Forum Post: There is now an organized and/or obsessed effort to prevent others from reading my essays bashing the richest one percent and their corporate golden geese. This effort may be led by Thrasymaque. IT WON'T WORK. I'm in this for life.
Posted 12 years ago on Jan. 9, 2012, 3:26 p.m. EST by ModestCapitalist
(2342)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
48 hours ago, I had 2229 points. Now, its down to 1900. From now on, I will create another page daily and repost ALL of my essays in honor of those who use multiple IDs and/or bots to vote down my comments. CLICK ON ALL + SIGNS TO VIEW COMMENTS.
How do you like that you die-hard partisan puppet critics? What about you Thrasymaque? Was this the result you were hoping for when you started using multiple IDs to aggressively track and 'vote down' my comments? Were you hoping to intimidate me? If so, I have some bad news for you.
IT DIDN'T WORK.
Say that reminds me.
The CBO report I am about to make reference to breaks down shares of net American income by quintile. Since a quintile represents 1/5, the middle quintile would certainly represent the 'middle class'. But we'll expand further out to all 5 quintiles just to cover all bases. Keep in mind these statistics represent income AFTER taxes.
Between 1979 and 2007, the share of net income for the lowest quintile dropped by 27.9 percent. Does that prove the expansion of the lowest class? Damn near it but lets eliminate all doubt.
Between 1979 and 2007, the share of net income for the second quintile, dropped by 23.6 percent. Does that prove the expansion of the lower class? Isn't it possible that the lowest two quintiles were always the lower class and the middle class had always represented just 1/5 of the US population? Well, thats what justhefacts would swear so lets eliminate that last shred of doubt. Lets move onto the middle quintile. The indisputable 'middle class'.
Between 1979 and 2007, the share of net income for the middle quintile dropped by 14.5 percent. There you go. Indisputable proof that at least 3/5 of Americans lost their relative share of net income between 1979 and 2007. Indisputable proof that America's middle class had shrunk and its lower class had expanded between 1979 and 2007. Indisputable mathematical proof. Still, lets move onto the next quintile.
Between 1979 and 2007, the share of net income for the fourth quintile dropped by 10.3 percent. There you go. Indisputable proof that at least 4/5 of Americans lost their relative share of net income between the years 1979 and 2007.
Bankruptcy and consumer debt rose significantly during this time frame. By 2007, consumer debt alone rose to nearly $2,000,000,000,000. Thats NEARLY TWO TRILLION DOLLARS.
So we've proven the actual shrinkage of the middle class and the actual expansion of the lower class. We've clearly established a loss of financial assets.
So where did the money go? The highest quintile? Lets take a look.
Between 1979 and 2007, the share of net income for the fifth quintile rose by 23.8 percent. Should we blame them? The highest quintile? Do we really want to blame a full 20% of the American population?
Not in my book. Lets take a closer look.
Between the years 1979 and 2007, the share of net income for the top decile (one tenth) rose by 40.2 percent. Thats a 16.4 percent spread just within 10 percent of the population. Lets take a closer look.
Between the years 1979 and 2007, the share of net income for the top ventile (one twentieth) rose by 61.9 percent. Thats a 21.9 percent spread just within 5 percent of the population. Interesting. Now, lets take a look at the final piece of the puzzle from this particular time frame.
Between 1979 and 2007, the start of the Great Recession and the worst financial crisis in nearly 80 years, the share of net income for the top centile (one hundredth, top 1%) rose by 128.0 percent. Thats a spread of 66.1 percent just within 5 percent of the population.
But that 66.1 percent spread is nothing. It is multiplied by hundreds just within that top centile. The richest 1%.
THATS THE PROBLEM.
Now, watch my die-hard partisan puppet critics deny the actual shrinkage of the middle class, the actual expansion of the lower class, and the actual transfer of wealth from poor to rich. In particular, the richest 1% who as of 2007, owned 43% of all financial wealth in America. Thats more than twice the share they held in 1976.
I see that my die-hard conservative partisan puppet critics and possibly another (Thrasymaque) who took sides with a die-hard critic of OWS and all we stand for (Slammersworldisback) and has admitted 'despising' me and using 'bots' of his own design to 'vote down' my comments are at it already. As a result, many of my comments are now collapsed. Be sure to click the '+' sign to re-open the thread and view all comments.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/48-hours-ago-i-had-2229-points-on-this-ows-site-no/
you keep at it, and don't give up.
Never. We're fighting for a just cause. Say that reminds me.
The 'middle' 3 quintiles were doing much better 35 years ago than they are now. Again, the critics refuse to aknowledge the HUGE difference between core inflation and the ACTUAL cost of living.
Energy, food, and home sale prices ARE NOT considered when core inflation is calculated. THAT CHANGES EVERYTHING.
Between the years 1990 and 2008, key living expenses like energy, food, health care, housing, and higher education increased far beyond the rate of inflation.
For example:
Housing: UP 56%. Health care expenses: UP 155% Four year public college education: UP 60% Four year private college education: UP 43%
I don't have figures for energy and food but everyone knows that they have risen DRASTICALLY over the last few years alone.
Then you have consumer debt (not counting home loans). Its over $2,000,000,000,000. THATS OVER TWO TRILLION DOLLARS. MORE THAN FIVE TIMES WHAT IT WAS 30 YEARS AGO EVEN AFTER YOU ADJUST FOR INFLATION AND POPULATION GROWTH.
The majority of that debt is held by the lower 90%. That drastic increase in consumer debt along with the stagnated and dropping wages of the majority (wages, not household income) over the past 30 years along with the points regarding inflation vs ACTUAL living expenses and 2nd providers/retirees working in order to compensate shatters any claim that the middle class has not lost strength.
and real estate has lost something like 30% of its value in just the last five years?
It's really fucked up that so many people continue to follow the repelikan line. It's hard to fathom.
and so many decent people lost their only homes and still ended up with a negative balance. If our leaders weren't so damn sold out, that $760 billion bailout back in '08' would have been offset by forcing the banks to forgive $760 billion in future payments from struggling home owners. This would have replaced the necessary capital and helped ordinary Americans.
BUT THEY COULDN'T DO THAT! WHAT ABOUT THEIR PRECIOUS STOCK VALUES AND FUTURE PROFITS?
BASTARDS!
Mine lost 75%.
(r)epelicans are repellant.
