Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: OWS Discord...Jart is Busy

Posted 3 years ago on Sept. 18, 2014, 4:22 p.m. EST by conservatroll (187)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

WASHINGTON — Activists who organized the dormant Occupy Wall Street movement are suing another activist for control of the main Twitter account, and one of the plaintiffs says there was no other option but to turn to litigation to solve the dispute.

The conflict centers around @OccupyWallStNYC, one of the main Twitter feeds that distributed information during the movement’s heyday in 2011. The OWS Media Group filed a lawsuit against organizer Justin Wedes on Wednesday, which is also the third anniversary of the beginning of Occupy Wall Street. The group, led by activist Marisa Holmes, is seeking control of the Twitter account as well as $500,000 in damages.

The Twitter account, which used to be shared among several activists, is now under the control of Wedes, who explained his decision to take over the Twitter feed in a blog post in August:

A thread about “self-promotion” became just another shaming session. If we start from a place of assuming bad intentions – i.e. discouraging “self-promotion” over encouraging solid, relevant content – we will end up with rules that shame rather than empower. Group members took on the task of limiting others to “1 to 2 tweets per day” (or week) on a topic, a form of censorship that would never have been allowed in the earlier days of the boat. I had to say enough!

“We can either go and beat him up or we can go to court,” Holmes, a video editor who was part of the core organizing team of Occupy, told BuzzFeed News. “And quite frankly if we go and beat him up then we could end up with countersuits against us, and that puts us in a more damaging position and we don’t really want to do that anyway.”

“So this is actually the least harmful for ourselves and him given the fact that he won’t give up the account without any kind of punitive measure,” Holmes said.

Holmes said that there had been numerous attempts to get control of the Twitter feed from Wedes, and that suing him was a last resort.

“I’ve given him many many chances and so have a lot of other people,” she said. “For the last six weeks there have been conversations online, mainly on Facebook and through intermediaries.”

“There has been conversation about it and Justin knew he was going to get sued.”

She accused him of using the feed for his own projects, especially his activism surrounding water rights in Detroit.

His taking control of the account is “equivalent to someone running off with a bunch of money or selling off assets,” she said.

This is the second time in the past year that there have been major fights over control of Occupy’s still-extant social media accounts, though the movement has for all intents and purposes died. Activists clashed in February over the @OccupyWallSt Twitter account, which was wrested away from other activists by Google engineer Justine Tunney, who claimed to have founded the account.

Wedes did not return requests for comment.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/rosiegray/the-people-who-organized-occupy-wall-street-are-now-suing-ea#34vxll6

84 Comments

84 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 8 points by beautifulworld (22772) 3 years ago

I used to think Occupy was severely weakened when the cops took down the tents and arrested peaceful protesters in droves. But, recently, after reading a few whiny scrambles for attention by supposed "non" leaders of the Occupy movement, because, of course, this was a "leaderless" movement, no?, I am beginning to feel that petty, egoistic bickering among these supposed "non" leaders has caused a real backlash in Occupy's online presence, a presence that certainly should have replaced the actual occupations on the ground. In today's technological environment, this would have been a natural progression.

We've been feeling it here on the forum for a long time, but I'm quite saddened that it is also happening on other online faces of the movement.

Anyone who thinks this movement is about themselves and their own future career as a revolutionary, which by the way, is not a career, it can never be a career, but a more of a calling, should step aside. If you just want power, fame and control, then step aside. This thing is much bigger than you and you can at least do one final right thing by handing the movement back to the people.

[-] 5 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 3 years ago

As soon as somebody proclaims themself a "leader" of Occupy it is Prima Facie evidence that they are a ridiculous Douchebag.#OWS is much better off without Hipster Blockheads,Wannabe Hactavists,Crusading Commies who are Legends in their own minds.overly militant Vegans who aggressively proselytize.and-as Rick Wolff would say-"all the rest of it." Having no leaders seems to repel the control freaks of all types who continually cause so much trouble.

[-] 4 points by beautifulworld (22772) 3 years ago

I agree with you wholeheartedly.

[-] 5 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 3 years ago

Thank our Lucky Stars for Occupy Wall Street.It has an amazing Knack for Dodging Bullets.The committed number of people in New York is not large,but there are enough people to grow it.And they have been-and will continue to be Dismissed because they are Supercrafty.I don't accept hearsay-I went down there and it's Been Verified by my personal investigation.They told me to make sure to show up on October 8th and I will be there no matter what.It costs 122usd for a round trip ticket for me to go.Lots of people simply live too far away to make these gigs.The size of these events will continue to grow,and when they get really huge everybody will be able to come if they want to.Anyhow-that's what I think.

[-] 4 points by beautifulworld (22772) 3 years ago

Occupy Wall Street has been and still is amorphous. It's hard to define and it doesn't fit into any previous molds which enables it to live on, especially in the minds of the American people, who do understand now that things could be and should be better for them.

[-] 5 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 3 years ago

People around here are really suffering.I have not seen the likes of it in my lifetime.I'm scared by this process of Grinding Down the People.It can only get worse.It will be interesting to see what the Flood Wall Street activists encounter on Wall Street on Monday.Democracy Now is covering the protests and Civil Disobedience via Livestream.I'm gonna be glued to that-for sure.

[-] 5 points by beautifulworld (22772) 3 years ago

I'm donating to the Bail Out fund. I think it's the least we can do if we can't be there. It's through InterOccupy. Here's the link to "Occupy Wall Street Activist Bail Out Fund":

https://org2.salsalabs.com/o/7315/donate_page/ows-bail-fund

Power to the people!

