when you are so very bothered by other people's posts.
"And, you seem offended when you are so very bothered by other people's posts."
When, where? Nah, I'm never angry or offended. I consider this forum a game. Nothing more. If it had a clear purpose, and if jart, zoe, and the other creators cared about it then I would also care. But, they don't. When someone creates a piece of software for a group he or she is working for, but then never uses that software there's something wrong.
Like joe said, this forum has been hijacked by a small clique of people who think they own this place. I'm talking about DKAtoday, shooz, VQkag2, shadz66, etc... I don't know why he added you to the list, I don't agree with that. I also think zendog's fine and Underdog as well. Zendog's a democrat, but, at least, he's straight about that. MattLHolck is cool. The others are democrat plants who have taken over the forum for the elections. DKAtoday is the most dangerous user for this forum at the moment, not I.
So 2 wrongs make it right?
Yes, if you're an anarchist or a religious person.
So you pulled that childish prank on DKA. There was no purpose to that but to hurt his feelings. Pretty low. You speak of it very proudly. Is that what you think is appropriate here? I think that act clearly shows a lack of understanding what the site is about, A mean streak, And maybe some need for therapy.
Pretty disgusting.
DKAtoday dished Odin. He spit on him because Odin didn't like the democrats. What comes around goes around.
Hey bw. I didn't know that DK had that sway either, but i found out that he did. And assuming jart trusted DK to be a fair moderator...to do the right thing...he definitely did not with me in particular the night Trek19 was banned.
I cannot imagine anyone, especially a young idealistic anarchist condoning what he did to me that night. Luckily I was able to document it before that whole thread was taken down.
To put simply, he has betrayed the trust that she gave him. He does not deserve to be the moderator here.
If you could have come to the Occupy Town Square pop-up this past Saturday at Sunset Park, you would understand even more that DK does not represent what this revolution is about.
And no I will never forgive him for using the relationship I have with my family in a negative way to go after me in the unconscionable way that he did. I draw the line there.
Aside from him, I am ready to go on, and be one of the contributors here who brings about healing, and setting us on a path in part at least to being a compliment to the people in the streets, and parks. The journey that we find ourselves on is a noble one.... with a lot of really good, unselfish, courageous people in it. We should keep it on the high road.
I am growing more and more fond of the quote that is atop the Arch at Washington Square Park which is across the street from where the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire occured in 1911. That tragedy in which 146 people died, 119 of them women... is what spurred the creation of the ILGWU, worker's rights in general, and even the Women's Suffrage movement. And very, very appropiately, it is the park where OWS has had many events including the student debt crisis since the NYU campus surrounds this park.
Washington Square Park will also be the sight of the next Occupy Town Square pop-up....gee I love those people... on Sept. 15th.
Anyway, the quote reads: "Let us raise a standard to which the wise, and honest can repair. The rest is in the hands of God." George Washington These words should be our model going forward bw.
I guess I understand your feelings, but I like both you and DKA so I hope you can make amends.
Thanks you have always been supportive of me, which I truly appreciate, and you have had a very gracious presence on this forum from the beginning, OWS needs more people like you, and so too does the world for that matter.
I have come a long way in my life in learning to forgive, but no DK crossed a line in trying to portray my relationship with my family in a negative way... He also expected he would get away with it, since that whole thread was removed. Considering that my computer skills could be a lot better, I was lucky to document it before it was taken down. I will not hold onto any anger with DK. That's for my own benefit though, not his. He is just another person that abused the power that he had obtained, which ironically is one of the reasons why we are all here.
It is time we move on and do our part in helping this forum live up to its potential. I talked to April about the possibilility of having several moderators, and transparency. Actually it was her idea, and I think it is a good one. These moderators should be honorable people of different view points, and from different circumstances, backgrounds, etc. Everyone has to feel that they can come here, and express their viewpoints freely without being red baited, intimidated, curse at, purposely misrepresented repeatedly, ganged up on, voted down in droves, or worse. While this forum has always been a great place of learning, sharing information, and teaching, it is also my hope that it will do a much better job at connecting with the streets. Anyway, everyone has to feel that they have a part to play in this revolution.
I hear you Odin. I can't imagine what he could have possibly said about your relationship with your family. I've always thought you have a great relationship with them, especially your daughters. Think of it this way, does it really matter what anyone else thinks of your relationship with your family?
Keep doing what you've been doing and keep posting here as MadinUSA. I just realized your moniker is Mad and not Made. Very good! I like it! Me too!
It was a false portrayal of my family relationship that DK fomented, it was done in the hope of not making me look reputable. Anyone with an ounce of decency would have agreed. Funny, I just got a text from one of my daughters saying that they were all out of XL Dad of a UAA grad tee shirts, but they were going to order them. It's a real problem as my dad of a Fordham grad shirt is starting to wear thin. ;-)
I have mixed feelings about my new moniker Madinusa, as I am not an angry person, and believe that this rev has to focus on building community, educating, and instilling in others the 'outrage' we share on the rotten system we live under. I have promised that I would not pursue getting my Odin moniker back though, but.......are ya busy? lol
On a side note, did you see how I got Matt to reply with more than four words, and in a great post too? Did I ever have a bet with you on that? The tragedy at that shirt factory was very sad though
Biography of Susan B. Anthony
Thanks for the history lesson.
Susan B. Anthony, another courageous woman.
Us guys gotta get off our butts here.
The Triangle Shirtwaist tragedy, and the positive things that came out of it gave both women, and men a feeling of empowerment, and that is very much like what Occupy Wall Street is trying to do.
I knew sooner or later I could break you out of your short cryptic remarks ;-)
Not for nothing, but those photos are not easy to forget. Pretty gross. Great if it wasn't you. Maybe April can enlighten us as to who it was.
If you opened your mind and stopped seeing Thrasymaque through the lies purported by others, then you would come to understand what Thrasymaque is all about and you would know he never would post porn.
LOLOL, 'T' !!! Your hubris is hilarious with a tiny grain of that rare commodity for you - 'truth' !! You have behaved unconscionably many times on this forum and you have "been honest" NOT "always" but only a wee fraction of the time (like your 'ideal system = Canada' comment below, to which I'm replying here)!
I don't "hate" you 'Trashy' but I do think that we should be wary of you & here's what it's really all about :
"The Republicans believe that the suffering of poor Americans is not helping the rich enough. Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney are committed to abolishing every program that addresses needs of what Republicans deride as “useless eaters”."
Read it and weep :-(
verb. sat. sap. ...
'Tr@shy' (re. below) : You're persistent and determined but do NOT confuse that with "strong ideas" & I utterly reject your invitations to vanity, hubris, ego and myopic self-regard.
Only 'OWS' and The 99% matter here.
"The Medium Is The Message", said your deceased compatriot (Marshal Mcluhan) & thus :
"War, economic collapse, and personal devastation await Americans no matter who they vote for - and what we should do instead".
per ardua ad astra ;-)
yep Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney are also trolls
trying to distract the issues
re. below...by electron... ".... You should always be wary of a man with strong ideas...."
and many names .. ;)
To be honest, as usual, you and I are very much alike. We only have different ways of attracting attention. You do it with fanciful syntax and arrogant Latin, I do it in other ways. In three years, we will be the ones remembered here. We both understand that when presenting an idea, one needs a little big of dressing.
The biggest crime here is not to use bots or "troll", it is to be boring. That, we are not.
You should always be wary of a man with strong ideas.
'Trashy' : You have a functional but rather twisted brain and even those of us who don't like your devious ways - have some kind of soft spot for you. I've been busy with my life for most of this weekend but our brief interactions (your 'sandysterling' & 'electron' threads & LeoYo's thread about the teacher and her 5 priapic pupils) - as well my catch up read here, really speak volumes.
You are not a radical or "socialist" (as April seems to believe) ; you are actually quite conservative and reactionary. You may be a 'social liberal' but you are a 'gradualist' who will also defend capitalism quite readily. You seem to have little to say ever about Banks, Banksterism, The Nature and Issuance of Money & the Corporate Capture of Every Day Life but how could you if "crapitalism is ok" by you ?
Your own mean, mendacious & manipulative ; devious, deceitful & duplicitous, behaviour - past, present and probably - future, is your ultimate undoing. 'OWS' is a pro 99% movement whereas you are really a species of 'neo-feudalist / quasi-elitist' and probably a natural born 'Ayn Rand' archetype, in my opinion.
You are hoisted and hung on your own petard 'Trashy'. 'Truth' is Treason in The Empire of Lies' and you mate, are one of the wannabe Emperors !!
temet nosce ...
I have always been honest about my convictions. At the moment, because I have yet to see a better system, I prone a well controlled form of capitalism. My ideal systems would be Canada, and some European countries. I know you have a soft spot for me. That's natural. You might hate me in a way, but you can't resist reading my posts. Perhaps you're not only here to gather high-fives from your friends. Perhaps you also like to read interesting provocative material. That's why you read my threads. They always get a lot of comments for a reason.
Interesting. I'm hoping April remembers who it is. I'll take her word for it because many of us here remember it as being Thrasymaque, but I'll take whatever April says since I'm not sure. Have you become a religious person or something? I think someone who could write that nasty joke thread re: DKA lacks basic morals and could also post porn.
To electron: Okay, you got me there with religion. LOL! I'm not religious either. You are absolutely right, morals do not equal religion. Dhoh of me!
I'm not religious by any means. I think all religions should be illegal. I don't know what religion has to do with not wanting to post porn in a public forum. Do you believe only the religious are righteous? I would say that they are possibly the only ones that aren't.
[Removed]
LOL,
Why would anyone be paid to post here where there are only a few dozen active posters. You would be better of paying someone to post on the Sponge Bob Square Pants FaceBook page. They have 36,643,530 likes
http://www.facebook.com/spongebob
shes one to talk about monikers look at this post from yesterday mediocre at best and it had 5 twinkles 3 in the self same hour. http://occupywallst.org/forum/troll-logic-they-are-the-same/#comment-815543
You've touched a lot of things I'll talk about in my article. You'll be able to read it tomorrow.
One thing: "The numbers near a name represent how many people twinkle or stinkle your posts. "
From what I have found, this is not entirely true. You automatically get 1 point for reach post, then the twinkles and stinkles (funny names) give or take a point away respectively. This means that if you post a lot your score will go up unless you get stinkles. So, when I see a really high score, it doesn't mean that user got x amount of twinkles = his score. It could mean he just posted a hell of a lot. I tend to think those with really high scores are very active on this forum, almost addicted perhaps?
There are a couple of misleading things with the point system.