It's cognitive dissonance which, I think, is really just the beginning state of "crazy". It's gotten to the point where these people literally need to be rescued from themselves.
whats wrong with real estate losing 30% or HOPEFULLY MORE of its value? Arent you for keeping more money in the hands of family, cause high real estate means families need to struggle more to pay for it, including sending wives to work, so the children grow up unsupervised and possibly becoming a menace to society. Im for people saving for their own retirement not adding to the pyramid scheme of getting rich off the poor ole next succor that comes in to buy their old house!
eh hem. excuse me.. I grew up with a working mother and was never in danger of becoming a menace to society. also, some of us 'wives' bring home the bacon so that our husbands can stay home and raise the children.. on the topic of the real estate market - if you have superior credit you can get a great deal. Everyone else is screwed. For those that own, let's just pray we don't lose even more equity. Thanks..
Exactly freewriterguy! Plummeting home value means homes become cheaper and more "poor" families can finally afford to buy them!
All Hail the "repilcans" who made house prices drop to the point where more people could afford them!!
right on! i am with you here as usual. i would be very happy if you could put some of those numbers together in bullet point style - maybe one for taxes - one for flat wages - one for inflation. i don't really have time to do it - those little bastard grandchildren are always on my leg! anyway the facts are on our side and pretty straight forward but so much disinformation that people are not sure what is happening to them. anyone with any sense knows that life was better in the 1960's (for all except those at the very top of the income ladder). it is also pretty simple to point out why - tax structure, income flat or declining for the bottom 80% - two parents working to make up for that income loss - along with more and more debt! ok, i won't go on - nice job
http://www.creditscore.net/u-s-consumer-debt-in-2011/
Worse than you even stated.
We went into debt when we purchased things that we didn't have the money for. We stopped doing that and our debt is disappearing.
There are six people in my house and I feed them for about the same amount I did 4 years ago even with two teenaged boys. When prices go up, I purchase less "crap" and tighten my budget and we eat at home more often. Healthier and more family time...how awful!
We have no credit cards. (cut them up in pieces three years ago and LOVE it) We save up for things we want, and have an emergency fund for repairs and purchases that are unexpected and it got us thru three months of downsized unemployment too.
When we started controlling our money, it stopped controlling us.
I should have specified. I was referring to consumer debt but not home loans.
US consumer debt excluding home loans is currently just over two trillion dollars.
I'll go back and add the distinction.
Thank you for being specific. And polite.
i like you you are well informed on us economic policy as i am.
Man! That looks like the writing style of a NY intellectual! Am I right? Am I right?...
aquila non capit muscas.
Don't believe this outrageous crap about the rich paying 37% of the taxes in America and the poor paying none. It's a trick. A spin on statistics to make it seem as if the rich are overtaxed. They aren't. But they damn well should be. We're in this mess because of them.
Be careful when you hear or read anything regarding the PERCENTAGE of OVERALL FEDERAL INCOME taxes paid by any particular group. It's a terribly misleading statistic. The rich pay a larger PERCENTAGE of OVERALL FEDERAL INCOME taxes now than 10 years ago because they have a larger PERCENTAGE of OVERALL INCOME in America now than 10 years ago. That statistic regarding 37% of Federal Income Taxes is one of the most misleading in the history of propaganda.
When you account for all FEDERAL, STATE, and LOCAL taxes and fees, the middle class actually pay about the same rate (as a percentage of income) as the rich. The difference is within 5 percent. It shouldn't be that way. The rich should pay a MUCH higher rate simply because they are horribly over-paid. We aren't. They own 43% of all financial wealth in America. We share the rest. But it gets even more disgusting. The devil is in the details.
Corporate profits have been partially subsidized with federal, state, and local revenue. This benefit has been hoarded at the top. Business managers make up the largest group of one percent club pigs (followed by attorneys, doctors, and celebrities). Plus 40% of the market is owned by the top 1%. Their record territory dividends have been partially subsidized by federal, state, and local revenue. The benefits have not been shared proportionally with the little guy. The lopsided division of growth across quintiles proves it.
The income for richest one percent has grown more than 10 times faster than the middle percentile over the last 30 years. This is true EVEN AFTER taxes. When you account for inflation and the actual cost of living (tied to record high profits in energy, finance, and healthcare), the middle class have actually lost relative buying power while the top 1% have drastically increased their income and bottom line wealth.
In 1976 (when their tax rates were much higher), the top one percent reaped 9 percent of all private income and held less than 20 percent of all private wealth in America. Now, they reap 21 percent of all private income and hold 40 percent of all private wealth. Meanwhile, the lower majority (those who are still employed) are working more hours and have less to show for it.
Just to make it crystal clear: The rich do not pay 37% of all taxes. Not even close. They pay roughly 37% of all FEDERAL INCOME TAXES which account for less than 1/2 of total government revenue. The rest is drawn from a number of sources and across income levels. The rich harp on this 'Federal Income Tax' statistic because it leads people to believe that they pay 37% of ALL taxes. They don't. Not even close. Their share as a group represents about their share of income. The difference is within 5 percent. In fact, the 2nd percentile actually pays a slightly higher rate on average than the top percentile.
The richest 500 Americans hold more personal wealth than the lower 150 million Americans combined. These richest 500 Americans pay an effective rate of under 15%.
If the rich want to pay a lower share of the taxes in America, then they should get themselves a lower share of the income in America. In other words, don't be so rich to begin with. After all, this obscene concentration of wealth actually CAUSES economic instability. It CAUSES poverty. It will CAUSE the next Great Depression.
No more excuses.
RAISE THOSE GOD DAMN TAXES ON THE RICH!
nope...it's still not true...no matter how many times you repeat it....
I see you've taken your denial one step further. A few weeks ago, your position was that I had not proven my assertions regarding total effective tax rates (Federal, State, and local taxes and fees as a percentage of income).
Now, you're swearing that they are "not true".
Check out this quote from Citizens For Tax Justice:
"The total federal, state and local effective tax rate for the richest one percent of Americans (30.9 percent) is only slightly higher than the average effective tax rate for the remaining 99 percent of Americans (29.4 percent). From the middle-income ranges upward, total effective tax rates are virtually flat across income groups." "
http://www.ctj.org/pdf/taxday2009.pdf
Then watch this video of independent economist and former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich debunking 7 lies about the economy. Pay special attention to that 7th lie.
http://m.youtube.com/index?desktop_uri=%2F&gl=US#/watch?v=mM5Ep9fS7Z0
I type the truth. When you account for all Federal, State, and local taxes, the middle class pay about the same effective rate as the richest one percent."
If you want your denial to be taken seriously, you'll have to cough up some evidence. Simply stating that its "not true" doesn't make it "not true".
C'mon scammersworld. Put up or shut up.
The ugly truth. America's wealth is STILL being concentrated. When the rich get too rich, the poor get poorer. These latest figures prove it. AGAIN.