[-] 7 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 3 years ago

Anybody who invades Wall Street and does Civil Disobedience will have to endure a moderately severe Beating and get jailed at Rikers.Without a doubt,they are risking their lives.I was involved in an action on Wall Street during the 80's and the only reason I did not get bashed up and hauled away was back then I only weighed about 100 lbs and I was able to squeeze underneath a car and the cops didn't see me.Even if there are 2000 people the NYPD will arrest them all.Your help will be needed by them-on their behalf I thank you.

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by anarkette (24) from Boston, MA 3 years ago

As soon as somebody proclaims themself a "leader" of Occupy it is Prima Facie evidence that they are a ridiculous Douchebag

The problem is not people claiming to be OWS leaders, it's people acting like OWS leaders, making decisions for everyone and taking control of web forums, twitter accounts, etc... and then still going on pretending OWS is leaderless. That is a really big danger. It's like autocracy, but with autocrats who hide and claim it's a democracy. Very dangerous. If I'm going to be under a dictatorship, at least I want to know who is my dictator.

[-] 4 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 3 years ago

TPTB really made a Majestic Blunder when they broke the Zucotti Encampment.They struck right at about the time when the situation was about to degenerate into a squalid and disgraceful clusterfuck.It did not ever really go into people openly doing drugs and copulating-on Broadway,in Broad Daylight.Rapes.Pillaging of local vendors.Aggressive harassment of female Wall Street workers and female residents.Of course there were accusations of all of these things,and I recall that a woman who was either a transient or from out town was murdered in connection with a sex crime,and the people involved met at Occupy1.Nobody brought forward any proof of other alleged debauchery.She was poor and obscure and now forgotten.If they had just left it alone to a hellish descent,there would have been no way to save Occupy.I don't quite get your use of the words danger.dangerous and very dangerous.If a group is co-opted you can easily figure it out and move on.Because of the way Bloomberg handled Occupy,TPTB don't seem to have anyone inside the hardcore group that I saw at Occupy 3.Anybody who was not there this year will have great difficulty fucking them around.They are Stone Cold Revolutionaries without the violence.I think the opportunity to infiltrate the core of Occupy came and went because TPTB was caught off guard and went into Panic Mode.Had they taken the time to think carefully,they could have destroyed Occupy,and prevented it from coming back ever.Let everyone dismiss Occupy and spend their time writing obituaries and assigning blame.The situation is developing...

[-] -1 points by anarkette (24) from Boston, MA 3 years ago

They are Stone Cold Revolutionaries without the violence

... and without the revolution.

[-] 2 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 3 years ago

If revolutions were Pop Tarts we would all be munching out.

[-] -1 points by anarkette (24) from Boston, MA 3 years ago

I think Badiou explains it well. There are two prerequisites for a revolution, and we don't have both. We only have the first.

  1. A disenchantment of the current system.
  2. A replacement system that would rectify the problems of the first. The problems that cause disenchantment.

He goes on to explain that this is why revolutions are rare, and cannot be forced. It's not often that you have both of these prerequisites at the same time. You often have a disenchantment without a clear replacement system, or system which seem better, but no real dissatisfaction with the current system. That second situation is like in Singapore. They know a system with more democracy might be better, but they aren't disenchanted enough with their current system to push for a change.

[-] 3 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 3 years ago

Let's go Vote to put things right-but The Fix went In in the middle of the Night.If the economy crashes again people will be standing around clueless for awhile.Many people will continue to go to work.Anyhow,that's what happened to ordinary people at first when the economy of the Soviet Union tanked its last Tank.Americans are less prepared for the hardships of an interregnum period than the citizens of the Former Soviet Union.In fact-Americans are not prepared for anything except Business As Usual,except Preppers and and Quasipreppers.Let's hope for the best.

[-] -1 points by anarkette (24) from Boston, MA 3 years ago

I don't really care about America. I don't consider US as a good example of a good country, or a country that matters much in things to come. US had its time. It's already dead. We need to look at other countries if we wish to know how to handle the upcoming crisis. US is just too religious. Americans lack good education, etc...

[-] 3 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 3 years ago

I am afraid I would have to agree on the Giant Shithole status of the Land of the Losers,Home of the Slaves.I have to go all out of my way to even find another person who isn't Dumb as Fuck-All.Nevertheless,I won't be leaving the country-I would if I was in my 20's.This country is pretty much a Hopeless Pile of Shit peopled mainly by Rubes,Rednecks,Bumpkins,Morons,Carpetbaggers,Con Artists,Head Cases,Basket Cases,and so forth.

[-] -1 points by anarkette (24) from Boston, MA 3 years ago

Yup, US is the land of douchebags.

[-] 2 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 3 years ago

I got all hopeful about a family that lives near me at one point.Sure enough,I was warned-Religious Nut Bags-don't even bother.I was told their MO is to not bring up The Good News right off the bat.Good luck with that,folks! Good Strategery!

[-] 1 points by grapes (4988) 3 years ago

Whom among the people can you trust to hold the key to the movement? Jart handed it to shooz et al and it turned out badly.

[-] 5 points by beautifulworld (22772) 3 years ago

The key belongs to the 99%. Something like this forum needs to be democratized and transparent.