Yes a higher score implies more active however if the gang of 7-10 addicts as you call them do not like you, they stinkle every post you make whether they read it or not. You can see that you have a -17 point rating.
I have also found that the mods can turn of your twinkle/stinkle ability. I have an older profile where my votes do not count (the do not add or subtract points to posts). How do you like that for a group that proclaims to promote fairness and talks about direct democracy as the way of the future!
In the end I would say the the points mean very little except that you are liked by the gang of 7.
My main point is that the forum section of this site has little to do with OWS. You should not use what is posted here to reflect what active members of the OWS movement think.
How do you always end up in BCT with way more points than most people ever get Joe? Huh?
Exactly!
Exactly?! You didn't answer my question. LOL! How many monikers do you have?
Probably three or four. A few old ones that I do not use anymore because they lost their voting capability. I believe the monitors took their voting rights away. If I twinkled or stinkled a post it had no effect. How do you like that from a group that professes to promote fairness and touts Direct Democracy as the way of the future!
This group/site does not represent OWS!
Then you use bots, right?
Explain,
What is a bot?
Were can I get a bot?
How do I use a bot once I have one?
It's a computer program used to vote particular people, often oneself up, surely you know that by now?
Were can I get a bot?
How do I use a bot once I have one?
Why do you ask Joe?
He just wants to lead you on. He knows perfectly well what bots are - he has been trolling here long enough.
No I was serious.
How do you get a bot and how do you configure one to post for you. Does it have artificial intelligence to appear human, or does it just keep posting the same thing over and over.
You need to program a bot by yourself. You can make it post for you or automate anything else a human could do on the forum. The level of AI will depend on the sophistication of the program. To understand the level of humanism you can achieve at the moment, watch this short video of two bots chatting with each other. At one point, one of the bots realizes he's talking to another bot.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGmFL0HyWf8
Why in the World would an honest farmer need sock puppets?
Gang of seven?
Are you makin' up conspiracy theories now too?
You know who I am talking about. Let's not pretend.
I could call y'all a group of 7, a collection of 7, or a gaggle of 7 if you like.
And what do you call your little group?
The puppets of misdestiny?
The corn bin?
How about answering the first question I asked?
Your first question is hyperbole.
Not really. You're the one that chooses to use "group" names, for those posters you don't care for.
You're response is the hyperbole.
so why do you need sock puppets?
I had three previous accounts. I discovered that those accounts had their voting rights taken away. When I would twinkle or stinkle a post and then come back I saw that the vote did not stick.
How do you like that for a group that calls for fairness and direct democracy! That was my first hint that this is not really OWS. This is a site run by a group with a specific agenda that if you do not agree with 100% lock step you are constrained and voted down.
This forum is not a all representative of the OWS folks I have met on the streets. I find them much more open minded.
Am I missing something here?
When you say that your vote "didn't stick" how can you be sure that you were the only one who voted?
Because I tried several posts once I suspected something was wrong. There was not a lot of activity at the time.
I just logged on with two of those old accounts to check again and tried. It does not work. you still have 1 point. Not that I think your post should be twinkled...
There's lots about this forum that I'm in the dark over, Joe. I just come here to read the news, and share what I've managed to learn or find myself.
I guess I'll just hang in the background like always. Cheers.
Cheers mate. Does turning an empty pint glass up-side down on the bar mean the same thing it used to in Australia? I think I may have done that here. hmm ;-)
Eeerm we don't do pints.
Schooners, pots and handles.
And I don't drink in pubs. Just a quiet red at home.
An Aussie not drinking in a pub? What's up with that?
True, obvious, but the mods remain oblivious.
That's just a temporary shadow ban.
and what of your "agenda"?
Please don't pretend you didn't come here with one.
This is not a RW forum. If you are gonna be supporting the RW - you will no doubt find your toes getting stepped on. And rightfully ( no pun intended ) as this is a progressive ( Left ) leaning site.
This comment shows exactly what I am talking about. In your mind there are two kinds of people; RW and progressive. You are with us or against us. I could not have asked for a better example of what I am talking about.
I am not a RW or a progressive. A better label for me if I must have one is a moderate. I prefer not to have a label at all since I look at issues one at a time.
Joe you are a closet elitist. But your door is not closed as tightly as you seem to think. You are always snubbing your nose at the poor and downtrodden.
Question Joe. Can a conservative be progressive?
This is a progressive forum - to hell with the status-quo.
That does not sit to well with conservatives.
Since you insist on putting labels on people I think a better question is:
If you are not a progressive does that mean you are a conservative?
I believe you would say yes whereas I would say no.
Kinda goofed that one up joe. I did not call for an absolute of what a person cold be.
Try again. Thank you for playing.
Again you put people in boxes. Why do you think that people need to be categorized as progressive or a conservative. Those terms are subjective and relative.
I can be progressive on one issue and conservative on another.
I can be more progressive than Frank but less progressive than Charlie.
As I told you I spend hours volunteering along with my wife and kids each week working to help the poor at http://americasgrowarow.org.
I think your accusations that I am "always snubbing your nose at the poor and downtrodden" very offensive.
Actions speak louder than words spoken on a forum post.
DKAtoday is the biggest danger on this forum at the moment. He has/is corrupting it.
Joe all you need do is hang around for a while. You can't help yourself - you need to sneer. Most people who are not familiar with your body of work seem to really like you as you seem to have some good things to say - but sooner or later you drop your guard ( must be exhausting by the way ) and your true animal looks out - and then if anyone is paying attention at the moment - your carefully woven illusion begins to unravel.
Tell me something Joe. I here you make comments about voting and scores.
You have been on this forum since last Nov. Right?
Seems like if you were a well liked indvidual for all of your posts and comments - well that you would be further along then you are - What is even more funny - your comments seem to somehow end up on the best comment board quite often - but your score does not point you out as being that popular for such high scoring comments - I must admit I always find it quite funny to see your comments with such a high approval rating.
OH - Yes - ummm - almost forgot - question: Do you vote for yourself with your sock puppets?
BTW, Why would I give a rats ass how many points I have on the OWS board anyway? It is just not that important.
Good Afternoon.
I am not on here every day like you DK. I come on here once or twice a week and you are here every time.
I have a life. In fact I am heading out for a walk by the river with the dog.
Have a nice day!
You have such a high score because you have no life, not because you are loved. You are addicted to this forum in an unhealthy way. And, even if you were so loved it wouldn't mean that what you have to say is more relevant than what someone else has to say. We are not here for high-fives. We are here to express ideas. If you truly cared about OWS and anarchy, then you would ask the mods to remove the scoring since it is a form of hierarchy. A false hierarchy at that.
This ain't no Donkey Kong. We don't need scores, we only need ideas.
Exactly joe why should you have any points on an OWS forum - I mean as you are not a supporter of OWS - you have said so yourself.
So why would a comment of yours be so strangely popular?
[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2629) 0 minutes ago
BTW, Why would I give a rats ass how many points I have on the OWS board anyway? It is just not that important.
Good Afternoon. ↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink
Sandy, DKAToday brings up a point that regular contributors have about "who can you trust" on this site. There are LOTS of trolls and shills here. A great deal of time is unfortunately wasted just debating issues with them. They constantly change user IDs, and so it is a never-ending battle to have meaningful discussions with newcomers, as they will not have proven themselves to the regular contributors. It takes time to sort things out because of this, but you always have to treat newcomers politely yet cautiously because they might end up being great long-term contributors.
Sorry, but I guess what I'm saying is you're gonna have to provide some kind of proof that you are who you say you are if you want to get rapid acceptance here.
Sorry it has to be that way...truly sorry.
I was thinking why does she/he (?) not run her/his bonafides by OWS on the E-mail contact address and the the forum could do an intro.
Press Inquiries press@occupywallst.org
That's a good tip. I'll send them an email.
These/those grey [Removed] tabs are posters who have been censored. Isn't it fun!!!
[Removed]
But doesn't it highlight quite beautifully the tyrannic nature of private power? There is no free speech where the government is NOT concerned.
Thanks for the heads up. That's why I asked what those numbers were about.
Thx for clarification DK. Yours is a better approach I think.
thx UD - I had an extra firing synapse for the moment - I guess. {:-])
Ahhh. That actually made me laugh. Good times.
That's one of the strangest welcomes I had on a forum in a long time. Guilty until proven innocent! Maybe I can use this theme as the center piece for my article as in "what happens when all trust is lost". From my experience as a journalist, you can never really prove yourself completely. At one point or another the subject of an article needs to trust you. Because of this, I tend not to bother to much with those that distrust heavily from the start. Still, I ask, what would satisfy you? Where do you draw the line? I gave you my name and the magazine I work for, even though the only thing I know about you is your username.
Sorry to make you not feel welcome. That was certainly not the intent. But you do need to understand that much that is discussed on this site could very easily be interpreted as advocating treason, as this is a site that openly discusses radicalism. It is unknown how many people in the world actually peruse this forum. The number of regular contributors is small, but if you had even a few thousand people a day curiously reading things here (I have no idea whatsoever how many people actually read here regularly) that would be a lot of exposure. The cautious assumption is that it is certainly possible that the government monitors the site, given the post-911 paranoia climate of the country and Patriot Act hanging over peoples heads. It is unquestionably true that there are staunch defenders of the status quo here who constantly belittle and criticise the radical discourse and advocacy of dramatic change that many contributors consider vital for our future. So, given those challenges, it is not so much that there is no trust, but that it is something that must be earned here and is not a given to any stranger who just happens to show up on the doorstep.
Une link peut-etre, s'il vous plait ?
Yes, I too, think it very well could be our french faux anarchist. He has a few personalities on the go recently.
I don't speak French. I'm only going to interview English speakers. Sorry about that.
[Removed]
A link to what? Our magazine is not online. Not everything is online. He can always pick up the phone and call a university in Boston if his trust level has dropped so low. It's hard to prove yourself on the web! BTW - I read your links. Very interesting. I also made it to your blog. You're a prolific writer. And, you attack many genres like poetry, the essay format, etc... Still, do you think I have proof your real name is Dave? Nope. As a journalist, I always have to check data in real life. Links don't mean much. At the end of the day, you need to pick up the telephone.
Everyone has a web site, I think I even have one somewhere, who are you?
and why are you here?
http://www.wickenburgsun.com/
Believe it or not, not everyone has a website! There are pictures of me on the web, and a few articles that mention my name. You can certainly research that. I already told you my name and why I am here. Do you have anything to contribute in terms of Occupy?
I'm starting to think this site is afflicted with some kind of deep paranoia! Nobody seems to believe anybody! I guess that's what I'll focus on for my article as it seems the prevailing theme on this forum.