According to the Social Security Administration, 50 percent of U.S. workers made less than $26,364 in 2010. In addition, those making less than $200,000, or 98 percent of Americans, saw their earnings fall by $4.5 billion collectively.
The incomes of the top one percent of the wage scale in the U.S. rose in 2010; and their collective wage earnings jumped by $120 billion. In addition, those earning at least $1 million a year in wages, which is roughly 93,000 Americans, reported payroll income jumped 22 percent from 2009.
Overall, the economy has shed 5.2 million jobs since the start of the Great Recession in 2007. It’s the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression in the 1930’s.
Another word about the first Great Depression. It really was a perfect storm. Caused almost entirely by greed. First, there was unprecedented economic growth. There was a massive building spree. There was a growing sense of optimism and materialism. There was a growing obsession for celebrities. The American people became spoiled, foolish, naive, brainwashed, and love-sick. They were bombarded with ads for one product or service after another. Encouraged to spend all of their money as if it were going out of style. Obscene profits were hoarded at the top. In 1928, the rich were already way ahead. Still, they were given huge tax breaks. All of this represented a MASSIVE transfer of wealth from poor to rich. Executives, entrepreneurs, developers, celebrities, and share holders. By 1929, America's wealthiest 1 percent had accumulated 44 percent of all United States wealth. The upper, middle, and lower classes were left to share the rest. When the lower majority finally ran low on money to spend, profits declined and the stock market crashed.
Of course, the rich threw a fit and started cutting jobs. They would stop at nothing to maintain their disgusting profit margins and ill-gotten obscene levels of wealth as long as possible. The small business owners did what they felt necessary to survive. They cut more jobs. The losses were felt primarily by the little guy. This created a domino effect. The middle class shrunk drastically and the lower class expanded. With less wealth in reserve and active circulation, banks failed by the hundreds. More jobs were cut. Unemployment reached 25% in 1933. The worst year of the Great Depression. Those who were employed had to settle for much lower wages. Millions went cold and hungry. The recovery involved a massive infusion of new currency, a public works program, a World War, and higher taxes on the rich. With so many men in the service, so many women on the production line, and those higher taxes to help pay for it, some US wealth was gradually transferred back down to the majority. This redistribution of wealth continued until the mid seventies. By 1976, the richest 1 percent held less than 20 percent. The lower majority held the rest. And rightfully so. It was the best year ever for the middle and lower classes. This was the recovery. A partial redistribution of wealth.
Then it began to concentrate all over again. Here we are 35 years later. The richest one percent now own 40 percent of all US wealth. The upper, middle, and lower classes are sharing the rest. This is true even after taxes, welfare, financial aid, and charity. It is the underlying cause. If there is no redistribution, there will be no recovery.
Note: A knowledgable and trustworthy contributor has gone on record with a claim that effective tax rates for the rich were considerably lower than book rates during the years of redistribution that I have made reference to. His point was that the rich were able to avoid those very high marginal rates of 70-90% under the condition that they invested specifically in American jobs. His claim is that effective rates for the rich probably never exceeded 39% and certainly never exceeded 45%. My belief is that if true, those effective rates for the rich were still considerably higher than previous lows of '29'. Also that such policies still would have contributed to a partial redistribution by forcing the rich to either share profits and potential income through mass job creation or share income through very high marginal tax rates. This knowledgable contributor and I agree that there was in effect, a redistribution but disagree on the use of the word.
One thing is clear from recent events. The government won't step in and do what's necessary. Not this time. Book rates for the rich remain at all time lows. Their corporate golden geese are heavily subsidized. The benefits of corporate welfare are paid almost exclusively to the rich. Our Federal, State, and local leaders are sold out. Most of whom, are rich and trying to get even richer at our expense. They won't do anything about the obscene concentration of wealth. It's up to us. Support small business more and big business less. Support the little guy more and the big guy less. It's tricky but not impossible.
For the good of society, stop giving so much of your money to rich people. Stop concentrating the wealth. This may be our last chance to prevent the worst economic depression in world history. No redistribution. No recovery.
Those of you who agree on these major issues are welcome to summarize this post, copy it, use any portion, link to it, save it, show a friend, or spread the word in any fashion. Most major cities have daily call-in talk radio shows. You can reach thousands of people at once. They should know the ugly truth. Be sure to quote the figures which prove that America's wealth is still being concentrated. I don't care who takes the credit. We are up against a tiny but very powerful minority who have more influence on the masses than any other group in history. They have the means to reach millions at once with outrageous political and commercial propaganda. Those of us who speak the ugly truth must work incredibly hard just to be heard.
I have stated many times that FDR's policies (designed to partially reverse the record high concentration of wealth) were successful every year but one. I have stated that his policies resulted in economic growth and job creation every year but one. Also that he did in fact, officially end the Great Depression.
The following is an entry from 'looselyhuman' who has gone on record with a similar claim. One source to verify our claims is included. Out of respect for 'looselyhuman', I will post not only the source, but also his entire entry unedited:
Its a good one. Looselyhuman said:
"Revisionist history. Check this out re: FDR's taxes that long outlived him (until 1980-82): http://www.brianrogel.com/the-100-percent-solution-for-the-99-percent
Unemployment declined every year from 1933-1940 except 1938 when FDR listened to the GOP and cut back on the New Deal. GDP grew every year except 1938 as well. The rest of the world was in free fall. There was no trade or commerce and without government spending it would have been total collapse. Then, yes, things took off even more during the Keynesian economic stimulus known as WWII.
Unemployment (% labor force)
1933 24.9
1934 21.7
1935 20.1
1936 16.9
1937 14.3
1938 19
1939 17.2
1940 14.6
Percent change GDP
1933 -4%
1934 15%
1935 10%
1936 13%
1937 9%
1938 -7%
1939 7%
1940 9%
How would you feel about 15% economic growth today?"
"Private capital tends to become concentrated in few hands, partly because of competition among the capitalists, and partly because technological development and the increasing division of labor encourage the formation of larger units of production at the expense of smaller ones. The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society." -Albert Einstein 1949
"The profit motive, in conjunction with competition among capitalists, is responsible for an instability in the accumulation and utilization of capital which leads to increasingly severe depressions." -Albert Einstein 1949
"The United States economy is like a poker game where the chips have become concentrated in fewer and fewer hands, and where the other fellows can stay in the game only by borrowing. When their credit runs out the game will stop." -Mariner Eccles Chairman of the Federal Reserve under FDR
You're probably wondering. If these guys were right and the wealth was heavily concentrated just prior to the Great Depression, how did we recover?
That's simple but not well known. There was a partial redistribution from the mid '30's to the mid '70's.
So why are we in this mess again?