[-] -3 points by anarkette (24) from Boston, MA 3 years ago

Wow, finally. It took you forever to start saying what I have been saying for 2+ years, but cool. Better late than never. DKAtoday's stance is that it's jart's forum so if we don't like it we should leave. But, I have always disagreed. If this forum uses the OWS name and accepts donations on behalf of OWS, I don't think jart should control it,even if she created the software or got the domain name. It's just not honest to accept donations in the name of OWS, but then use them for one's own private self.

[-] -1 points by anarkette (24) from Boston, MA 3 years ago

That has to be one the biggest mistakes in OWS history. To give the key to shooz. I have no idea how that could have happened. I had smelled out DKAtoday and the rest of the Twinkle Team infiltrators almost a year before jart made them moderators. I have no idea who she missed that.

One way to avoid that is to make sure everyone always has a vote. Everyone should have equal power as much as possible. The problem wasn't about shooz. The problem was actually that jart had all the power and could decide to make shooz a mod without taking about it to the community first. And, once a mod, only jart could change her mind, but she barely every used the site herself. This would all have been avoided if the forum was run by the community, for the community.

[-] 1 points by anarkette (24) from Boston, MA 3 years ago

I used to think Occupy was severely weakened when the cops took down the tents and arrested peaceful protesters in droves.

It was.

But, recently, after reading a few whiny scrambles for attention by supposed "non" leaders of the Occupy movement, because, of course, this was a "leaderless" movement, no?

Recently? There has been in-fighting at OWS since the very beginning. Way before the cops caused trouble for OWS, OWS founders themselves were already in-fighting.

Occupy's online presence, a presence that certainly should have replaced the actual occupations on the ground

No, that is the mistake of many on OWS forum. To think that web activity can replace real on the grounds activism. It can't. Tweets are nice, but it quickly can become clicktivism or slackivism. You can't compare having millions of people physically in the streets and having millions of people on online forums. Seriously, you just can't. Without people on the ground, we are nothing. The world won't get better by people posting and commenting on forums. It just won't.

[-] 4 points by beautifulworld (22772) 3 years ago

"Without people on the ground, we are nothing." Bull sh-t.

YOU have been trying to take down this forum from day one BECAUSE you know how IMPORTANT online activism is, so take it elsewhere.

If you haven't noticed, every time Americans try to get out on the street, they get arrested. They even recently had tanks and machine guns pointed at them in Ferguson.

I hope and pray that the actions on Wall Street next week will draw big crowds but DO NOT tell me that online activism doesn't matter. That is a load of crap.

[-] -3 points by anarkette (24) from Boston, MA 3 years ago

YOU have been trying to take down this forum from day one BECAUSE you know how IMPORTANT online activism is, so take it elsewhere.

Actually, that is completely false. I didn't want OWS to have no forum. What I wanted at one point was a better forum. It wasn't since the beginning that I wanted to change, only after the Twinkle Team took over. The forum under their control was hurting OWS, not helping. People who didn't know about the protest would come here and see users like GF, shooz, Zendog, DKAtoday, etc.. fighting with others and insulting others with childish bullying. Very bad for our image. If you loved OWS, it was normal to see the forum has a liability at that time, not a strength.

No, I always wanted a better forum. That is why I talked about building a Bridge to the Ground. To connect the ground troops together using this forum. So that a trooper in Chicago could exchange ideas with us and a trooper somewhere else like in NYC. Real world activities are the bread and butter. This forum was never connected to that. We were never part of OWS really. Just observers from the net. We never directly helped, and I think that is sad. If the online man power would have been connected to the ground man power, many things could have happened. This forum should be the hub that connects all occupiers, not a place where 6 people exchange ideas. What happens here is only talk in the wind because nothing is ever put to practice. If we had a connection to ground troops, what is discussed here could actually be translated into real practical solutions. Seriously, practical stuff happens in the real world. Help organize a community garden in your area and you do much more for OWS than post comments here. Connect all community gardens and other OWS activities to this forum, then people who can't participate in real life (because they are sick, or too far) can actually help directly with ideas.

The other problem was the moderation and jart's iron fist control. That's why I talked about the idea of a forum by the community, for the community. Without the moderator/user hierarchy. A forum where everyone can be equal.

If I wanted to destroy OWS on the web, I wouldn't waste my time talking about those GREAT ideas that would do nothing but GREATLY improve OWS online.

DO NOT tell me that online activism doesn't matter.

I never said that. I said it cannot compare to ground activism. Ground activism is the bread and butter, forums and such can be used to extend that, but on their own they are useless. Connected to ground troops, online tools can become very powerful.

You should read Micah White's piece on clicktivism. That might open your eyes.


Please don't put words in my mouth.

Learn to read.

[-] 4 points by beautifulworld (22772) 3 years ago

Oh, no you don't. You are not going to explain away your bad behavior here. You were around way back in the beginning posting photos of you know what and causing disruption. Way before the Dems ever tried to take over this place, and I don't disagree with you that that happened, but it doesn't excuse you. And, you weren't the only genius who saw that happening! What makes you think you were? What kind of hubris makes you think you were the only one who saw what the Dem faction was doing? Give me a break!

You were a sh-t disturber from very early on, with jart and others. Remember Tiouaise?

I have yet to see you post on behalf of the 99%.

[+] -4 points by anarkette (24) from Boston, MA 3 years ago

I attacked conspiracy theorists before attacking the dem intruders. anti-jewish conspiracy theories and 9/11 truther crap. That was against the forum rules. I was actually doing that with jart's full support.

As for the porn, I never posted that. It was an angry conspiracy theorist posing as me. He created a user called Thrasymoque. Ask jart if you don't believe me.