The best way to learn about this forum is to go through the archives and read. It could take a while as this has been, and is, a very dynamic place. Taking the word of just a few people to describe this forum would be a mistake in my mind. Read for yourself.
Click on "Forum" then "Archives."
I'm not only going to talk with a few people! However, I want the article to be about how the forum is now, not what it was 6 months ago, that's why I won't be reading too much of the archive. I've read a bit and I can already see how the forum themes have changed over time. That's interesting, but it's not the focus of what I want to write about.
Not reading the archive will be a mistake, but it's your article, so good luck with it. This is not a static place and how it is here today will not be how it is here tomorrow or next week, even.
i googled her and couldn't find her or the mag - did you?
Hi flip. Nope and I can't imagine there's a magazine out there that doesn't have a link. (Sandy could be a man's name too, I'm thinking.)
i am sure you are right but i don't see them too much - don't spend much time here but there is some good info floating around - keep at it!
Stick around, flip, we need you. You are one of the best posters here. I know it can be frustrating, but it's all about the message, right?
Yes there is a lot of good info here, and you are one of the better contributors here.
true - couldn't find him or the mag - didn't look too hard but what is that about. this site has imploded - it was never what i had hoped but it seems a few people now control it
You know, I really don't let that bother me at all. I just try to keep saying what I want to say and bumping up good threads and comments. There are still a lot of good people here imho. Once the election is over I think all the nonsense will subside.
I read part of the archive already, but I really want a feel for what the forum is like now. I'll probably stick around for a few days before starting to write. I already had interesting discussions with DKAtoday and zendog, both who seem to be very active posters. I just read a comment from a user who told me most people here were over 60. I found that a little surprising.
See. LOL. That's not true at all that most posters are over 60. It runs the gamut in age. I could name you who I think are our top posters who range in age from their 20's to their 60's, but what I think is irrelevant. This has been a very prolific forum, there are thousands of threads to read through. Good luck.
[Removed]
96 sounds better
"I don't think I need to be in the phone book - I think I am me. Who else would I be?"
I'm not saying you are not you! I'm just saying it's not that easy to check up on people and know who they really are. You don't have to worry. I'm not planning on using real names in the article unless some users specifically require that I do. Once the article is finished, I'll post it on this forum before going to press in the case that quoted users would like their real names published. Usually, when we write about online activity we simply publish the online usernames of the contributors.
[Removed]
OK great. Like I said, I'll post a copy of the article here before going to press and if I use some of your material I'll make sure to follow your requirements. We can certainly send some copies out to some people here. I'm not sure how many copies we could send, but I'm assuming that we could send one to each person who contributed to the article in any significant manner. I'll have to check with my editor before confirming this.
[Removed]
Our magazine does not favor a particular slant. I'm most likely not going to use your poetry as this piece is about online Occupy activities, but, if I do, I'll be sure to ask your permission first.
Who's Up
[Removed]
[Removed]
I'm not surprised our magazine doesn't show up on Google! It's a small magazine like I said. It's only distributed on campuses in the Boston area. It's a niche magazine for students in political sciences. If we grow bigger we might get an online presence, but, for the moment, we wish to remain small. A lot of articles are specific to problematics in the Boston area.
[Removed]
I'm sad to hear all the brightest contributors have left.
Let me explain the article briefly. Although Boston Politician is mostly concerned about political discussion pertaining to the Boston area, we have one article per publication that is about national or international politics. Our magazine has one issue per month. A few months back, one of our writers wrote about the Occupy scene in Boston and also touched upon various Occupy protests around the country. This month, I wanted to talk about the Occupy scene on the Internet which is why I asked to hear from the most serious contributors here.
DKAtoday had the idea that I contact press@occupywallst.org to get an official posting here. Although the idea is good and I might follow through with it, you have to understand that a journalist likes to go straight into the terrain unprepared. That's usually how you get the most truthful information.
The goal is not to print names or get personal details from anybody here. It's only to get a feel for what Occupy is like online. In all honesty, I gathered quite a bit of information on this posting alone. I already have a draft for the article. Certainly, I will touch upon your statement that all the brightest contributors have left, and also on the welcoming I got here. There seems to be a lot of paranoia on this site. Users don't trust newcomers which is normal if the forum was infested by trolls and bots like you say. When we visited Occupy protesters we also found the moral to be low as they felt constantly threatened by the police.
That being said, I also want to talk about the positive ideas and the concerns you are discussing on this site. Your links helped a lot in that regard.
I hope that helps you understand a little bit more what my project entails. Feel free to ask more questions.
Let me help you Sandy. I think I can point to the central contradiction in Occupy's approach to politics.
First, Occupy's strengths: Occupy avoids division by basing itself on the 99%. No explicit ideology beyond us vs. them. Past attempts to organize a movement which unites all grievances and points everybody in the same direction were led by socialists or communists burdened by an unpopular ideology and bogged down in endless debates about useless nonsense (like Trotsky.)
But the weaknesses. General economics is boring. More focused struggles against this or that racism or homophobia generate more passion. And here's where the 99% idea fails. The 99% unites but it doesn't help envision another world. Take all the bankers' money and redistribute it, reduce social inequality, create a level playing field.... all of it.... Now what's changed? From the point of view of most people: nothing. You still have schools, jobs, bosses and all of these things run the way they did before.
To really imagine a different world you have to divide the 99%, to attack hierarchy throughout the social structure. This is a project beyond Occupy, but without such a project, the movement can't really capture imaginations except for those of the die-hard activists.
could not the people shrug the hierarchy ?
just not pay debts
"Occupy avoids division by basing itself on the 99%. No explicit ideology beyond us vs. them."
Is this truly the case? Occupy did refuse to make demands and also refuses to play into the upcoming elections by not presenting candidates and by not proposing we vote for a particular party. Then we could talk about the general assemblies, the direct action, etc...
I'm not expressing an opinion on these choices, but they do seem to point to a clear ideology. From what I've seen at various protests, not everyone agrees with these ideas. Many protesters want to take part in the political game. I think Occupy clearly presented itself as a form of anarchy, even if they welcome various ideologies into the protest, it doesn't mean they will change their underlining ideologies to suit these new recruits.
maybe anarchists, of varying types, significant at ows inception, may have encountered difficulties in teaching simultaneously about anarchical philosophical foundations, direct democracy, and the flaws in our political economic systems simultaneously, and may presently be a minority.
this site has all kinds of people and ages, a random format, advocates education, personal responsibility for actions in whatever non-violent capacity one's conscience dictates.
one gets a chilly reception on the site. partisan politics is discouraged.
. thrasy was busy in nov. dec. and contributed to finding other forums or seeking a vacation. if you wan't info on thrasy, maybe his posts are still there. i don't know, maybe deleted.
maybe thrasy, spammers, or partisans compelled anarchists to other sites or minority status. change is difficult. our system has a history, and our people are not very informed, apathetic, ignorant, programmed to not believe one can make a difference
there is varied ideology. everyone has different viewpoint. most everyone believes democrats and republicans, the duopoly, support oligarchs and rich, and we must get money and lobbyists out of politics, and prevent global warming, protect the lower and middle classes, whose incomes have not kept pace with the one percent, while productivity has risen, jobs have left. some say there should be people running businesses, rather than capitalists, many want universal health care.
like in the ga's each has a unique voice. consensus is slow.
many may like green or justice party, and feel we should NOT discard our vote, and people here may be a little older than those gathering publicly.
but there is a lot of good information one is not going to encounter in mainstream media MSM.
one can make discoveries, grow and challenges ones beliefs, and be encouraged to make a difference, together with others of like mind.
these are just my personal opinions and feelings
i believe if you want to write truthfully about this site, you need to interview gsw. What he just said, I believe, illustrates completely what this site is all about.
I believe a web site allows people the luxury to say what they really believe, where as when people are on the streets, they are more accommodating to those who are the most passionate and presentable. As social creatures we don't want to offend those we make eye contact with.
The internet allows people to be themselves, and that can get messy.
Obviously many ideologies coexist, not comfortably or equally within Occupy.
Occupy Raleigh http://forum.occupyraleigh.net/ , about which I'm more qualified to speak, has been more conservative than most. We've had Ron Paul 'mavericks', people who insist on helping the police even as the police arrest us, people who open dialogue with republican pols, certainly no revolutionary sloganeering like OWS.
You know what unifies Occupy besides the 99%? It's the procedures, the whole finger wagging, GA, mic check, deescalation bs. Have you seen these in action? They take the place of ideas, amounting to a kind of ritualized enactment of Occupy's better world to be.
I have been to many protests and have seen the rituals you refer too. It sometimes borders on cultism. I'll check out your site, thanks.
There was alot of personal attacks against people who posted what they believed. I havent noticed "all the brightest contributors that have left" as they say, I read plenty still going on. I would say that the Occupy movement is right about one thing, there is something wrong, and imbalanced in society. They say the 1% is hoarding up the earth and its resources, or more specifically, its wealth. Many propose an increase of taxes on the rich is needed: but as outlined by Peter Schiff's youtube video as he speaks out for the 1%:
http://www.youtube.com/watchv=UGL-Ex1CD1c (dont watch this until after reading the rest as its kind of long)
Basically, Peter Schiff tried to warn people of the coming collapse in 2007 when he wrote about it in his book titled "Crashproof". Peter is trying to point out that increasing taxes on the rich isn't going to help create jobs, as he already pays 55% of his income in taxes, and if its raised to say 75% he would just sell his company or lay 150 people off saying, "Why should I work for free?"
I tend to agree with OWS that there is an imbalance in society, however I dont agree that giving more money to create a bigger government is the solution. Perhaps if there was a way to get the money directly into the hands of the people and bypass the middle man , our government whom I think is the most wasteful consumer that ever existed!
Or better yet, get the land back in the hands of the people. The bureau of land management has been managing our land what like a hundred years now? How many more hundred years will the government deny us the right to claim our land before we realize they have simply stolen it from us?
Then there is the issue of how our country was handed over to private banks best explained by this12 year old Canadian Girl. This girl brilliantly explains how we have been robbed as a country and has given her speech at several American banking conventions:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bx5Sc3vWefE
In my opinion, being a business owner, government overregulation negatively affects my finances far more than corporations do, as well as my constitutional right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. To reiturate what one OWS'er on this forum said, "All Government is needed at first to protect the people's liberties, but eventually they mature to a monster, and become the people's persecutor." So true, today in America.
Here : I will toss you a freebie. As it is what ( some of what ) I have done - it will not step on anyone's toes. And I have already shared it out on twitter - so it is already been made public off of this forum site.
They are letters of protest and chastisement.