"The income gap between the rich and the rest of the US population has become so wide and is growing so fast that it might eventually threaten the stability of democratic capitalism itself." Allen Greenspan testifying before congress in the spring of '05'.
Robert Reich and a dozen more prominent economists have gone on record with similar views.
All that progress made after the Great Depression has been reversed over the last 35 years. The richest one percent now own 43% of America's financial wealth. That's way too much. Its caising economic instability. But they absolutely will not stop.
It's very similar in Europe. The rich are too rich. Period.
Greed kills. It will be our downfall.
[Removed]
the world wide oligarchy is not going to just hand over the reigns of power we must take what we want. the real truth is that unemployment will never go down from here on out only up because of automation and outsourcing.
Using 'bots' to vote down Modest Capitalist. Shame on you Thrasy. OWS is about fairness. What the hell is fair about that?
Siding with Slammersworldisback. Double shame on you Thrasy.
FROM MODERATING POLICIES: Due to software limitations forum posts are limited to about 5,000 characters; that's about 1-2 pages of text. If your posts really need more, you can finish the post in the comments (which can actually take about twice that amount).
You and I talked about this earlier, and you agreed he was within the rules of the forum. If you have a problem with the rules, take it up with the moderators. That is fair. There is no need to resort to cheap tricks and creating bots to down vote anybody you don't like. Who are you to moderate Modest Capitalist's needs to bash the rich? I say let ModestCapitalist use as much space as he wants to piss off slammersworld.
Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots. Play fair. Don't use bots.
I just had another EPIC CONFRONTATION with Thrasymaque, which I found very revealing. If interested, please check it out here:
http://occupywallst.org/forum/new-forum-features/#comment-576731
I'm on the fence about Thrasy. This person seems to be really concerned about the rules of this forum, fighting spam and conspiracy posts (which in Thrasy's defense the tv ads were a big problem), then at other times Thrasy seems to be bothered about things I consider trivial. Overall, I think Thrasy's the type of person who goes around writing 'wash me' on other people's dirty cars. Go figure.
Personally, I'm not on the fence at all... Our Moderator, "agnosticnixie", recently confronted Thrasy, accusing him of "trolling" : "you're not particularly helping with your trolling."
http://occupywallst.org/forum/WOW-statement/#comment-546018
I don't have the slightest clue what "agnosticnixie" said or didn't said. I do know Thrasy used bots to down vote Modest Capitalist, and that's not cool.
I think at the time tensions were running really high. I'm sure there was some level of frustration on the part of the moderators because there was an enormous amount of junk and spam all over the forum. The truth is, Thras did alot to help clean that up. Jaded, I know you will be fair, and take this into consideration, the whole of the situation.
Of course. I have given credit to Thrasy for fighting the tv spam which was overwhelming the forum and thanked him for that. I just didn't see the situation here on the same level. But I think we have resolved this issue and put it behind us. :-)
Why doesn't he ask her to ban me, instead of stalking me like a little girl backstage at a Justin Bieber concert? If she already agrees with him, she'll certainly follow his advice.
I do not know. I'll ask him.
He's mentally ill.
Well, he does look highly suspicious for mental illness, in my unprofessional opinion. It's definately possible based on his extremely strange behavior. But technically, we don't have a medical diagnosis to prove it. I'll ask him.
Hmmm.... Perhaps I should program some kind of forum doctor bot who goes around giving diagnostics to conspiracy theorists and prescribing certain ailments for their illnesses... Ah! If only I had five lives I could implement all of my ideas. That bot would be called HowserBOT, for Dougie Howser, M.D.
Oh God, please no. lol!
You will find their exchange here:
http://occupywallst.org/forum/WOW-statement/#comment-546018
[-] Thrasymaque 1 points 5 hours ago Off topic, why isn't there any forum moderation? Why are all the conspiracy theorists and spammers left to kill this forum? They are murdering logical thought and discussion. ↥like ↧dislike reply permalink
[-] agnosticnixie (Laval, QC) 1 points 3 hours ago Because they're mostly not being reported and we're doing what we can with only six people who don't really have time to check the forum constantly, and you're not particularly helping with your trolling.
We have all often said things in the heat of a moment that we didn't really mean. I read this in a different context.
agnosticnixie's retort sounds like a frustration at being bothered by Thrasy.
First notice how busy agnosticnixie claims to be, and then notice how agnosticnixie used the word trolling instead of the actual word troll.
In other words, agnosticnixie could have just as easily said, "you're not particularly helping by bothering me right now."
Why don't you ask her to ban me, instead of stalking me like a little girl backstage at a Justin Bieber concert? If she already agrees with you, she'll certainly follow your advice.
Thrasy, we all know by now about your obsession with "little girls" and being an adored pop idol... Get help with your fantasies from a professional. They are PAID to listen, we are NOT. Get it???
Have you ever seen a mental health professional? Under gone any psychological diagnosis? I just have to ask because your constant harping on the same old thing looks really suspicious as if you are mentally ill. It may be an indication of an abnormal obsessive disorder of some kind. If so, please advise. We'll take that into consideration with your continued verbal harassment and try to be understanding of your mental disorders.
LOL
When it isn't Rico flying to the rescue of his TROLL-FUEHRER, it's April!
Her credibility in this debate is therefore minimal... I will be content with quoting Thrasymaque:
"I have to be honest, I'm really sad this forum has become infested with mentally ill paranoid schizophrenics."
This theory of "Dr. Thrasy" - self-appointed psychiatrist to OWS supporters! - seems based on the curious assumption that anyone daring to disagree with him or - God forbid! - confront him, HAS to be a "mentally ill paranoid schizophrenic". In fact, he wants all of us who disagree with him put ON MEDS! LOL
I guess that shows how much respect he has for the members of this forum.
And even if there WERE some duly diagnosed schizophrenics on this forum, it would STILL be wrong to insult them, as they are intelligent and valuable human beings, entitled to our respect like any other person on this forum.
In fact, Thrasy and April are, in my opinion, in violation of FORUM RULE NO 1: "Will not be tolerated • Bigotry; this is a wide subject, and gratuitous use of sexist, racist, homophobic, ableist, etc insults also falls under this subject. Posts will be moderated, repeat offenders will be considered for bans."
I dared to disagree with him and we were able to work out the issue by being mature about the matter. How do you explain that? If your assessment was correct, I would not be able to reason with this person under any circumstances.
The key to maturity is listening and being able to reevaluate a given attitude or belief based on new information. You can go back and read our disagreement up above and see we indeed worked out the issue.
I am providing you with proof that you can disagree with Thrasy and come away with mutual respect. But it takes both sides to want to reach that outcome. If Thrasy offers any give, then you should to. It's a two way street.