Anyways, that's not important. I'm here to exchange ideas, not to fight or delve in the past.

What kind of hubris makes you think you were the only one who saw what the Dem faction was doing?

I never claimed that at all. Not sure where you got that idea.

Remember Tiouaise?

Yup. He was a conspiracy theorist. Got mad at me because I was defacing their posts. Then he started calling me a Nazi and a Fuhrer. He was also stalking me, attacking me every time I posted a comment. I asked him to stop, jart asked him to stop, he didn't. So I created a few forum bots and attacked him straight on. Then jart banned him. Simple. I don't regret that. I would do it again. I don't tolerate bad behaviour.

I have yet to see you post on behalf of the 99%.

That's because you seem to have selective memory, or can't comprehend the stuff I write.

I posted on behalf of the 99% just above. Talking about an OWS that would be connected to the ground troops is posting for the 99%. Talking about an OWS forum that is built and run by the community for the community is posting for the 99%. I talked about improving the image of OWS in the past, I talked about how OWS should teach by example by helping people start anarcho syndicalist co-ops and by using direct democracy on this forum, etc... I posted a ton of stuff that directly supported OWS.

[-] 1 points by grapes (4988) 3 years ago

The cops had the strength to take down the tents but they could not take down the souls of the people (it is Not final unless every one of them and their families, friends, associates, and all of their informational footprints have been excised which the cops did not do). It was more like a retreat from "Dunkirk." The battles in "Europe" were lost but the war was not over. It just went global into a different arena (the "Atlantic").

As the original causes of the discontent still exist, the war grinds on with an incursion here and there. As for "boots on the ground" to conquer "Europe," that awaits the "special relationship" and strength of "America" and "D-Day."

[-] 0 points by anarkette (24) from Boston, MA 3 years ago

It's not because a few people post on internet forums that there is still a war going on. In fact, little is changing. The people making changes that can save the planet are scientists and companies like Google with electric cars. Occupiers have had their time. They don't occupy anything now, not even the discourse. They affect no change at all. They didn't even start the discussion, they just forced it to go mainstream, but now they aren't even participating in it anymore.

[-] 1 points by grapes (4988) 3 years ago

There is Nothing regrettable with going into darkness once the torch has been passed on. It is the natural order of things - without the fire of the torch it naturally gets darker. It is actually a sign of success.

Scientists and Google cannot save the planet although they can make the means available to do so. The peoples of the world can.

[-] 0 points by anarkette (24) from Boston, MA 3 years ago

Scientists and Google cannot save the planet although they can make the means available to do so. The peoples of the world can.

That just sounds like empty rhetoric.

First, scientists and Google employees are people of the world.

Secondly, people that work at companies like Tesla motors are doing something practical, inventing an electric car for broad consumer use. Some companies do solar panels, some are working on GMOs, etc...

That's what we need right now. Practical applications that can help us and the environment.

I'm not sure what you mean by the peoples, and what you think these peoples are doing.

Who are you talking about exactly?

[-] 1 points by grapes (4988) 3 years ago

Check out the size of the ozone hole over Antarctica. The Montreal Protocol worked. Yes, when countries realized how much they all had at stake, they acted and saved the ozone, the planktons, the anchovies, the mackerels, the tunas, the whales, the fishermen, their families, the fish consumers, and so on.

Another example is acid rain in the U.S. Sulfur dioxide emission trading under the tightening pollution standard has greatly reduced the problem of dead forests and dead ponds.

Avoid handshakes to prevent spreading germs. It is just cultural change that can save lives as alluded to in: Infectious Disease Insurgencies.

[-] -1 points by anarkette (24) from Boston, MA 3 years ago

If you think the ozone, the planktons, the anchovies, the mackerels, the tunas, the whales, etc... are now safe, we are in much deeper trouble than I thought. You are living in a dream world my friend. All what you mentioned are still very much in very big jeopardy.

[-] 1 points by grapes (4988) 3 years ago

I did not say that they are saved but that coordinated global human efforts have bent the curves in the correct directions. We the peoples of the Earth did these deeds before and we can certainly do more again if we set our minds to them. Yes, I dream big and I dream on but I know that I must be patient and it may well not be me who will see the day when these deeds succeed. That will be just fine because I am in a sense both finite and infinite.

All roads to hell start with a single step so do all roads to paradise.

[-] 1 points by grapes (4988) 3 years ago

The U.S. government was handing out money for the U.S. populace to green up. Yet, the programs were surprisingly ineffective. In fact, the Great Recession did a far better job at cleaning up the traffic congestion's exhaust.

If Tesla offers an environmentally green car and if the people still would not buy it, there is still no way to "save the planet." The people's mindset has to change first. People need to see our oil addiction leads to wars, repressions, insurgencies, diseases, environmental degradations, deaths, poor nutrition, starvations, lack of education, and on and on. I see connections but many still do not so we still have much mind work to do.

[-] 1 points by flip (7101) 3 years ago

tesla is certainly not the answer

[-] -1 points by anarkette (24) from Boston, MA 3 years ago

The U.S. government... (blah blah blah)

Governments can't save us when it comes to international global problems like Global Warming. Look at what they have done for Global Warming so far. Nothing. They just meet and do nothing. The people who can take action are activists, environmental groups like GreenPeace, and companies like Google and Tesla Motors. They are the ones who will put solutions to life.

If Tesla offers an environmentally green car and if the peoole still would not buy it, there is still no way to "save the planet."