OPEN LETTERS To The Fed. Gov. & The People :
http://occupywallst.org/forum/is-the-government-of-the-usa-trading-places-with-t/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/an-open-letter-to-the-people-of-the-usa-and-to-the/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/of-the-people-by-the-people-for-the-people-an-open/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/an-open-letter-to-the-state-department-to-the-worl/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/playtime-is-over-time-to-get-adults-to-do-some-par/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/open-letter-to-the-government-oath-of-office-72820/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/todays-modern-money-banking-investments-economy-an/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/give-em-all-a-madoff-makeover-from-riches-to-rags-/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/wardeath-by-drone-is-it-really-a-good-policy-or-is/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/letter-to-the-president-and-all-members-of-governm/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/let-us-get-our-priorities-syraight-an-open-letter-/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/proper-reform-what-do-you-think/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/standing-on-the-very-brink-of-doom-an-open-letter-/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/send-a-letter-to-the-potus-and-share-it-with-the-p/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/an-open-letter-one-comment-from-a-conversation-on-/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/an-open-letter-concerning-minimum-wage-though-i-wo/
Thank you. Open letters to the government. Quite interesting! This clashes with what we learned about the goals of Occupy protesters on the street so I find it quite interesting indeed. The vast majority of protesters we met did no want to make demands or otherwise work or even discuss matters with politicians. This is the first time I hear of an Occupy protester who sends letters to the President. Have you been doing this for a long time?
These links will also give you a better idea of what this on-line site is about:
ABOUT and Public Forum - Read the Rules Before Posting
Because as I say - anything you find on this forum page that is not specifically from OWS but is from contributing supporters is unofficial.
[Removed]
i figured DK recognized word patterns and arguments
[Removed]
occupy wall street odin
[Removed]
my google search link is being blocked
I have this adress enter above
https://www.google.com/search?q=occupy%20Wwall%20street&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&source=hp&channel=np#hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&hs=vM&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3Aofficial&channel=np&sclient=psy-ab&q=occupy+wall+street+odin&oq=occupy+wall+street+odin&gs_l=serp.3...4233.8302.0.9011.6.6.0.0.0.0.323.1325.0j3j2j1.6.0.les%3B..0.0...1c.UC15L9r3UsU&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=bed1a85ad7b6ce0&biw=1067&bih=735
but the link is not working
It aint no reporter.
[Removed]
Naw that was odins pet peave - keep it in the streets we have no business with politics. Besides she said that she was just observing and not taking sides or presenting a slant.
[Removed]
It was a pretty good act until it got to the point of questioning assertions and also pointing out that there are older anarchists in the streets who would take it unkindly as to being referred to as a kid. It is Odin.
[Removed]
I won't get her/him banned. But sandy lost his/her credibility with me.
I perused the rules yesterday, and, quite frankly, half the postings seem to break them! One of the rules is to abstain from political talk, but most of what I read concerns either the republicans or the democrats. I found that strange since the street protesters did not talk much about specific political parties. I'm still looking around and I'm trying to be as objective as possible so this is simply a remark, not a criticism.
Well then you overlooked some information in those links. Look for reference to Direct Democracy. As OWS is about working inside and outside of the system - This is a very commonly misunderstood fact.
In the About section:
What do we stand for?
Here are some documents published in New York that have been well received by the movement:
Principles of Solidarity
Declaration of the Occupation
"As OWS is about working inside and outside of the system"
Thanks for the information. I'll review it. My understanding was that Occupy was a protest based on anarchy that did not believe in the system and that is why protesters did not want to work inside the system. This is information that was gathered for a previous article from Occupy protesters. Things might have changed since. Is Occupy planning on creating a political party? Does Occupy endorse particular candidates in the upcoming election, or a particular party?
NOPE - OWS/Occupy is set up to be leaderless. A hard concept for most everyone to grasp. OWS/Occupy points to the ills of our society - this started with of course - WallStreet and the criminal activity that caused the economic meltdown. You might say the very visible tip of the ice-berg. But this has led to everything else - the Ills of society here in the USA are stagering and then you add in the rest of the world and it gets to be insane.
But anyway the Occupy movements point out these ills to the public to educate as the public is not getting educated by government nor by the Main Stream Media. Then it is up to the public to get involved and start addressing these issues - and this is where Direct Democracy becomes involved.
[Deleted]
This is The Critical Comment on this bogus thread. Thanx 'Proteus'.
e tenebris, lux ...
I just arrived today and I certainly have no preconceptions of what Occupy should or should not be. If I asked question about it being anarchy it is only because street protesters have told us that it is on numerous occasions. And, DKAtoday presented me with a long detailed definition of anarchy. I was mostly referring to his definition.
What do you think Occupy is, isn't, or should become?
[Removed]
Well at the moment - she has lost her credibility with me.
"Uh huh. so much for being the disinterested observer and not having a slant."
It wasn't a slant. The definition and the actions you presented me were incongruent. I simply asked you to further explain them. It's a way to gather information. It's not my subjective opinion that fighting from within a system and differing power to politicians is non-anarchist, it's in your definition.
No it is in your dismissing the long winded definition and going with preconceived notions from centuries of bad press. The histories written by the rulers who would understandably be worried about anarchy catching on.
"Having fun ODIN?"
Who's Odin? I hope I didn't offend you in any way as I was simply trying to understand your position. I guess I have to read more of this forum to see what it is really about. But, I have to say that so far it's been quite interesting. I think my article will be easy to write. There's a lot of material here.
Uh huh. so much for being the disinterested observer and not having a slant.
I'm running out of replies... arghhh
To my understanding, when your definition of anarchy states that - "If anarchists have one article of unshakeable faith then it is that, once the habit of deferring to politicians or ideologues is lost, and that of resistance to domination and exploitation acquired, then ordinary people have a capacity to organise every aspect of their lives in their own interests..." it seems clear that every anarchists should and must refuse to defer his power to an elect official responsible for representing him. Essentially, it means anarchists refuse to be represented. As such, they do not work with politicians, they work between each other because they want the power to remain solely and entirely with the people. I thus find it very odd that you state that anarchy wants to work from within the system, since your definition states the complete opposite. Never mind that anarchy means without hierarchy, and thus without elect officials representing the people as this means they are above the people. And, even if you argue that they aren't and that a person retains all their powers even if they are being represented, within the current government system there are hierarchies for the representatives themselves.
I'm simply trying to make head or tails with the comments you provided as they seem contradictory.
I am not saying that Occupy should or shouldn't be based on anarchy. And, I'm not saying that this could not change. The people that make up Occupy can decide what is best. However, I do think it's important to be clear when you accept donations and new members. A person joining Occupy should know what to expect, just like a person donating to the protest.
Maybe you are trying to take in too much at one sitting. Sleep on it review the thread later but in the meantime take the time and have the courtesy to contact the e-mail address that I gave you. Have the site verify you. And let em know what you are doing as they would no doubt love the attention of even a college news paper. Then they can introduce you - and I don't see where you should have a problem with that.
"No it is in your dismissing the long winded definition and going with preconceived notions from centuries of bad press."
How did I dismiss your definition? I used it in my question when I quoted the part about "not differing our power to politicians". I was talking about the definition you posted.
In your view, what does "not differing the power to politicians" mean?
Wanna try that one again?
deferring
present participle of de·fer (Verb)
Verb:
Put off (an action or event) to a later time; postpone. Submit humbly to (a person or a person's wishes or qualities): "he deferred to Tim's superior knowledge".
"...power originates in the people, and they alone have, together, the right to wield it."
Sure, but this has little to do with fighting from within the system. It seems clear to me that anarchy is about empowering the people to fight against the system from without. Like your highlighted quote says, power originates in the people. Your definition clearly states that one must remove the habit of differing power to politicians if one wants to be an anarchist. The power must remain with the people. Once you start playing from within the system, you legitimize the system, and essentially you are differing power to it, to the politicians within it.
These are the reasons I find strange that you write letters to the President and that you claim Occupy fights from within as well as from outside the system. Either Occupy has changed since the last time I looked and it is no longer an anarchic protest, or your definition of anarchy is wrong? Certainly, something in incongruent as the definition you provided and the actions you describe to not go well hand in hand.
Politicians are meant to be our ( the peoples ) employees. To represent us and what we want and need - to represent to the best of their ability the Majority. In this way then government becomes horizontal and not hierarchical this is Direct Democracy - where the people are involved with directing their government. Currently the government has come to represent the minority - the 1% as it is referred to somewhat incorrectly but not too far off.
Anyway the terminology I use is that the corrupted politicians are actually corpoRATist's as they are supporting profits over people, profits over the environment, profits over society, profits over the world.
And that there is a group of politicians ( a very visible group ) hiding behind the Republican Banner that are in open rebellion to the government and the People of the USA. Yes there are some also hiding behind the Democratic Banner as well - though they at the moment are not acting as openly as their counterparts in the Republican party.
"Politicians are meant to be our ( the peoples ) employees. To represent us and what we want and need - to represent to the best of their ability the Majority. In this way then government becomes horizontal and not hierarchical this is Direct Democracy - where the people are involved with directing their government. Currently the government has come to represent the minority - the 1% as it is referred to somewhat incorrectly but not too far off."
This flies in the face of all the political theory I learned! When you have a representative, then you are essentially differing the power of the people to a politician. Sure, he works for you, but he does so by representing you, and, as such, he talks for you. This is what differing power means. As I understand it, anarchy is about horizontal organization in which people talk for themselves since there are no leaders. You can go to a general assembly and raise your concerns with your voice and you can have your say on every issue. If a candidate is talking for you, and you only have a vote every few years, then you are clearly differing your power to that candidate.
I'm sorry, I still feel what you have presented me is quite incongruent. You have showed a definition of anarchy that does not fit with the actions you claim Occupy is taking.
This is not a criticism, but, surely, with the definition you have provided, you must agree that if Occupy fights the system from within then it is not anarchy. There's nothing wrong with that, but I think it's important to understand definitions clearly to know where the protest is heading.
Actually there are two models used in political thought. they are the delegate and the trustee models of representation. Do they do what we sent them there to do, or do they discern the best interests of their constituencies through deliberation?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trustee_model_of_representation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delegate_model_of_representation
Having fun ODIN?
" If anarchists have one article of unshakeable faith then it is that, once the habit of deferring to politicians or ideologues is lost, and that of resistance to domination and exploitation acquired, then ordinary people have a capacity to organise every aspect of their lives in their own interests, anywhere and at any time, both freely and fairly."