You didn't answer my previous question below. Why do you continue to obsess with something that happened weeks ago? Thats the whole point.
People understand it is sarcasm. Lots of people make all sorts of comments about posters that are strange here. Surely, you can distinguish between sarcasm and not.
When have I ever, ever, or even Thras for that matter, made a serious sexist, racist, homophobic post?
While you continue to harass him about some sick sex thing with little girls? Really? Can you not see how ridiculous this is?
Forum rule 1 - stop talking about it and do it. Report to the moderators. Please. This is getting stupid and boring.
Our Moderator, "agnosticnixie", recently confronted Thrasy, accusing him of "trolling" : "you're not particularly helping with your trolling."
http://occupywallst.org/forum/WOW-statement/#comment-546018
And out Moderator wasn't being "sarcastic", she was being dead serious.
IF YOU REALLY CARE about Thrasymaque, HELP HIM to see more clearly how he is sabotaging not only the work of this forum, but his own reputation.
AS FOR RULE NO 1, you seem to have missed the point about "bigotry... this is a WIDE subject... homophobic, ableist, ETC. INSULTS also falls under this subject." If we have some schizophrenics on this forum, it would be wrong to disparage them on account of their illness, as they are intelligent and valuable human beings, entitled to our respect like any other person on this forum.
And btw, I am NOT harassing Thrasy about his obsession with being a pop idol surrounded by "little girls". Anyone can verify for himself that HE is the one who constantly brings it up... LOL
I'm sure if the moderators thought that he was truly bigoted towards mentally disturbed people, and not using this as eupemism for dumb and stupid people, they would ban him.
Would you prefer he call people dumb and stupid when people are being dumb and stupid? Wouldn't this be offensive and insulting to dumb and stupid people on this forum? Because, the truth is, there are alot more dumb and stupid people in this world than there are mentally disturbed. So wouldn't this be insulting an even larger class of mentally challenged people? Instead, he is sparing the feelings of the dumb and stupid. You could say he is being kind and sympathetic to unintelligent idiots.
Why do you continue to bring this up? This was like weeks ago! It's over. There was tons of spam all over the board. I'm sure the moderators were really frustrated as we all were. And the truth is Thras and NewEnglandPatriot helped to clean up the junk on the forum. Why are you still talking about this??
What obsession with little girls? That is just an obnoxious slanderous and perverted statement! Why would you say something that has no basis in fact? Everyone can see that this kind of attack says more about you than it does about him.
Seems to me you are the one with the obsession. This whole thing is so over weeks ago! Yet you still continue to harass him and talk about it to anyone that will listen. Which is just juvenile and stupid. Get over it and move on.
Last warning. One more reply, and it's bot time. Your stalking me is the only trolling around here. You had your chance to report whatever behavior you don't like from me to the moderators, but instead you choose to stalk me. That's trolling.
Why doesn't he ask her to ban me, instead of stalking me like a little girl backstage at a Justin Bieber concert? If she already agrees with him, she'll certainly follow his advice.
If I we're TIOUAISE, I would drop it and move on. Obviously, you are not a troll.
Why don't you ask her to ban me, instead of stalking me like a little girl backstage at a Justin Bieber concert? If she already agrees with you, she'll certainly follow your advice.
Thrasy, we all know by now about your obsession with "little girls" and being an adored pop idol. Get help with your fantasies from a professional. They are PAID to listen, we are NOT.
Why don't you ask her to ban me, instead of stalking me like a little girl backstage at a Justin Bieber concert? If she already agrees with you, she'll certainly follow your advice.
The Moderator has ALREADY written to you a couple of weeks ago: "you're not particularly helping with your trolling."
Can't you get the message, "Justin Bieber"? LOL
If the moderators already know I'm the head troll who has destroyed this forum and they have decided not to ban me, then it's case closed as far as I'm concerned. I have no idea why you are obsessed with the idea of stalking me. I can only assume that you're like a little girl backstage at a Justin Bieber concert. For some reason, you idolize me and can't stop stalking me. Unfortunately for you, I'm already taken. At this point in time, I have no interest in developing a cybernetic relationship. Sorry.
Thrasy, we all know by now about your obsession with "little girls" and being an adored pop idol.... Must you continue to embarrass yourself further?
Get help with your fantasies from a professional. They are PAID to listen, we are NOT.
God damn, you are one obsessed and mentally disturbed conspiracy theorist! I hope you choose decent porn sites to whack off all the erotic tension that mounts up in your penile tissues during your stalking sprees when you reply to each and every one of my comments with saliva dripping from your mouth like a wild animal in heat during the midst of Spring. Watch out! Don't cum all over your keyboard. You know what they stay, - sticky deeds lead to sticky keys.
trashy
. . . you pink pantied penis poser . . .
What was that?
Our Moderator wrote to you a couple of weeks ago: "you're not particularly helping with your trolling."
http://occupywallst.org/forum/WOW-statement/#comment-546018
Do you feel the quality of your contributions has improved since? LOL
I wonder why I haven't been banned? That's funny isn't it? You don't feel like asking them instead of stalking me? Let's go underground shall we?
You seem to have a sane mind, don't let these mentally ill conspiracy theorists mess it up. Seriously, their disease is highly dangerous and can be contagious. Read his comments and make your mind up for yourself. Try to remain logical and use the scientific method. That's important. Don't let your mind drown in his flurry of baseless assumptions.
In his comments, this person asked you repeatedly to answer concerns about you being an agent and an innuendo warning people to be careful (which I took to be tongue in cheek). But you never responded to these concerns with any sincerity. I am unaware of your full history, so I can't make a judgment call beyond what I read.
What I ascertain from the exchanges is a misunderstanding on the accuser's part of your intentions and no sincere attempt from you to alleviate those concerns. In fact, you both appeared to worsen the situation with back and forth insults, letting it flame into a war. I think both sides need to step back, take a deep breath, and get a grip.
I noticed one thing that speaks highly for your being on the up and up. The person referenced owsass as a source for basing their assumptions. I can with good conscience say owsass is not anybody I have high regard for and I wouldn't put two cents on anything owsass says.
With that said, being a bad judge of character does not make this person a conspiracy theorist. I only recall humorous type posts by this person, not conspiracy posts. But again, I may not have the full story of what your basing that claim on.
Being a bad judge of character doesn't make someone a conspiracy theorist, but being paranoid to the point of accusing another user on this forum of various allegations ranging from being a paid agent to being a child molester who posted pornographic images on this forum without providing one shred of evidence does.
It's very simple, TITOUAISE and OWSass are angry at me because I attacked the conspiracy theorists on this board by posting numerous images in their postings. Since then, TITOUAISE has been stalking me like a little girl backstage at a Justin Bieber concert.