That's kind of a lame way to look at things no? Who makes the real difference, those who have ideas and take the personal financial risk to develop them into useful products, or the consumers who just buy the products when the are ready? Consumers just wait. Entrepreneurs do.

The people's mindset has to change first

It already has. People would quickly adopt environmental solutions if they existed. That's why we need saviours like Tesla Motors and others to make those solutions for us.


In essence you're saying the peoples will save the world. And, you say they will do this by consuming things like electric cars when they are ready. Fine then. Just go wait on the sidelines until we have a product for you to consume.

[-] 1 points by grapes (4988) 3 years ago

The magic of "saving the planet" lies in aligning Tesla, Google, etc. with the consumers' appetites and wallets. Consumers can exceed 100% rate of return by thinking wisely and controlling impulses. Producers can never achieve anywhere near that.

As an example, I need a cup of milk but I have none. In my mind, I picture driving my one-ton car to the grocery store to get a gallon of milk. That burns up gasoline, pollutes the environment, and fuels terrorism and the oil wars in the Middle East.

If I feel that I am really just thirsty, I drink a cup of water instead. I saved the gasoline, the time for the trip, and the cost of the cup of milk. The return is far more than the cost of the cup of milk. No one in the world can know what I truly want, not Tesla, not Google. The best Tesla can do is to get me off of oil and use half coal, quarter natural gas, and one fifth nuclear. The environmental impact is still pretty big, not to mention that I could get into an accident or incur a big medical bill.

My point is that people can do far better themselves. Waiting for Tesla or Google is okay but it delays actions. If we legalize Uber in more places, we can reduce the ownership of cars and parking spaces. That is a cultural issue that can be addressed today - no need for lithium from Chile.

[-] 1 points by grapes (4988) 3 years ago

There are many environmental solutions that exist. I am being facetious here: Remember Bush's hydrogen economy? Where are we now?

Google has great potential but it has already succumbed to the curse on all corporations. It is not a problem that it becomes amoral but we still need the people to steer it towards being moral.

Okay, Tesla comes up with lithium-battery-powered cars. Hmmm, how much lithium do we really have? When will we have a lithium economy? ;)

[-] 0 points by anarkette (24) from Boston, MA 3 years ago

There are naysayers like you, who just go on forums and complain, or protest and complain, then there are those that actually do stuff to try to change things. Will Tesla succeed in providing clear cars that don't pollute much and are affordable for all, or will some other company succeed in doing something good for the environment? Maybe, maybe not, but at least they try. That was my point. Those who try to change things are the ones we must support. Not politicians, or others that just waste time talking and doing rhetoric like you.

[-] 1 points by flip (7101) 3 years ago

Tesla is NOT the answer. Individual transportation will not be the way to go. Mass transit!

[-] 0 points by anarkette (24) from Boston, MA 3 years ago

Sure, but Tesla is working hard to develop electric cars. That is part of the answer. Their electric motors can possibly be used for mass transit like buses as well. Mass transit is possible now, but people in US like to have their own car. They don't care if they pollute. At least with Tesla pushing electric cars people won't send CO2 in the atmosphere with each car drive.

Why be a contrarian? Both ideas can be used. There is rarely only one solution. We have to encourage companies like Tesla who push to create a better world.

[-] 1 points by grapes (4988) 3 years ago

Even with Tesla's electric cars, the electricity that they use still has half coming from coal and at least a quarter coming from natural gas. Both of these produced CO2 when they are burned to produce electricity. Also the production is only about 30% efficient. Then there is the transmission loss of perhaps 10%. Massive usage of electric cars will not reduce pollution CO2 or otherwise unless the electric utilities are transformed.

Additionally the batteries need to be replaced after years of usage. Anyone with a lithium-battery-powered laptop knows how the battery life gets shorter and shorter. There is only so much readily available lithium ore around so we use a non-renewable resource to move pollution from one place to another. I do not find that to be particularly wise.

[-] 0 points by timeforabigchange (-43) from Winnipeg, MB 3 years ago

Thanks for the comment with great ideas below. I could not reply there, but wanted to make a point of thanking you. Let's hope we can make the batteries you talk about asap.

[-] 1 points by grapes (4988) 3 years ago

I am finite but you can help carry the torch of goodwill into the future so in a sense I am infinite if I define myself as my information field. Best Wishes!

[-] 0 points by timeforabigchange (-43) from Winnipeg, MB 3 years ago

OK, so keep using gas cars?

What do you propose to stop the CO2 car problem?

Also, will we have gas forever?

[-] 1 points by grapes (4988) 3 years ago

Not necessarily. Gas cars are acceptable for a while as we transition to renewable energy but we must insist that they get more and more efficient. Tesla's electric cars are also acceptable but only if the EPA rules to limit coal electric plants' emissions are not blocked.

Due to the U.S. being a capitalistic economy, we have to use a capitalistic tool for changing fossil fuel consumption pattern. We can assess a gasoline and diesel tax to pay for military expenditures or interventions in countries producing oil.

Lithium being far less abundant than magnesium on Earth means that we should think about using magnesium for batteries. The voltage achievable may be lower but future cars built with advanced ultralight and strong materials will not need as much power anyway.

Gas will become a specialty item, definitely not used in the same way as today - burnt up in an internal combustion engine. We got out of the Stone and Bronze Ages. We still have stones and bronze but we no longer use them in the same ways as before so we will have gas forever and no, we will not have gas forever. The price at which gas is readily available will increase inevitably.