The whole definition is a tad long winded and much of it could be better synthesized, but I found this particular paragraph interesting. As it states, anarchists share the unshakeable faith that the capacity for people to organize their lives freely must come with 1) removing the habit of deferring to politicians, and 2) resisting exploitation.
I was referring to number one when I stated in my other comment that is seems incongruent for an anarchist group to want to work from within the system. My idea seems to be further strengthened by your definition since when we work form within the system we automatically defer a part of our control to politicians. This is the only time I've heard of an anarchist group that wishes to work from within the confines of an hierarchy like the American republic. I find this quite interesting, and, frankly, I am totally bewildered as to what this really means. My first instinct would be to say that if Occupy wants to work from within the government, then it cannot call itself anarchy as per your definition since is it deferring to the politicians.
Last paragraph: ( and enter direct Democracy )
Elsewhere, the less formal practices and struggles of the more indomitable among the propertyless and disadvantaged victims of the authority system have found articulation in the writings of those who on brief acquaintance would appear to be mere millenarian dreamers. Far from being abstract speculations conjured out of thin air, such works have, like all social theories, been derived from sensitive observation. They reflect the fundamental and uncontainable conviction nourished by a conscious minority throughout history that social power held over people is a usurpation of natural rights: power originates in the people, and they alone have, together, the right to wield it.
"NOPE - OWS/Occupy is set up to be leaderless. A hard concept for most everyone to grasp."
Nothing hard to understand there. It sounds like anarchy to me. It kind of reminds me of the student protests in France, may 68'. I'm just bewildered that an anarchic group would want to work the system from the inside. This seems somewhat incongruent.
Anarchy as a whole is misunderstood - even by many who think of themselves as anarchists. I have found that many differing social systems have many similarities to Democracy and to Republic.
I came across a definition at some point in time and it makes a lot of sense and other anarchists ( as I don't consider myself to be one though others might ) have found it to be very agreeable :
What is anarchism?
Anarchism is the movement for social justice through freedom. It is concrete, democratic and egalitarian. It has existed and developed since the seventeenth century, with a philosophy and a defined outlook that have evolved and grown with time and circumstance. Anarchism began as what it remains today: a direct challenge by the underprivileged to their oppression and exploitation. It opposes both the insidious growth of state power and the pernicious ethos of possessive individualism, which, together or separately, ultimately serve only the interests of the few at the expense of the rest.
Anarchism promotes mutual aid, harmony and human solidarity, to achieve a free, classless society - a cooperative commonwealth. Anarchism is both a theory and practice of life. Philosophically, it aims for perfect accord between the individual, society and nature. In an anarchist society, mutually respectful sovereign individuals would be organised in non-coercive relationships within naturally defined communities in which the means of production and distribution are held in common.
Anarchists, are not simply dreamers obsessed with abstract principles. We know that events are ruled by chance, and that people’s actions depend much on long-held habits and on psychological and emotional factors that are often anti-social and usually unpredictable. We are well aware that a perfect society cannot be won tomorrow. Indeed, the struggle could last forever! However, it is the vision that provides the spur to struggle against things as they are, and for things that might be.
Whatever the immediate prospects of achieving a free society, and however remote the ideal, if we value our common humanity then we must never cease to strive to realise our vision. If we settle for anything less, then we are little more than beasts of burden at the service of the privileged few, without much to gain from life other than a lighter load, better feed and a cosier berth.
Ultimately, only struggle determines outcome, and progress towards a more meaningful community must begin with the will to resist every form of injustice.
In general terms, this means challenging all exploitation and defying the legitimacy of all coercive authority. If anarchists have one article of unshakeable faith then it is that, once the habit of deferring to politicians or ideologues is lost, and that of resistance to domination and exploitation acquired, then ordinary people have a capacity to organise every aspect of their lives in their own interests, anywhere and at any time, both freely and fairly.
Anarchism encompasses such a broad view of the world that it cannot easily be distilled into a formal definition. Michael Bakunin, the man whose writings and example over a century ago did most to transform anarchism from an abstract critique of political power into a theory of practical social action, defined its fundamental tenet thus: In a word, we reject all privileged, licensed, official, and legal legislation and authority, even though it arise from universal suffrage, convinced that it could only turn to the benefit of a dominant and exploiting minority, and against the interests of the vast enslaved majority.
Anarchists do not stand aside from popular struggle, nor do they attempt to dominate it. They seek to contribute to it practically whatever they can, and also to assist within it the highest possible levels both of individual self-development and of group solidarity. It is possible to recognise anarchist ideas concerning voluntary relationships, egalitarian participation in decision-making processes, mutual aid and a related critique of all forms of domination in philosophical, social and revolutionary movements in all times and places.
Elsewhere, the less formal practices and struggles of the more indomitable among the propertyless and disadvantaged victims of the authority system have found articulation in the writings of those who on brief acquaintance would appear to be mere millenarian dreamers. Far from being abstract speculations conjured out of thin air, such works have, like all social theories, been derived from sensitive observation. They reflect the fundamental and uncontainable conviction nourished by a conscious minority throughout history that social power held over people is a usurpation of natural rights: power originates in the people, and they alone have, together, the right to wield it.
[Removed]
By disfavoring the republicans, aren't you favoring the democrats? Isn't that the type of party politics that Occupy wants to avoid? From my understanding, street protesters avoid favoring a particular party, and attacking a particular party resumes itself to favoring the others over it, since, if you did not favor any party, then you would attack them all. No?
[Removed]
In essence, you trust that other parties like the democrats care and will take care of the problems raised by Occupy?
You refer to the anarchists who want to go against the system instead of fighting against it as kids. Are you aware that some prominent thinkers and philosophers who are anarchists and of old age are also part of Occupy? Isn't it somewhat demeaning to others if you use the word "kid" to define them. It makes it seem like if anarchists are too young to understand what they really want. As if what they believe in is only the product of a young immature mind.
[Removed]
Sandy, it has been my experience that many (and perhaps even most) of the regular contributors to this forum are older (certainly not "kids"), and thus bring those older experiences to bear in these discussions. I like to think of it as the "kids" being the footsoldiers who are actually on the street and at the GAs, while us "old farts" are having discussions and strategy ideas that might prove useful somehow (maybe) to the movement.
I would actually be most curious to know the age of all the regular contributors here. I myself am 57. I have recently talked to someone who I learned was 72. I have frequently encountered people who are in their 60s here. This tells me there could be a lot of retired contributors who are worried about the future of the country and are offerring up their opinions as to what to do about it.
[Removed]
"I'm not sure what else to ask. You seem to already have direction for your article - can we get you to post it here once you publish?"
Like I said in another comment, I'll post it here before going to press.
Thanks for all your help. That's very kind of you. After taking a few days to read some postings and comments here I might ask you to comment further on some of your specific writings if you wish to do so. Thanks again.
[Removed]
[Deleted]
"Some long time ago, I published a small piece of text on an obscure publishing site, days later, my name was all over Google and I had to fight for a month to remove it."
We don't publish on the Internet, and we don't intend to do so at this time. It's a small publication printed only for some universities in the Boston area. We don't have big numbers at the moment.
"The next question is, whatever you are a small magazine or not, why would you waste internet exposure when you have so little to do to have it?"
I'm not sure I understand your question. I am writing an article on the online activities of Occupy. This is not about getting Internet exposure for our magazine. I'm here to research an article that I'm writing and which will be published in our upcoming publication.
"Still , it may be possible you have a school magazine with a blue cardboard cover only for its students, but if you were so preoccupied to stay small, you would simply enjoy strolling here to talk about evidences, the way you're talking and insisting, you look like you want to make a professional study."
We are a small publication, but that doesn't mean we are not serious!
[Deleted]
[Removed]
We are a small community magazine. We are not interested in having an Internet presence at this time. We could have a website, but we would not have the resources to update its content so it would remain static which would simply make it look like we are inactive. From my experience, an Internet presence can have a negative impact if it is not properly maintained.
We usually do not have a problem of trust. Most of our articles concern people in the Boston area and we can meet them in person. And, honestly, this is the first time I have encountered so much distrust on the Internet. The first part of my article will be on "being guilty until proven innocent". I like the sound of that statement, and it describes quite well the feeling I got as a new user on this forum.
[Deleted]
"Don't you think it make sense?"
What are you referring to?
[Deleted]
I don't think you are over reacting! A little bit of pestering can bring out a person's true colours. A kind of 'vetting' if you will. I wasn't here this morning. What guy was bothering you enough that you thought of leaving the forum?? Do you have a link?
[Deleted]
I think you're spot on! He's using many of his characters and playing them off each other to keep the conversation going. Recently I've only been peeking in here, and I have to admit...when I first saw your name, I thought you were him! Hahaha! "Proteus" sounds similar to something he would choose as a username. Hang in there...you're doing great! I had to answer your post up here as the last post didn't have a reply button. The conversation streams only go to 13 or 14 posts.
Oh my...I see! What a merry-go-round. That, my friend, is a piece of work originally known as 'Thrasymaque' from your neck of the woods. His username was eventually banned, and has since done his level best to shape this forum to his ideal. Stick around and you'll get the hang of his modus operandi. I used to be on the forum far more that I am now and I used to be able to spot him from 1000 paces. It gets easier over time. Don't take him too serious. His bark is worse than his bite. Hehehe!
[Removed]
[Deleted]
[Removed]
I don't want to make personal subjective comments at this point since I'm still writing the article. I don't want it to be about what I think. I'm just observing. I'll get back to you after publishing.
do you have a profile online?
You mean like Facebook? Yes, but it's private.
make it public
Nope. Facebook is already public enough as it is! I'm fighting for my privacy everyday!
why?
if we all voted openly, the result of the vote could not be rigged
[Removed]
[Removed]
If you are looking for online OWS/Occupy activity - then you will want to go here NEWS as what you find "here" on this forum page is unofficial postings made by supporters as well as attackers of OWS/Occupy.
Of course, but, usually, the unofficial activity of a group tells as much or even more than the official activity. I'm sure that if the official OWS protesters found this forum displeasing they would shut it down. It exists on the official OWS URL, so it must have a meaningful purpose.
"I" like to think of the forum as a communications hub. Others have their own thoughts.
I'm not an official OWS protestor, however I did donate my time to create www.occupynews.net as a way for 175 occupy sites from around the country and world to keep up on the latest news.
I also differ on debt in that I am not advocating debt forgiveness but the ceasing of interest rate charges, penalties, and fees on existing credit card debt and student loan debt for those who are serious about paying down their debts.
[Removed]
Seems to be no magazine with that name mentioned anywhere in any search. Interesting.