TITOUAISE stipulates that I'm the head troll on this forum and that a moderator has called me a troll. Yet, strangely, I am not banned. I am here replying to your message.
You accuse me of never responding to his accusations in an effort to clear my name. I told him I would answer all his questions if he promised to stop stalking me. He says he will not do that. The truth is, there is no reason for me to defend myself because his accusations are not supported by one shred of evidence. He has the burden of proof, not I. Even if I did answer his questions, that would not satisfy him. Conspiracy theorists are never satisfied by the simple truth. They always seek an elaborate fantasy-like explanation. In addition, his questions are rude and presumptuous. They are a form of attack, again, presented without any proof of any kind. They come from a mentally ill individual. I don't have time to answer such questions, nor do I feel I should be obliged to.
Now, let's say I accuse you of being a bank robber, a pedophile, and of having a fetish for blow up dolls crafted in the image of Pamela Anderson. Let's say that I provide no evidence for any of these claims, but that I stalk you day in and day out in this forum, that I relentlessly call you the head troll of the forum, and that I demand that you answer these three questions:
Wouldn't you feel insulted by these questions and my stalking you? Wouldn't you feel that it's useless to answer these questions because they are silly, and a gratuitous attack on your person? Wouldn't you ask that I stop stalking you, and perhaps only offer to answer my questions if I promised to do so?
Now, if you want me to answer Mr. TITOUAISE's questions, I would like you to answer mine first. You must defend yourself like you are asking me to defend myself.
I'll add another question for good measure: Are you a paid psyops troll capable of mind infiltration?
I await your answers. If you don't provide any, I will stalk you for a few days. You will learn what it's like to be attacked by a lunatic conspiracy theorist.
Now, I demand you answer my questions you pedophile mind infiltrating agent of a troll!
This person did indeed tell you no way, but it is much harder to accept an offer as being made in good faith when it is provided with an insult about stalking...not judging, just saying. In your position, I might have acted the same way.
Like I said, I don't know the full story. I don't know what conspiracy posts this person may or may not have posted, but you could have reported this person to the moderator and yet, this person is still here also.
I'm a peacemaker at heart and not fond of seeing people bashing on each other. But based on all the information I have to go by, it appears TIOUAISE is guilty of listening to the wrong people, adopting strong beliefs, and then not able to reevaluate those beliefs against new information.
I think that makes this person gullible. Mentally ill is a harsh characterization. Of course, I wasn't accused of the things you were accused of and treated the way you were.
And as far as your mock trial. 1) no 2) no 3) not my type (real or blowup)
I don't even know what a psyops troll capable of mind infiltration does, but it sounds sneaky, and that is not my style.
You're a tough cookie on other people, especially those who don't do things according to your principles, but otherwise you come across intelligent, rational, and reasonable. Good Luck with your stalker problem.
You CAN'T answer my questions! That means you GOT something to hide. A BIG thing I presume! Everyone thinks your a TROLL! You single handedly DESTROYED this forum! Answer my questions IF you want the users here to respect you again. I hold my hand out. I'm given YOU a chance. Don't turn around and HIDE. I know you're an agent, you know you're an agent. So just BE HONEST for once.
(Sorry, I just started to learn TIOUAISEan. The style is not yet subtile.)
You sound silly.
Why do YOU REFUSE to answer my questions. You HAVE something to HIDE!!! I think we can ALL agree that YOU ARE A PAID AGENTt. Saying that I sound SILLY won't change that. Who pays you? How much do you MAKE? You're only here to DESTROY the forum.
Show US that you're HONEST. Answer my questions.
(Sorry, I just started to learn TIOUAISEan. The style is not yet subtile.)
Sigh.....I'm putting on earmuffs.
You doubt my honesty because I didn't reply to TITOUAISE's questions which are based on nothing but assumptions. Why should I believe that you're honest if you don't want to answer my questions which are also based on nothing more than assumptions. Why are you refusing to answer me if you don't agree that I should refuse to answer TITOUAISE? Until I have a reply to this question or my previous ones, I will be on your back. You must defend your contradictory position. It's the least you can do.
No problem. I'll respond to this, I just won't respond to silliness with seriousness.
I don't doubt your honesty. I doubted your fairness. You used bots to down vote Modest Capitalist. I don't even necessarily disagree with your assertions that MC could be more concise at times. I disagree with the heavy handed tactics you use to make your points. It isn't hard for me to extend that same nature of unfairness and apply it to your interactions with TIOUAISE. Simply, it's not your arguments that I protest, it's your approach.
I would ask of you, mind you, not demand, only ask that you chill out a fraction in dealing with people. I think I share at least one value with you. I value truth a whole lot. And I know from reading a lot of your comments that you do as well.
I offer my observations of the truth as I see it. There are better approaches to dealing with people, that will garner you better results. Peace.
Thank you for you honest answer.
OWS uses forceful tactics because this is necessary. For example, they take hold of parks, buildings, and use direct action. At times, I use these same tactics.
Logic is of utmost importance if we are to create a new world. For this reason, I think it is important to slay the ramblings conspiracy theorists with whatever means that are at our disposal. They come here and post their garbage assumptions even though they are well aware that they are breaking the forum's rule #2. For these reasons, I have no shame in using bots to deface their posts and down vote their comments in an aggressive manner.
We can agree to disagree.
You make a very good point about the necessity for using forceful tactics against garbage assumptions, and for the most part, I have agreed with your actions, and certainly agree that garbage assumptions are a road to nowhere.
At any rate, we can agree to disagree.
Damn! Why are you so obsessed with me? Are you some kind of professional stalker, or just another conspiracy theorist with a mind disease? Report me to the moderators already. What's the point of stalking me day in and day out if you're not going to do this? Moderators are here to moderate the forum. Use their service, or take your meds.
I have to be honest, I'm really sad this forum has become infested with mentally ill paranoid schizophrenics. I have a couple of friends with this mental illness and it's not pretty. But, believe me, you can find help and lead a healthy life. Go to a doctor. That's what they're there for. There's no reason you should suffer like the way you do. No reason at all.
Look, Thrasy, this particular thread has everything to do with you, in fact the title even mentions you by NAME. So I have every right to offer additional information to forum members on the topic at hand. Are you trying to intimidate me from posting on any thread where you might appear? All I can say is that IT WON'T WORK. I don't respond well to intimidation. I'm weird like that...
You write :"I have to be honest, I'm really sad this forum has become infested with mentally ill paranoid schizophrenics." Infested? Really? That must be why in our last discussion you wanted to put all forum members who disagree with you ON MEDS.... Thrasy, I love it when you talk like that, as it makes me laugh out loud, so thank you for the comic relief you offer - however accidentally - on this forum.