My hope is that we can get solar electricity generated from every square inch of the road surface so magnesium battery lightweight cars can charge up nearly everywhere on the roads. These cars will work like horizontal elevators with computer software control to route them and recombine them for transportation efficiency.

Production of magnesium needs CO2 so coal electric plants' CO2 emission may help transition to magnesium battery cars.

[-] 1 points by flip (7101) 3 years ago

The society we have built on fossil fuels is done. Get with it

[-] 1 points by flip (7101) 3 years ago

Resource scarcity is coming fast. One person in a car electric or gas is a thing of the past. Read " limits of growth"

[-] 5 points by Renneye (3874) 3 years ago

It isn't only jart that's busy. I suspect there are far more players than we're aware of. For all we know, jart may not even own the forum any more. Who knows? There is a real sense of not being kept in the loop.

I saw the article in the OP, as it was reported on yesterday (the Sept 17th, 3rd anniversary and Occupy rally), of all days.

I don't mind it so much, as these things will happen in a movement that spans a much longer time than was intended...and there are activists with differing and impassioned views, as well as people and organizations with intentions of infiltrating and changing the course of Occupy by getting in under false pretenses and changing things from within. It's bound to happen. But, well-intentioned people are on the right side of those court battles. What sucks, is that the system in which the battle plays out is the flawed legal system of the 0.01%. Not to mention, how do we know if these 'battles' are not fore-scripted into the movement so as to keep chaos and subterfuge at the forefront during critical moments, both public (major rallies) and behind the scenes (important legal maneuvers, ie; branding, copyrights, etc.) ? So we'll see where it all goes.

Much more concerning to me, is another article that came out yesterday (again, Sept 17th!). This one...

http://www.ibtimes.com/occupy-wall-street-failure-ows-2014-marks-survival-brand-blurred-purpose-1690198

...where, MSM does it's usual ambiguous reporting from both sides of the fence, but, thankfully, it does point out several positive Occupy facts. However, it also talks of Occupy using terms like 'brand' and 'franchise'. Suggesting that there is much in the way of legal maneuvering/positioning under the radar, and once again, it becomes obvious that major decisions are being made without the community voting on them, or even being aware of them, for that matter.

This could be good or it could be bad. We'll have to see. Depending on who the 'players' are. If we ever truly find out, that is.

~" Amid its congested messages and image problems, Occupy’s most salient feature has always been basic branding -- from its effective use of hashtags and memes to its populist catchphrases like “We Are the 99 Percent.” It’s a strategy that was brought into focus by Kalle Lasn, co-founder of the anti-consumerism magazine Adbusters, who registered the domain OccupyWallStreet.org in the summer of 2011 and used social media to build a buzz around the first Occupy Wall Street encampment. The Occupy brand has since become an international franchise. "~ (from above link)

Also, from link;

~" A protest celebrating Occupy’s third anniversary is planned for Zuccotti Park on Wednesday, although how many people will actually show up is anyone’s guess. The folks at Adbusters haven’t abandoned the cause either. They’re calling Occupy’s third anniversary “World Revolution Day,” and as usual they haven’t been very specific on what that means. The slogan this time around is “What Will You Do?” "~

Sure, it's a good question...however, this does clearly indicate that Occupy is going long-term, and becoming, in essence, a movement...a revolution being 'designed' now, as a cottage industry.

Again, this could be good, for the sake of not going through a quicker but bloodier revolution, or it could be bad because the longer it takes, the more opportunity for infiltration, if that hasn't happened already. Maybe it's both.

Please don't be boring and intentionally misinterpret this, for the sake of keeping everyone cheering while keeping everyone's 'head in the sand'. Let there be no doubt...I love, love, love Occupy! For the sake of humanity, I just want it to come from an honest place.

All I'm saying folks, is lets not hurry forth with a "rah-rah!" head-in-the-clouds mentality of blind trust, thinking that everything will always be okay with Occupy, when in fact it might not be. That's dangerous.

Let's keep our heads about us. Don't not be aware of the possible dangers.

Considering that, we, the 99% are not involved in the decision making of Occupy activities, one of the best ways to do this is to insist from Occupy, on TRANSPARENCY... knowing clearly who is funding Occupy...and who ALL 'the players' are.

[-] 4 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 3 years ago

:) ... imo... the real jist of all this... is that Occupy has already succeeded ... Occupy has changed the people's mindsets ... already ... it has spelled over into facebook, twitter...and zillion other sites... everywhere you go on the net... people are demanding change... because of Occupy as much as anything else ....

back in the early days... the nycga site was very happy to have this site (OccupyWallSt) take the brunt of the chaos .... there was so much chaos & fighting in the beginning... that today's conflicts seem minuscule ...

the new-comers & those who wanted to bring Occupy down (unaware of other Occupy sites) came here first... which allowed many of the other sites to progress w/o the trolling disturbances ... I like coming here....because there are some very sharp people here... and I have learned a lot from most everyone....

anyway... there is much truth to... "you can't stop an idea whose time has come".... and Occupy's time has come and will continue... regardless of whether or not the sites stay up... new ones will follow ... the time for change has come...

what Jart is doing ... who knows... and who cares... she did provide us with a great foundation ... and there are many of them now... She should never be criticized IMO... for whatever she chooses to do now.... and I for one... will always Thank her !! :)

[-] 6 points by Renneye (3874) 3 years ago

"the real jist of all this... is that Occupy has already succeeded"

Yes, I couldn't agree more. That is the crux of the linked article...that Occupy has superceded it's original goal, and is now in the International psyche. It states that the goal of Occupy was to "start a conversation", and indeed it has.