This one is worth a look though.
http://blogs.bostonmagazine.com/boston_daily/2012/07/31/campaign-ads-ruining-american-politics/
Nothing too interesting about that. There's tons of magazines and other publications with ISBN numbers that aren't listed on the Internet. We live in a connected world, but the Internet still doesn't account for everything that exists out there.
I did give you my name and you'll find me if you do some research. There's even a few pictures of me on the web. What's your real name? I assume it's not builder.
Do you have anything to contribute except doubt? I already have enough doubters to make an article just about my welcoming on this forum, but I'd also like to hear your points of view concerning Occupy. What's your goal on this website? What do you like to post about?
Just did several searches for your "moniker", and this is all I turned up, Sandy.
http://www.bostonherald.com/blogs/entertainment/the_assistant/?p=8748&srvc=home&position=recent
[quote]According to the NEAQ, a former Miss Massachusetts named Sandra Sterling, who is now a resident of the Hannah Duston Rehabilitation Center, had painted a poster of several different species of penguins and had sent a copy to Aquarium staff along with a letter stating how much she enjoyed the tuxedoed birds. I mean, what a lovely lady! Aquarium staff were genuinely touched Sandra’s actions, so they wanted to thank her. So instead of hauling all the folks to the aquarium, they brought the aquarium to the home. Lovely! [/quote]
It's all about information dissemination for me, Sandy. That's the reason why the site was created. If you are collecting information on regular users here, purportedly for a magazine article, it's only fair that you identify that magazine, and point to some previous articles for our reading and research purposes.
Name is Norman, and I hail from the hinterland of the Cooloola coast in QLD Australia.
Norman, take two seconds to re-read my original posting. You'll find that I do indeed name the magazine. Certainly, I can't be blamed if you don't take the time to read properly! You can also Google my name. You can also call universities in Boston to ask about the magazine.
I can't simply scan one of our old magazines and post a passed article here. There are copyright laws. I would need the permission of the magazine owners, and of the writers of the articles I would want to publish online. It's complicated, and, as I have explained elsewhere on this thread we are not going to to that for the one article that I am writing.
I have been very forthcoming. I have answered all the questions people have asked me. I came here with my real name, a magazine name that can be checked, and the honest goal to write about this website.
The welcome I got here is beyond strange. It's almost insulting.
I've shown you the search results for your name, and your publication has not a single result for any search engine.
Googling my name, and I'm a nobody, comes up with several public events I've attended over the years.
Fess up, or the gig is up.
Do you want to be an investigative journalist? If so, you have to do your work properly. I only work part time for that magazine, and it has no online presence. What you should do is pick up a phone and call a university in Boston, then ask them to speak with the political department, then ask about the Boston Politician. We distribute our magazine at all Boston universities.
As a journalist, I've learned not to accuse or insult people before checking facts. I'm starting to think this forum is made of a small clique that doesn't let anyone new inside. Is that it?
Do you think it's important to welcome new users?
Whatever happened to Sandy's article?
I think that was a hoax.
That's my point, but the thread is still there. Looks pretty silly.
And a lot of comments on it - I wonder who is getting the laugh out of this one?
Well, now, let me think.....
vvv the PR shill?
But the forum's not important. That's why they waste their time here trying to wreck it.
Well of course - they are just here out of altruism for the saving of our time - don-cha-know. Yep the lot of em are plainly S-aint.s...ack...huh..hHMmm ... ack-hack....gag......shit..... I should..'nt say st..u.u.ff... like...hack. . . . . . . hack.ack. . . . gurgle ...cough....t-t-th-thhattt...ugh...
[Deleted]
LOL - the mask has been removed.
Simply read what people are writing and make your own determination. It's all subjective, someone that agrees with you or strokes your ego often becomes your favorite contributor.
Of course, I do that too. I am not looking for my favorite contributors. I am looking for the most frequent and active ones. I want my article to reflect what this forum is about, as such, it's clear I'll give more importance to dedicated posters who contribute each day as opposed to those who simply pass by once in a while.
Look for the dedicated ones to be here at all hours I suppose, check the best comments list and recent comments. I've become more of a passerby, I wanted this to be a sort of liberal Tea Party, get good people elected for a specific agenda. It's gone more in an anarchistic direction and the majority doesn't seem to want to get involved with the electoral process.
What you just wrote is fascinating as it goes against what I've been uncovering today. My idea was that the forum was becoming more political and less anarchic, not the other way around. Perhaps I have to look closer into this. Most regular posters I have talked to seem more like democrats wanting to play in the system as opposed to anarchists wanting nothing to do with politics.
Your perception is correct mostly, and this is very unlike the streets.
I've drifted in and out of the forum as time permits and only have commented on items that interest me. My opinions with regard to the anarchist element formed early on and I haven't kept track so you may have a better view things as they are today. The shift to participating in the system may be too little too late, but that too is simply my opinion.
Hmm.....this is just to good to be true. Joined Aug. 24, 2012.....
Sandysterling.....be honest....what are you really looking for?
If you are who you say you are, then surely you have insider information on how to access any one of the many persons who post on here. After all.....this is a media operation...is it not?
Sounds suspikcious!
I came here to write an article about online Occupy activities, but I'm starting to think I should write about "trust on the Internet". Lol
Yet, why should there be trust on the internet? If you are a reporter, then surely you understand what types of individuals utilize the internet? Is this.....cyber dream land, yes. Are we little children about to be preyed upon? No
Those who are aware of what OWS is about really cannot sum up in one forum or post what issues are relevant to the all of society. Yet, one has to start somewhere...correct?
My basic question is why there is such a preoccupation with OWS and what the political basis for this movement is all about when all is explained after one first logs on? There are some arguments that are just personal views, biased opinions and will never get to the heart of this nations problems. There are some opinions that will never truly express what this movement is about, or even touch upon the reasons for its existence, just ramblings of individuals trying to get their personal views across.
Here is the best way to go about it and meet with those who keep this website going since they, "allegedly" are monitoring everything.
http://howtooccupy.org/
Personally, I am a realist and never trust anyone that tries to pretend to try to understand the already understandable. It reeks of ulterior motives.
There are always advantages and disadvantages that come with the level of trust you wish to give a person or a particular situation.
I don't trust walking in dark alleys when I'm alone. This has the advantage that I seldom find myself in a situation where a man could forcefully attack me. However, I also have to walk further distances as I avoid many shortcuts. If you don't trust banks, then you need to keep your money under a pillow which is not very convenient.
On the Internet, you cannot be physically attacked and you cannot always see your attacker. You open yourself up to attack if you reveal too much about yourself. This has nothing to do with newcomers since whatever you write here is archived and can be read by anybody whether they are signed in or not.
Someone could create a technical attack, but in that case only the admins would know and could do something about it.
So, the only thing a newcomer can do is post a comment, an idea. This cannot harm you so there is no reason for a preemptive attack like I received as a welcoming here. If I were to post something against the forum rules, then I would expect another user to report me and an administrator to ban me. But, I simply came here and started to discuss issues. I don't really understand the goal of such preemptive attacks.
What do you gain by intimidating a new user by insinuating that he isn't honest, or that he is some passed troll? How does that protect you? Even if a user was a passed troll, would it matter unless he starts trolling again, at which point you would simply report him to the moderators?
To answer your first question - "Yet, why should there be trust on the internet?" I would say because if you want to create a community that grows you'll have to welcome new people and if you distrust them from the beginning, without giving them the benefit of the doubt, then you'll lose a lot of potentially worthwhile users. You'll limit the potential growth of the forum. And, like I explained above, there really is no advantage. If he trolls, then you report. If he hacks, then an admin will notice.
I hope that answers your question?
TMI......the internet is a tool that sets the behavior for the people who use it and feed into it. You cannot shield a child from abuse or stop persons who want to attack others, on the internet, no matter how many police log on!.
This forum contains individuals who are not open to new ideas, thoughts, or have the ability to understand the reality of the world they live in, unfortunately. So, on that note, I really don't believe anyone can create a community on the internet unless they are of the same mindset, and organizational thought.
Just like those on this forum, your idealism is beyond the scope, reasoning and reality of this particular forum and the people who utilize it. So...Good Luck!.
Why don't you provide a sample of a past issue of your magazine for us to browse. That way people would be more likely to open up and freely discuss their thoughts and views. Isn't that a journalist's first concern? Gaining trust?
We don't have scanned issues. And, if I scanned one, I would need permission to post a copy here as our issues are for sale. Putting an issue online would undermine our sales quite a bit. That's not something we can afford.
Gaining trust is important, but this is only one article for the magazine. We're not going to post a copy of our magazine online so that we can gain the trust of a few forum users to write only one article.
I didnt realize there were print magazines who didnt have an online presence these days.
Hmmmm...
There are many. You would be surprised. However, if you doubt me, then please call a university in Boston, ask for the political department, and ask them about the Boston Politician. That way we can perhaps start to talk about Occupy instead of me being accused all the time. Google my name! I have a few pages on Google.
If you want to be an investigative journalist, then you have to spend some time investigating.
I would be suprised.
Investigating is going to OccBoston.
You should investigate, because insulting someone and accusing them without knowing facts is not right.
Should I believe all the bad things I heard about you from other forum users without first discussing those things with you? Of course not, and, as an investigative journalist, I check facts before making accusations.
Do whatever you want.
Have fun fact checking on internet users. That should be quite interesting.
Are you just getting started in your field?
Could you do me a favor. Could you call a Boston university?
Sure, I'll put it high on my list of things to do Monday morning...
41. Make various phone calls looking for a magazine.
hahaha...
She gave the phone number of someone at the Boston Globe here:
http://occupywallst.org/forum/this-line-of-communication-has-been-severed/#comment-815741
[Removed]
LOL
[Removed]
That's fine. Doubters provide a good feel for this site. If all I get here is doubt and mistrust instead of Occupy messages, than that is what I'll write about. There's no win or lose for a journalist. I come here and I see what's going on, then I write about it.
[Removed]
U say U are a student? or an actual journalist? Because all too many journalists(?) these days do not actually print facts - instead they print opinion - and opinions are common - everyone has them.
Some pieces are opinion based some aren't. It depends on the context. Every news paper has opinion sections. I'm a journalist. I said that in the second phrase of my intro. Our magazine readership is mostly made up of political students, but it concerns issues that affect everybody.
By the way, are you a moderator here? I'm asking because you have the highest score I came across and you seem very serious about checking me out and doubting all I say.
How about one of your own recent articles for the magazine? Surely you have that in digital format.
I'll try to get one from the office tomorrow if my editor permits it. I might be able to publish an article that didn't make it to press.