On a more serious note, however, I must warn you that you are entering into the realm of wild "conspiracy theory" by writing such nonsense as :"I have to be honest, I'm really sad this forum has become infested with mentally ill paranoid schizophrenics." This theory of yours seems based on the curious assumption that anyone daring to disagree with you or - God forbid! - confront you, HAS to be a "mentally ill paranoid schizophrenic".
You appear so obsessed with labeling your adversaries that one has to wonder if you are not the textbook example of what the famous psychoanalyst Carl Jung called "the projection of the shadow". In layman's terms, it means that the labels you are so desperate to apply to OTHERS in fact speak volumes about parts of yourself that you have thus far been unable to face.
Thrasy, I'm sorry to tell you these things in such a public manner, but you leave me no other choice, as you refused to even read the private messages that I sent you a couple of weeks ago. You are the one in need of help, my friend, and I hope you get it asap. It takes tremendous courage to take that first step, but it's worth it. Your problems will not simply "go away" and even powerful antipsychotics will not suffice. You need some in-depth "talk therapy" as well.
I confront you periodically on this site for the good of the forum and of OWS's sacred struggle. That does not mean that I despise you personally. Hatred is a bad trip that I don't need or want in my life. My quarrel is with your behavior, not with your person. I bear you no ill-will, but I - and many, many others - will continue to challenge your attempts at disrupting the important work of this forum and intimidating its members.
GOOD DAY.
Stop stalking me. If you have a problem with my behavior on this forum, make an official complaint to the moderators, else I will use my powers to cure your malady.
You are an obsessed mentally ill delusional and paranoid conspiracy theorist. Your behavior speaks for itself. For your own good, you should seek the advice of a doctor and take the medication he prescribes.
LOL
YOU are the one in need of help ASAP. After all, YOU are the one writing: "I have to be honest, I'm really sad this forum has become infested with mentally ill paranoid schizophrenics." Infested? Really? That must be why in our last discussion you wanted to put all forum members who disagree with you ON MEDS....
Are we to assume that anyone who dares disagree with you on this forum qualifies as "an obsessed mentally ill delusional and paranoid conspiracy theorist"???
LOL - I know I shouldn't be laughing, but sorry, I can't help myself...
Why don't you ask her to ban me, instead of stalking me like a little girl backstage at a Justin Bieber concert? If she already agrees with you, she'll certainly follow your advice.
ModestCapitalist doesn't use comments because he doesn't have enough room in the main article postings. He publishes the same comments over and over again. This is not fair play. It's easy to go around the forum and publish extremely longish comments over and over again to force users to read what you write. Let me demonstrate. I'm going to bold this comment and repeat it many times. Is this against the rules. No. Should I do it day in and day out to make sure people read my stuff. Probably not.
ModestCapitalist doesn't use comments because he doesn't have enough room in the main article postings. He publishes the same comments over and over again. This is not fair play. It's easy to go around the forum and publish extremely longish comments over and over again to force users to read what you write. Let me demonstrate. I'm going to bold this comment and repeat it many times. Is this against the rules. No. Should I do it day in and day out to make sure people read my stuff. Probably not.
ModestCapitalist doesn't use comments because he doesn't have enough room in the main article postings. He publishes the same comments over and over again. This is not fair play. It's easy to go around the forum and publish extremely longish comments over and over again to force users to read what you write. Let me demonstrate. I'm going to bold this comment and repeat it many times. Is this against the rules. No. Should I do it day in and day out to make sure people read my stuff. Probably not.
ModestCapitalist doesn't use comments because he doesn't have enough room in the main article postings. He publishes the same comments over and over again. This is not fair play. It's easy to go around the forum and publish extremely longish comments over and over again to force users to read what you write. Let me demonstrate. I'm going to bold this comment and repeat it many times. Is this against the rules. No. Should I do it day in and day out to make sure people read my stuff. Probably not.
ModestCapitalist doesn't use comments because he doesn't have enough room in the main article postings. He publishes the same comments over and over again. This is not fair play. It's easy to go around the forum and publish extremely longish comments over and over again to force users to read what you write. Let me demonstrate. I'm going to bold this comment and repeat it many times. Is this against the rules. No. Should I do it day in and day out to make sure people read my stuff. Probably not.
ModestCapitalist doesn't use comments because he doesn't have enough room in the main article postings. He publishes the same comments over and over again. This is not fair play. It's easy to go around the forum and publish extremely longish comments over and over again to force users to read what you write. Let me demonstrate. I'm going to bold this comment and repeat it many times. Is this against the rules. No. Should I do it day in and day out to make sure people read my stuff. Probably not.
ModestCapitalist doesn't use comments because he doesn't have enough room in the main article postings. He publishes the same comments over and over again. This is not fair play. It's easy to go around the forum and publish extremely longish comments over and over again to force users to read what you write. Let me demonstrate. I'm going to bold this comment and repeat it many times. Is this against the rules. No. Should I do it day in and day out to make sure people read my stuff. Probably not.
ModestCapitalist doesn't use comments because he doesn't have enough room in the main article postings. He publishes the same comments over and over again. This is not fair play. It's easy to go around the forum and publish extremely longish comments over and over again to force users to read what you write. Let me demonstrate. I'm going to bold this comment and repeat it many times. Is this against the rules. No. Should I do it day in and day out to make sure people read my stuff. Probably not.
ModestCapitalist doesn't use comments because he doesn't have enough room in the main article postings. He publishes the same comments over and over again. This is not fair play. It's easy to go around the forum and publish extremely longish comments over and over again to force users to read what you write. Let me demonstrate. I'm going to bold this comment and repeat it many times. Is this against the rules. No. Should I do it day in and day out to make sure people read my stuff. Probably not.
Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot. Don't worry, I'm not longer using a bot.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/a-short-javascript-to-ignore-user-postings-and-art/ http://occupywallst.org/forum/a-short-javascript-to-ignore-user-postings-and-art/ http://occupywallst.org/forum/a-short-javascript-to-ignore-user-postings-and-art/ http://occupywallst.org/forum/a-short-javascript-to-ignore-user-postings-and-art/ http://occupywallst.org/forum/a-short-javascript-to-ignore-user-postings-and-art/ http://occupywallst.org/forum/a-short-javascript-to-ignore-user-postings-and-art/ http://occupywallst.org/forum/a-short-javascript-to-ignore-user-postings-and-art/ http://occupywallst.org/forum/a-short-javascript-to-ignore-user-postings-and-art/
Hey Sherlock. I never posted the same comment 9 times in a row on the same page. Also, my comments are relevant. What you just posted is worthless.