It doesn't matter who I speak with in the public arena of the supposed 'clueless masses', when I bring up the subject of 'Occupy Wall Street', everyone knows exactly what I'm talking about. That's a huge success anyway you look at it.

I'll refrain from any thoughts on jart, as this particular post wasn't really about her or just this forum, but instead the bigger picture and influence of 'Occupy' as a whole. But certainly don't let me stop you from doing it. Who knows, maybe she'll respond to you. ;-)

[Removed]

[-] 3 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 3 years ago

I also feel hesitant about cranking on Jart.I imagine her as a person who is holding down a demanding full time job-or even worse,dealing with a Crazy Quilt of part time and free lance jobs.Either of these can suck the life right out of a person.I think Jart may live in Brooklyn or Manhattan-very expensive,requiring long hours at work even if you make good money.I saw a picture of Jart,but if she was at Occupy 3,I did not recognize her.If more information related to Jart needs to be Revealed,it probably will be.I am often dinged for being overly cautious-believe it or not.The forum did absorb shitstorms-I remember thinking that might be a good thing when it was at the nadir.

[-] 1 points by grapes (4988) 3 years ago

Jart according to her profile lived in Hipster Mecca - Williamsburgh, just across the East River from Manhattan. Now she lives near Stuyvesant Town and East Village in Manhattan. Financially and emotionally, she had been jerked around by the Establishment as well as her Movement. Google was such a savior at the time but it turned out later that it had colluded with Apple to hold down salaries of workers. It was more like "Don't be evil [(where people can see)]!" Profits still count!

One can only absorb so much betrayal before becoming really cynically focused on what matters.

[-] 2 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 3 years ago

New York is a really brutal environment.It didn't take all that long to tear me to pieces.By the time The City chops you up so you can't live there anymore you feel like a foreigner anywhere else.It used to be impossible to see The Big Picture if you lived there because of the distracting environmental influence of NYC.Now,not so much Because the Internets.

[-] 1 points by grapes (4988) 3 years ago

Yes, it reminds me of "_ is dead, and living in New York." Hopefully, there is still the lotus seed under the bubbling muck which will flower someday.

[-] 2 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 3 years ago

Bad prints coming out on inequality in NYC-and the whole state.If my partner and I were younger,we would probably sell up and GTF out.New York State is a Shithole.

[-] 1 points by grapes (4988) 3 years ago

My life experience taught me to think hard of where I want to be before I take the leap. Strong emotions are great for motivations but they often cause overshoots that only become apparent as time drags on.

[-] 3 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 3 years ago

Any move has the built in component of the possibility that The Unforseen could cause you to have to move again,and/or lose every last nickel you've got.Of course,the Unforseen has a tendency to produce any number of things no matter where you are.LOL-back in the Day,I was ferociously mocked by my associates for always trying to dodge the Unforseen by coming up with not only plan B,but plans C,D and E.Hilariously,the Unforseen had an uncanny ability to produce circumstances for which no Plan was prepared in advance.Something would come up and I would say-"I failed to anticipate this," Everyone at the meeting would be rolling on the floor laughing at the Pomposity and Presumptuousness of the things like that that came out of my mouth.LOL just thinking about those times.

[-] 1 points by grapes (4988) 3 years ago

It is called Greek tragedy but at least with all these plans in place you do NOT often end up where you planned not to go.

I think of many scenarios and plans but I know that reality needs not follow my plans and I leave it at that. No one can aspire to more than Laplace who kept his head on his shoulders through the French Revolution but Lavoisier lost his.

[-] 2 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 3 years ago

One of the reasons people hated me was because of my constant interference in their activities because they constantly would ignore safety procedures while working.They would try to keep me from bothering them by locking the doors to the studios and hiding or disappearing safety equipment.Nobody would listen and one of them lost 4 fingers on his right hand.Good luck in an art career with an injury like that.

[-] 1 points by grapes (4988) 3 years ago

To fail is human, to try again after going broke is American.

[-] 3 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 3 years ago

Until becoming Too Big and Important to fail in business like everyone else.The inability to fail is their doom.

[-] 1 points by grapes (4988) 3 years ago

You are right. They are Downright Unamerican!

[-] 3 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 3 years ago

There is no disgrace in failing at Business.Not really.I myself have lost 2 small businesses.It's a bitter experience.Most people lose way more than I did because by the time they lose it,they have loans out that still have to be paid.I invested money I saved from working.It was only a total of around 80 grand for both episodes,but it was all I had.I once owned an art collection that would be worth millions now if I had been able to hold onto it.That's business-one bad break or poor decision and you're gone.It has a kind of Terrible Beauty-does it not?

[-] 0 points by anarkette (24) from Boston, MA 3 years ago

Would you be interested in leading OWS? We need calm thinkers like yourself to lead the show.

[-] 1 points by grapes (4988) 3 years ago

I am honored and humbled but you need to remember that OWS is a Leaderless movement. I do not mind leaving the impression that I am "from Missouri" because thick skulls can signify adherence to principles that we share. I aspire to serve my people. It is more of a labor of love for me so no, thank you.

[-] 0 points by anarkette (24) from Boston, MA 3 years ago

OWS was never leaderless. That's rhetorical theoretical bunk. In practice, OWS very much had leaders and still does. For example, this website and the donations that go to it are controlled by one person. It's untrue, and even dangerous to claim that all OWS decisions were made communally. All the important decisions were made by a few behind closed doors. Who to invite at rallies, what actions to do, how to design the posters, what news to post on this forum, etc... All those decisions were taken by a few OWS leaders.