You can search the archives here for a historical view of how the early occupy forum was one of action, while the current forum is one of inaction.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/archive/
We can always go back to being what we were
I wish we could get the numbers of people out in the street back up. Our group once had a max of 30-40, now it's down to 4 core members plus a few others occasionally. The support is still there from general population though.
Agreed, it can be discouraging at times that so few people are taking part in the protests, even in a city like NY. The reasons vary from people who are too busy with work, and/or school....to people who fear being arrested, to people who have defeatist attitudes, and who unfortunately believe that nothing can stop the downward cycle we are in, which is bull shit.
I have just gotten back from another Occupy Town Square event in Sunset Park Brooklyn. If you could have been there today, you would have a feeling of renewal, not of despair, believe me. These mostly young people in this group, and the other affinity groups that were there... are amazing. Truly, i have nothing, but admiration for them. What I see is a quiet resolve to see this through to fruition. Everyone knows, it won't be easy though.
Anyway, as NY, and cities like it (although there is no city like NY) 'go'....so will 'go' the chance for success of this movement. Knowing this from the beginning is the reason that I chose to dedicate most of my efforts there in NY, in my once a week trips since late October (minus my time in AK).....even though it is approximated 65 miles away from where I live.
These same kids in OTS who do these events with the hope of reaching out to the mainstream, also take part in, and help organize direct actions. This group's blue-print is being emulated in other cities now. Some of the kids in this group are very well educated, in not only this country but abroad as well. The 'real mover' behind OTS went to Cambridge on a scholarship. He was also arested in Montreal for taking part in those protests. Others in the group do jail watch, either greeting people coming out of jail, or getting the names of people going in. The sense of community is very heartening to see.
I am going to 'digest' the wonderful day that I had today amongst all these determined people, and put up a thread in a couple of days, or so. Look for it
Just to let others here know that all Occupy groups are not kids, homeless, jobless, or unwashed. The people you see on TV are the tip of the ice berg.
Our Occupy group in a small town of 80,000 is mainly middle aged or above with a few younger ones occasionally. Not a single black bloc. The positive feedback we get in the form of honks, thumbs up, raised fists, and waves comes from every age and income level. I was surprised to see in our mostly conservative middle class area people driving brand new cars in support of Occupy as much as ones driving junkers. The response is still as strong as it was 8 months ago when I first started. Occupy's message is not dead. Never let the media convince you otherwise.
Will keep an eye out for your digest.
I agree, even in NY now, you see more, and more middle-aged, and older people attending these OWS events. Today, there were tons of kids there. It was annoying as hell!..lol....just kidding. When I go to OWS events I always trim my beard, and dress well, and in the warmer weather, I often wear my "Dad of A Fordham Grad tee shirt. Still waiting for my UAA grad/dad shirt. :-)
This revolution will be driven mostly by the young though, as they have the energy, and arguably the most to lose if things contiue as they are.
A couple of days ago, the cable man came to my house, and as usual to almost everyone new that i meet, I got to talking about Occupy to him. Surprisingly he knew that the shitty things that are going on in this country is way beyond the capability of party politics to fix nearly anything, in the same way that most people in OWS do. He still though did not know what OWS was about though. I filled him in, and gave him some stuff to think about.
In the very conservative middle-class area that live in, and that is hurting quite badly, i believe people are starting to have the same epiphany that the cable guy had under-gone. When I discuss my involvement 'with OWS to them, I have found that when you tell them, 'this is not about dems vs. repubs, but rather about right vs.wrong....well they are thrown off balance, and start to listen. Although they might not agree with me, I know that I have made 'in-roads' in their psyche
Anyway, I is good to hear the spark' hasn't been doused out in California. It reains all of our jobs to reach out, to see that the spark is reignited. Never give up...never.
My local newspaper....circa 100,000 or so.. has been going on a relentless campaign to increase readership, and I suspect that is because people are turning away from MSM, as people realize that they do not cover the news accurately, or the concerns, or degree of discontent of the people in this country. I always enjoy telling the callers why i do not want their paper, but I am respectful to the fact that they are just trying to make a living.
Newspapers are a dying breed. I used to take the paper for years, but get 90% of my news with the internet. The internet also has the advantage of comparing the same story from many sources. No one source can be trusted for all news.
I'm looking at the polls, about 45% for each major candidate, which only leaves 10% voting for third party or independent. After all of the financial troubles, political corruption, and loss of freedoms, how can the people continue to vote for more of the same? Whichever way the polls go, I'm committed at least till November. Sure hope that justice will prevail like Truman did back in the 40's.
One start would be to never mention the MSM unless it is preceeded with 'corporate-owned or corrupt'. I don't understand how they can vote for them either. More and more people are turning away from corporate-owned MSM. As diasappointed as i am on what this forum has become, it is still a wonderful place to share our knowledge, and here different perspectives. My sentences are going astray, time for bed. A great day though, a lot to reflect on.
[Removed]
I'm an old guy who got beat up locked up tear gassed many times back in the day. Having been hit by a car a few years back my running from the cops or even standing in one spot for long days are over. So yes I also work lots of odd hours and before I leave for work as well as when I get home I enjoy participating in this forum and hope I make positive contributions.
top contributors are not the ones with the highest scores. They are the ones who are ranked for example you can say something and get ten points from people because they like it. But beware because countless here have multiple accounts to raise there standings or post mindlessly without true statements.
Now this website is just a propaganda machine for politics with lines drawn in the sand with no real purpose but to insult those who do not agree with each other.
Suggestion, Sandy. You might try a little comparison. Visit other Occupy forums. I've been trying to get some of the active writers here to post on Occupy Raleigh's Forum. Raleigh is a medium size city with ZERO history of political volatility since the confederates were chased out, but Occupy has been surprisingly strong. Now we need some energy. Please y'all come tell us what you're thinking about. http://forum.occupyraleigh.net/
Thanks. I'll take a look.
If you want to write about the, or at least one of the, most hated conspiracy theorists on the site, I just may be your man.
I'm also well recognized as a diabolical propagandist for the Chinese government. Imagine that, a conspiracy theorist who has conspiracy theories written about him.
Interesting! I met a lot of conspiracy theorists at Occupy events, but you're the first one I meet on this site. What kind of conspiracy theories are you talking about? Do you have forum links? I know the 911 Truth movement was associated with some Occupy protests. Is that what you mean?
As a supporter of Lyndon Larouche's Political Action Committee:
http://larouchepac.com/
I believe that our country has been "colonized" once again by its original enemy the "British Empire", that is, the remnants of what we once called the British empire that still exist as a "financial empire".
Wall Street is the junior partner to the City of London financial district, but more importantly, is a part of an international financial empire with outposts all over the world.
You might remember the "Tories" as the Americans who used to be loyalists to the empire during the days of our revolution. I believe that this same class of people exists today as powerful members of Wall Street and other major financial centers around the world.
The monetary power of the empire has been used to bribe and black mail our political leaders, as well as to buy out the information systems, the mainstream media and educational institutions of our country.
As the result of a major information war conducted against us, many people don't understand that our financial collapse is directly related to our re-acceptance of the economic policies of empire which we now call "free trade" or "globalization".
The policies which once made America great are the exact opposite of free trade, which advocates that economic success is attained by increasing monetary profit by reducing the cost of labor.
The American system, however, proposed that economic success is achieved by the education of the worker and the improvement of the tools with which he does his work. This includes both private equipment, such as machine tools in factories, and public infrastructure, such as transportation and energy systems.
What I believe is often considered conspiracy theory, since most people find it hard to believe that anything as powerful as a global empire could operate with such a degree of secrecy.
Interesting. Do you believe the other British colonies such as Australia, India, Canada, Singapore, Hong-Kong, etc... are still controlled in this way?
Sure, those countries and others as well which are heavily influenced by global financial corporations. You can look up Neo-colonialism at Wikipedia to know more. Wikipedia doesn't believe that such a system really exists, but does give a pretty good explanation of it.
Some of the signs of the empire in many countries of the world today would include:
Financial crisis, such as in western countries, where the empire sucks the money out of the economies through financial scams and bubbles.
Sweat shop labor, a continuation of the slavery policies of the British empire, which was originally the biggest slave trader in the world.
Money laundering, such as by HSBC, originally the Hong Kong Shanghai Banking Corporation, which is increasingly recognized for its role as the world's biggest money launder for the drug trade, and was originally set up by the British empire to handle its profits from the sale of opium to China.
You seriously believe all this?
Sure, why not? Empires have existed for thousands of years. Think about it, the British and the Roman empires are well known, but before them there were the Persian and Babylonian empires.
Should we really think that empires just disappeared over the course of a century after being around for thousands of years? Its a little easier for people to conceive of "financial empires" today, but they really are not that different from the other kinds empires that have always existed since the beginning of civilization.
agh. dont get involved into it. just try to be objective. add a bit conspiracy to your article. people would love that
You'll have to scroll through to see all your responses!
Help us!!!
[Removed]
Seek out the entity formerly known as thrasy.
He is likely still around under another name.
It is he who almost single handedly destroyed the effectiveness of this forum.
It is only he who can explain to you how the tyranny of bot and sock puppet usage is somehow a higher calling in the service of OWS.
Chances are, he's still around.
So apply your investigative chops to get to the real story, as he IS one of the forums most prolific posters .
You're story will not be accurate without this information.
you said it
How can I seek him out if I don't know his name nor his modus operandi?
Not much of an investigative journalist then?
He quit talking to me a while ago as I was unafraid to point out his love of tyranny.
Confusion, disruption and injections of tyranny, along with an insatiable ego are his modus operandi.
I hope this helps you.
"Not much of an investigative journalist then?"
That's exactly what I'm doing now! I'm investigating by asking you questions. Journalists don't get information from the sky. We have to ask questions. lol
Solidarity!
I guess your story will be incomplete then.
That's too bad.
It's an important facet of this site.
Why would it be incomplete if I'm researching this user? First, I have to understand who I'm researching which is why I asked you to clarify. How can I search for a user when I don't know his forum name or what type of poster he is? You didn't give me much information at all! I checked for his username, but "thrasy" is not registered on this site.
Yeah, that's the problem with chasing down sock puppets.
He's used perhaps 100s of them.
For all we know, you could be one of them.
I guess that's why you perceived a cold reception.
It's just one more way he damaged this site.
Every user here is responsible for how he or she treats a newcomer. You can't blame that on a passed troll. My philosophy is give a newcomer the benefit of the doubt and treat him nicely until he spams or trolls at which point your report him to the moderators. If you do preemptive attacks every time you think a new user is a troll you just end up kill potential new recruits for no reason at all. Trolls can't hurt you after all, they can only post comments that you don't agree with, or that are bothersome (spam). When they do that, you report them. Simple. If not, people loose track of the important issues. They start talking about trolls instead of Occupy.