Personally, I prefer MatLock over Sherlock, but let's save this discussion for another time. I think you understand my point. If you want more readers, you'll head my advice. If not that's fine. There's always the dislike button.
Thanks for no longer using a bot. Now, I'm going to ask Modest Capitalist to take your comments to heart and try to make peace on the issue. And I'm going to ask you to remember he's on our side and try to make peace on the issue also. I would like to see you guys start a post, have a very courteous discussion, and come to some sort of gentleman's agreement on the issue. Peace.
Awesome idea.
Honestly, I have no idea what he stands for. I never read his verbose comments.
[-] -3 points by Thrasymaque (2732) 10 hours ago
48 hours ago, I had 2229 points. Now, its down to 1900.
This ain't no Donkey Kong, so it's OK if you don't reach ZenDog's high score.
F-f-f-f-foooolin....you have a selective memory.
No, I don't. That wasn't posted in one of his verbose comments. That was posted in his article (OP). Read up top, it's still there. I have no problem with verbiage when it's used in the OP. My problem is when people post essays in tiny comment boxes. I don't have a memory problem, it's you who lacks reading comprehension skills.
I'm saying your comment is not on the up and up. I know sour grapes when I hear 'em.
It's a good thing you don't get intimidated when some one rates down a comment. Someone once rated down my comment and i just about pissed my pants.
I don't care if a comment gets rated down as long as its rated down by an individual using their only ID. A few here. A few there. Thats no big deal. 329 points in two days is BS.
No one cares about your points but you self centered ego maniac
Again, you're missing the point.
[Removed]
Who is this Thrasymaque? Some kind of wizard? Geek God? Have we found our leader?
He is just another user with contempt for me and multiple IDs to show that contempt.
[Removed]
Actually its just because your an overly self-righteous buffoon.
You're confusing determination with arrogance.
This ain't no Donkey Kong, so it's OK if you don't reach ZenDog's high score.
Its ok if I don't reach his score. Whats not ok is the shady tactics you and others use to prevent others from reading what I have to say. No way in hell did I lose 329 points from legitimate voters in 48 hours.
No way in hell.
Of course not, you lost 329 points in 48 hours because I was using a bot to shadow you and aggressively down vote all your comments. It's a shady tactic useful against other shady tactics like taking over a forum by posting essays in tiny comment boxes.
Don't worry, I won't do it again. I'm down voting you manually now.
You know damn well that I'm a true supporter of OWS. You took away the rights of others to make their individual votes count. That makes you a hypocrite.
You support OWS, but you disrespect this forum by spamming it. You post essays in small comment boxes forcing users to scroll through your verbiage, and you keep bumping your own postings over and over again like a small narcissistic child. That's not cool.
Ironically, your message would be so much more powerful if you learned to write in a concise manner. I'm not the only one down voting you. Many others are as well. Form is just as important as content. Learn to save essays for articles, and learn to use comments properly and you'll be a real hit around here. Your mom will be proud.
I will not boil my views down into a few lines. I will not change my writing style. Its one of many on this forum. The more styles, the better. Whatever it takes to make people understand.
I also won't fall for any cheap psychological tricks.
Hear, hear!
Don't let yourself be intimidated by psyops or psychos or whatever they're called...
Ok. I won't.
Hear, hear!
Don't let yourself be intimidated by psyops or psychos or whatever they're called.
Yeah, don't stop, this has been such an effective movement with great results
My brother once tried to write a book using forum comments. It didn't really work out well. I told him he should at least post articles instead of comments. He agreed and things improved. He's a happy guy now.
Now who would downvote this? This was very funny.
I like Modest, he has alot of interesting info. He just needs to talk with people a little more, rather than at them.
I'll try. I just get really fed up with the die-hard conservative partisan puppets. Puts me in sort of a a bulldog mood sometimes.
I'm not a conservative by any stretch of the imagination. Read my posts. I'm a pretty hard core socialist. I always vote NDP. I just don't like totalitarians who try to take over the forum by posting essays in small comment boxes. It's like drivers who take up two lanes. It's a form of spam.
You took sides with one of the most die-hard conservatives here (slammersworldisback). Yesterday, you told me that you wanted me to stop posting my essays alltogether. Not even on my own pages.
Anyway, the users should be allowed to vote my comments up or down as they see fit. You take that opportunity away from them by signing on with 10 IDs and voting them into oblivion.
So don't feed me some BS about 'taking over'.
I took sides with him because I am against your tactic of posting essays in small comment boxes. I consider this as nothing more than spam. I didn't take sides width him because of his political views.
You seem to view life in black and white. I take sides all the time with conservatives on all sorts of subjects. That doesn't mean I agree with their political views. Conservatives don't only have political views, they also have opinions on a wide range of other subjects. Just like democrats, anarchists, and Baptists.
You clearly stated that you have a problem with me pasting my essays on my own pages.
I did. You keep bumping your postings over and over again like a small child. I started down voting your comments when I realized you had posted 6 comments to your own posting before receiving a single reply. That's spam. Especially since your comments are copy/pasted from other similar comments that previously appeared on the forum.
It's not because of magic that many users are against your tactic and call it spam. It's because it is indeed spam. You should realize this because it's only hurting your message.
Does that make me a conservative? Nope.
Let the individual users decide what is relevant or not. Spam or not. Its not your place to moderate this forum.
When I add my own essay to my own page its not intended to 'bump'. Its only intended to expand the page. Like I said before, all the words in my long essays are my own except for the the income statistics for 2010 (two very short paragraphs) which I copied from another site and the occasional quotes of others which I always give credit for.
I will not stop. Deal with it.
The long essays which you hate so much are my own.
All right. I won't read your comments and will continue to down vote them as if they were spam. Deal with it.
As long as you do so using only one ID, I won't care.
Look at that, your score is going up again. Maybe one of these days you'll get the high score after all!
that guy is a tool a conformist hack fuck that tool. his favorite words are logical fallacy which is funny because that is where he lives. the conformist politically corrects hacks are just as bad as the fascist objectivist conservatives and libertarians. the people with static belief systems never learn anything that runs contrary to their own. if a fact or truth does not fit their narrow little narrative they simply disregard the fact as a lie and move on. please read my post about this. http://occupywallst.org/forum/stop-validating-fascist-conservativeslibertarians-/
Grammar tip: Use a capital letter at the beginning of a sentence.
tip suck the tip of my cock once again this is not school or work or a paper or a book i don't need tips from you i know how to write from a pseudo intellectual like yourself also why should i bother to put the effort in to reach the shift button for you you are a hack