It's time to talk about real things. About practical things. Enough of this empty rhetorical garbage talk. It leads to nowhere.

I aspire to serve my people.

We need both servants and leaders. If you feel more comfortable as a servant that is fine.

[-] 1 points by grapes (4988) 3 years ago

You are correct about a few movers and shakers being often at the control levers. The fact though is that servants and leaders do not need to be exclusive of each other. Those at the control levers can be servants at one time and leaders at other times or both at the same time.

I watched ants hauled a fly to their nest. They did not have an apparent leader and yet they got the job done. OWS can work like that, too.

[-] 0 points by anarkette (24) from Boston, MA 3 years ago

The fact though is that servants and leaders do not need to be exclusive of each other. Those at the control levers can be servants at one time and leaders at other times or both at the same time.

Sure, but that's not what happened to OWS in practice. The leaders remain the leaders since the beginning. It's actually more dangerous than representatives since we don't always no who they are and we don't get to vote every 4 years or so to rotate them.

I'm interested in practical stuff. Real stuff. Not lame rhetorical garbage.

Sorry to be so blunt.

OWS can work like that, too.

Perhaps, but it isn't. If you believe it can, then show us how. How do we go from a forum like this one controlled by one person, to a leaderless forum (for example).

[-] 1 points by grapes (4988) 3 years ago

Bitcoin model may have solved the problem already. The internet is not a single server to the world but the information still gets there somehow. Coca-Cola's trade secret formula continues to be accessible and used even though no one person has access to it.

[-] 0 points by anarkette (24) from Boston, MA 3 years ago

What does that have to do with what I was talking about. OWS is still very much ran by founders, not sure what bitcoin or Coca-Cola has to do with that.

[-] -1 points by anarkette (24) from Boston, MA 3 years ago

Yes, she is too busy to run a forum, and since she believes OWS is dead and no longer espouses OWS political views (Which is fine btw, anyone can change their views and opinions about something, it's called evolution.) she should probably just give this forum and domain back to OWS and the community.

[-] 2 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 3 years ago

"Don't hate me for being a Fence-Sitter," said Trashasaurus,while safely perched on a fence,safely above the Fray.

[-] -1 points by anarkette (24) from Boston, MA 3 years ago

Who's Trashasaurus, and how is he on the fence?

[-] 2 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 3 years ago

That's me.I am hoping you are not the type who will resent and/or dislike me for not taking sides in this matter.I have a feeling that unfortunately,you may well be exactly that type of person.If you are,I'm sorry.If not,it's "All Good."

[-] -1 points by anarkette (24) from Boston, MA 3 years ago

It's true that being on the fence is lame, but if that's your position then I respect it.

[-] 2 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 3 years ago

Alrighty,then.I just don't want to sink what energy I have into Savage Arguments.I just can't do it anymore.

[-] -1 points by anarkette (24) from Boston, MA 3 years ago

That's fine. You can stay on the sidelines and watch the game from afar. They sell popcorn at stand #3. Enjoy the show.

[-] 2 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 3 years ago

Whatever.I don't know you and don't want to.Hope you enjoyed New York at the 3rd Anniversary of #OWS.Or Oakland,or wherever you went.I'm sure I'll be seeing you on October 8,2014 at 50th St. and 6th avenue.Because you are obviously a Fearless Leader.

[-] -1 points by anarkette (24) from Boston, MA 3 years ago

Hold on tiger, you're the one who said you wanted to remain on the fence, on the sidelines. And, there's nothing wrong with that. It's what the majority of people want. You're more than normal.

[-] 3 points by trashyharry (3082) from Waterville, NY 3 years ago

I am not going to involve myself in childish squabbles over an internet forum.Other controversies of whatever kind I will deal with as I choose.See you in NY on October 8,2014.Try not to get hurt when you are getting arrested on Wall Street on Monday.I could only find someone to take care of the 40 animals we have here for the 3rd Occupy or Flood Wall Street,not both.I chose Occupy,even though I wanted to go to the bigger,more sexy event on the 21st which will involve all of the most famous writers,activists and celebrities.The 3rd Occupy went very well,and I feel I did the right thing.There is a reason why the people on this forum put up with me,and it doesn't involve Jart,Lulz, sentimentality,family connections,my work,or Fortune.I am not an educated person,so it's not that.These people are not sentimental,nor do they engage much in Personalities.Either you don't know why these people tolerate me because you lack perspicacity,or you do know the reason and you count it for nothing because you are a Fool.I cannot respond to anything you have to say to me or about me because I do not have time for it.In order to continue to engage my attention,you still have options available to you,so Knock Yourself Out,if you don't have anything better to do.

[-] -2 points by anarkette (24) from Boston, MA 3 years ago

I am not going to involve myself in childish squabbles over an internet forum

You shouldn't. I agree. childish squabbling is the worst thing you could do on this forum. It helps no one and just turns new visitors off.

Don't worry. I don't go to US events. I try to stay away from America as much as possible. I take part in european activism.


You seem angry, and I have no idea you went into a long rant. You started saying you were on the fence and I said that was OK. Then you became angry for some reason.????

[-] 3 points by gsw (3024) from Woodbridge Township, NJ 3 years ago

Well said about Jart.

Would be nice if this site could have new ideas for leadership, maybe more positivity towards her will have her come around more often, I wiould hope.