Agreed
I'm trying to explain to you that that is part of the damage he has done to this site.
Take it or leave it, it's the truth.
You have heard of the saying "once burnt, twice shy"?
Perhaps if you would be a bit more forthcoming about your "publication" you would find the reception improved.
Please recall that you did not come here under the guise of a "new recruit".
You came as an investigator.
So investigate. Find out where thrasy is.
Can you give me at least one of his usernames? Like I said, the user "thrasy" does not exist on this forum.
http://tinyurl.com/cwokrd9
He's talking about Thrasymaque. My faves Thrasymaque and epa1nter. geo and pewestlake very good too.
I like epa1nter. and geo
all thrashy did was remove my ability to post images by spamming the image posts
You like Thrasymaque? Everyone says he is one of the biggest trolls on this site.
Confrontational - yes. Troll - no. I think some people got overly bent up about it. Making his confrontational style a much bigger issue than need be. Most people ignored it if they weren't interested. And stuck to other topics. But a few became overly focused on it and it became a topic in itself for them. But I always liked him. I know there were others that did too. It doesn't surprise me that he's become a topic unto himself again. But I think it's weird.
[Removed]
I never posted porn on this site my friend. It's sad that you have created a bed of lies to sleep in. But, you may believe what you wish. You never understood what Thrasymaque was about. Or, should I say, is about. If you did, you would understand that he has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with the republicans. You actually lean towards the right more than I do. I would vote for a third party like the Green Party, while you work for the democrats.
1 points by ZenDog (9778) from South Burlington, VT 1 minute ago he was - is - a fucking bully, probably a repelican operative, and still around somewhere
Aaaaaaaand........ there ya go.
Generally where you found Thrashymaque April would be close by.
Bingo!!! He/she is Victor/Victoria.
His original moniker was thrasymaque.
He's used 100s of others since.
So many that I quit trying to remember them all.
I took a few posts, but you finally gave me some information I can use. Thanks.
Let us know what you have interpreted from your readings.
Sandy -
check out the 65+ videos on our site for the idea of a PRIMARY
OWS goal
http://corporationsarenotpeople.webuda.com
Sweet. Thank you.
[Removed]
sandy, assuming you are on the level (any real reason not to?)...are you impressed with the talent here? paranoid, suspicious, self-important clowns who still think mixing socialism (rules about everything) and anarchy (no rules at all) is a good idea that will affect social change. add the crackpot, fruitcake 9/11 truthtards and you have an excellent cross-section of ows' online forum.
do you know what their birthday gift to themselves is?
becoming a propaganda arm of the DNC. there is so much DNC astroturfing going on here it is ridiculous.
ows may have been a good idea on some levels, but the incoherent and contradictory coalition, infected with terminal cancer stupidity by 9/11 truthers, ruined any chance of this doing anything worthwhile.
all it is now is romney bashing, obama ass-kissing, and a few of us who know both parties suck and whatever differences they have doesn't add up to a hill of beans.
good luck with your story.
911 was an attack on the world trade center and the pentagon
are you into stating the obvious, or is that your way of announcing that you suffer from the mental illness known as 9/11 truth?
when 911 happened
my friend predicted the Iraq invasion
so did I. most people who were paying attention did. US policy before W was regime change. of course they wouldn't let the opportunity slip away . looks like you fell for the media narrative, that is was a "rush to war."
so, is this your way of avoiding admitting that you are a 9/11 truther?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor
you know, if you actually followed occam's razor you wouldn't be a truthtard who is too embarrassed to admit it.
hijackers hijack 4 planes and crash 3 into buildings.
that is about 1000 steps simpler than the truthtard inside jobby job theory.
but you never considered that. and so typical of a truther to talk about something assuming the other person doesn't know it. I've been telling truthers for years about occam's razor. how delusional does one have to be to think occam's razor works in favor of the 1000-step, 5000-person conspiracy theory?
get mental help, son. get it soon. you don't want to be so disconnected from realty that you become the next jared loughner, do you?
http://occupywallst.org/forum/you-troll/#comment-815445
sucks to be a truthtard and not be able to admit it, huh?
but there is hope for you. the fact that you can't man up and admit it is because your conscience way in the background is telling you:
"dude, you know this inside job shit is stupid. you know you have to be dumber than a bag of shit to buy that nonsense. come on, man, you can let the inside job crap go and still rage against the machine and hate bush and hate wall st. and hate corporrrrations and hate banks and hate those with more than you and hate those who are smarter than you and hate the koch bros and hate the frackers and hate and hate and hate until your little heart's content."
listen to that inner voice warning you to not be a complete loser. it knows. you just have to face it.
I quit my jib in military research
why cant you admit you're a truther?
an islam cleric told me not to be afraid to say
I don't know
the resulting war of shock and awe bears more importance
Did he tell you to dance around a question 4 or 5 times, implying an answer before finally taking the chickenshit way out and claiming you don't know, when everything you've said prior would lead any reasonable person know what your real answer is?
Taqiyya is best employed by those with experience.
You're laughably transparent, truther.
Did you know Dylan Avery, truther hero and the dope who made Loose Change, doesn't even believe inside job any more? If he can admit he was wrong, anyone can.
What's your excuse?
It is important to be truthful
when one doesn't know
Only after ignoring the question completely 4 or 5 times, first, hoping it will go away. Isn't that right, truther?
Expand more on occam's razor. I'd like to know how the 2 step "hijack planes, fly them into buildings" plan is less likely than the 1000-step, 10,000-person inside jobby job plan. Since you brought it up, explain how occam's razor in this case works in reverse for the time in history.
Sharp comment! I'm definitely going to quote some of these passages. I don't want to make subjective comments while I do my research as I like to try to stay objective, but, I have to say I understand where you're coming from. When I first came here I had many forums open, and when I read the headlines of the postings on this one I thought for a brief instance that I was still surfing the Obama forum.
[Removed]
lol!
So was odin!!!!
[Removed]
I'm interested in what all posters have to say and I verify everyone's claims. My article is on the presence of Occupy on the Internet. This presence must be judged as a whole if I want to understand the life of the forum. Essentially, as a journalist, what I'm interested in are points of view and the arguments to back those points. It's not that important who or what a person is, what's important is to weigh what they have to say.
I link to this forum from the glee forum and the no doubt forum
after a year this forum remains very active
in the past 10 minutes m there has been 12 posts
"obviously not a genuine OWS supporter."
no, I'm not. I meant exactly what I said.
see, sandy, this is another problem with these people. they are binary thinkers.
it's always all-or-nothing. you can't be supportive of some of the ows ideas. if you aren't down with everything, you suffer the heart-wrenching indignity of being called "not genuine." (don't worry, I think I'll recover)
"Most likely another repelican shil"
I did mention paranoid, right? there's the 5014th example I've come across.
"It runs in tandem with their activism to curb voting rights in several states right now. "
and the unintentionally hilarious DNC ass-kissing.
"Why this sleezo would want you..."
and the maturity. you can set your watch by all these boilerplate, childish responses. they come one after another. and they think they're clever.
when this all started, I knew most of the members were young, grew up and were educated in the self-esteem movement, they played sports and games but didn't keep score. 1+1=3 if they really, really wanted it to. and they were never told they were wrong or not special in all ways. then they met the big bad world and it was in a recession. so what else to do but become an anarchy-socialist (yeah, that'll show 'em!) and camp out for a few months and play radical black-bloc boy, raging against the machine?
it's really pathetic.
[Removed]
"historical rates of taxation are the only equitable solution to a deficit that has spiraled out of control"
well, that's one. then there's historical rates of spending and size of govt in relation to GDP.
but you keep telling yourself there is only one way. that must make you feel better and superior. good for you. see, all the adults were right. you are special and you're never wrong.
awww.....
[Removed]
the more you look, the more you will see the astroturfing.
what are the odds that so many here would be DNC lickspittles and so few see anything at all ok from the right?
the idea that the fed govt deserves another cent of anyone's money is so insane, where to begin ripping the idea apart? and yet so many here tow the DNC line and think raising taxes on the mega-wealthy as the president wants will make all the difference. it won't. the amount raised will run the govt for about 3 days.
that and romney's tax returns seem to be the most important things in the world. anyone with a half a braincell operating knows the tax returns are the holy grail of dense and complicated data the admin and their press stooges can make into whatever they want it to be.
they'll scream some bullshit about him deducting $xxx,xxx for hookers and blow and who is going to listen to "IRS code 456 sec B subsection 8-R lines 5 through 23 clearly states that the deduction on flamina hamina blamina is totally legal and is actually quite common on most returns for those with incomes above $xx,xxx,xxx who have a renumerated universal life policy with a 1257-S rider for dividend reinvestment"?
that is the only reason the savages want the tax returns. but I digress.
libertarians are despised here because what most of these left wing authoritarians really want is govt control over everything. for fairness? hell no, so they will feel better about taking those with more than them down a peg or two. they are hostile to wealth, private property and accomplishment of nearly any kind. they are hostile to business, painting all businesspeople with the same broad brush a bigot paints all blacks or hispanics. and then they'll tell you how tolerant and open-minded and....liberal....they are. it's a sad, sad joke.
and the closer we get to the election and the more it looks like the president is going to lose, the more this forum will become a shrill, frantic, flailing DNC vomitorium.
[Removed]
"the repelican party is DONE"
if your beloved President loses in Nov (still an if), will this still hold true?
bonus question: will that spell the end of the ows forums, since it is now in 24/7 Obama reelection mode? curious what you think about that, DNC-boy.
yes
no, neither candidate supports occupy
U don't come up in a google search.
Does that mean we don't exist? Google is not the only means one can do research. Pick up a telephone and call a university in Boston. Like I said, it's a small magazine. It's only distributed in the Boston area. Are you always so friendly and inviting? Especially when a journalist wants to learn about this website?
OWS, Occupy, the 99% pretty much all of the Occupy movements are not very well presented by media - not Main Stream Media anyway.
And like what was mentioned by others - this forum - gets attacked pretty much non-stop.
So - yeah you could say that the longer a person has been here the more cautious they become.
Not that we will not talk freely - but - trust is slow to be given - and can be easily lost.
So your best bet with out an intro would be to just hang out and scroll through posts that have been made.
It's important for me to know that trust has been eroded here. It's going to be part of the article. That's why I didn't say much at the beginning. A journalist always gains more information when he enters the terrain cold. Of course, I'm reading many articles on the site. The article won't only be about the welcome I got here and the overall energy the forum gives out to new users.