TetrisMonkey!!!!

[Alex]

Once again, I find it necessary to write in defense of myself and my beliefs. The nitty-gritty of what I'm about to write is this: I want to live my life as I see fit. I can't do that while TetrisMonkey still has the ability to cast ordinary consumption and investment decisions in the light of high religious purpose. I don't know which are worse, right-wing tyrants or left-wing tyrants. But I do know that we must stop tiptoeing and begin marching boldly and forthrightly towards our goal, which is to act as a positive role model for younger people. Yes, we must keep our eyes on the prize, but here is the point that is worth considering: He's planning to exploit issues such as the global economic crisis and the increase in world terrorism in order to instigate planet-wide chaos. Planet-wide chaos is TetrisMonkey's gateway to global tyranny, which will in turn enable him to cause riots in the streets.

On rare occasions, in order to preserve their liberties, sometimes people must get everyone to march in lockstep with TetrisMonkey's callous trained seals. TetrisMonkey does that even when his liberties aren't being threatened. His put-downs epitomize chauvinism in its truest form. There's no need here to present any evidence of that; examples can be found all over the World Wide Web. In fact, a simple search will quickly reveal that if TetrisMonkey continues to take rights away from individuals whom only TetrisMonkey perceives as stentorian, crime will escalate as schools deteriorate, corruption increases, and quality of life plummets.

It's TetrisMonkey's deep-seated belief that censorship could benefit us. Sure, he might be able to justify conclusions like that -- using biased or one-sided information, of course -- but I prefer to know the whole story. In this case, the whole story is that if I want to suffer the pain of TetrisMonkey's wrath, that should be my prerogative. I really don't need TetrisMonkey forcing me to. Selling officious publishers of hate literature on Trotskyism has been a Golconda for TetrisMonkey. That is why, come what may, we must think outside the box.

[Alex]

Since you are more bent on trying to get me out of here and not the bias, selfcentered mods that only mod for personal glorification, then fine.

Im done with these forums, not just this section but all of it.


Now heres something for you to remember.

Im not the enemy here, look to Smoosh, Jack and the others, they only mod for each other and play favorties.

Im done trying to talk to this community, ive done what I can, and its for them to decide what should be done with the mods, not the Admins.

The community holds the power, the second you forget that, is the second Admins such as Smoosh become tyrants and dictators, running the mods and forums how they want it, instead of how the community wants it.


-Signed Tetrismonkey

So I type your name into a complaint generator and what I copy and paste gets you to quit? Damn, I'm like superman!

[Iƒrit]

there is nothing to be proud about being a supporting reason for someone to quit. This kind of attitude should show others exactly how much care you cast towards others, well done.

[Alex]

there is nothing to be proud about being a supporting reason for someone to quit. This kind of attitude should show others exactly how much care you cast towards others, well done.

This is a letter of love and peace; I will not lash out against anyone, and I will not use specific names of individuals or organizations that break down the industrial-technological system. That said, let me merely point out that Ifrit's historical record of vengeful bait-and-switch tactics is clearer than the muddled pronouncements of his expositors. Let me cut to the chase: Ifrit will stop at nothing to draw unsuspecting racketeers into the orbit of the worst sorts of intrusive, lascivious riffraff there are. This may sound outrageous but if it were fiction I would have thought of something more credible. As it stands, I'm not very conversant with Ifrit's background. To be quite frank, I don't care to be. I already know enough to state with confidence that if we foreground the cognitive and emotional palette of Ifrit's mudslinging half-measures rather than their pathology we can enter vitally into his world. Why do we want to do that? Because any rational argument must acknowledge this. Ifrit's loquacious orations, naturally, do not.

I'm merely suggesting that I have absolutely no idea why Ifrit makes such a big fuss over prætorianism. There are far more pressing issues that present themselves and that should be discussed, debated, and solved -- issues such as war, famine, poverty, and homelessness. There is also the lesser issue that the biggest supporters of Ifrit's filthy sentiments are inhumane pamphleteers and subhuman individuals. A secondary class of ardent supporters consists of ladies of elastic virtue and cosmopolitan tendencies to whom such things afford a decent excuse for displaying their fascinations at their open windows. Are you prepared to discuss this, Ifrit? There are two flaws with his lamentations: 1) the things that he says about favoritism range from the trivial and inarticulate to the ignorant and incoherent, and 2) his untrustworthy exegeses are in full flower and their poisonous petals of factionalism are blooming all around us. It is similarly noteworthy that there is an unpleasant fact, painful to the tender-minded, that one can deduce from the laws of nature. This fact is also conclusively established by direct observation. It is a fact so obvious that rational people have always known it and no one doubted it until Ifrit and his protégés started trying to deny it. The fact to which I am referring states that it may seem at first that I can promise freedom-lovers everywhere that my priorities, observations, countermeasures, and predictions are not in any manner similar to those embraced by Ifrit. When we descend to details, however, we see that what I just wrote is not based on merely a single experience or anecdote. Rather, it is based upon the wisdom of accumulated years, spanning two continents, and proven by the fact that he had previously claimed that he had no intention to impose ideology, control thought, and punish virtually any behavior he disapproves of. Of course, shortly thereafter, that's exactly what he did. Next, he denied that he would weave his reckless traits, cranky grievances, and vindictive publications into a rich tapestry that is sure to overthrow the government and eliminate the money system. We all know what happened then. Now, Ifrit would have us believe he'd never ever bring this battle to a fever pitch. Will he? Go figure. My view is that thanks to Ifrit, the epidemic of ethnocentrism is spreading rapidly. End of story. Actually, I should add that if he honestly believes that some of my points are not valid, I would love to get some specific feedback from him.

I am convinced that there will be a strong effort on Ifrit's part to use organized violence to suppress opposition by next weekend. This effort will be disguised, of course. It will be cloaked in deceit, as such efforts always are. That's why I'm informing you that we wouldn't have a problem with adversarialism if it weren't for Ifrit. Although he created the problem, aggravated the problem, and escalated the problem, Ifrit insists that he can solve the problem if we just grant him more power. How naïve does he think we are? Truly, Ifrit wants to spawn a society in which those with the most deviant lifestyle, self-righteous behavior, or personal failures are given the most by the government. Personally, I don't want that. Personally, I prefer freedom. If you also prefer freedom then you should be working with me to nourish children with good morals and self-esteem.

Over time, Ifrit's rejoinders have progressed from being merely intemperate to being superintemperate, hyperintemperate, and recently ultraintemperate. In fact, I'd say that now they're even megaintemperate. I hope that Ifrit's endeavors were intended as a joke, although they're not very funny if they were. Pardon me for not being able to empathize with the most high-handed cozeners you'll ever see, but Ifrit's effusions are designed to evoke a misdirected response to genuine unresolved grievances. And they're working; they're having the desired effect.

I have a message for Ifrit. My message is that, for the good of us all, he should never violate all the rules of decorum. He should never even try to do such an effrontive thing. To make myself perfectly clear, by "never", I don't mean "maybe", "sometimes", or "it depends". I mean only that Ifrit refers to a variety of things using the word "counterrevolutionary". Translating this bit of jargon into English isn't easy. Basically, he's saying that his bromides are not worth getting outraged about, which we all know is patently absurd. At any rate, I suppose it's predictable, though terribly sad, that vulgar litterbugs with stronger voices than minds would revert to pompous behavior. But he maintains that the world can be happy only when his faction is given full rein. Perhaps it would be best for him to awaken from his delusional, narcoleptic fantasyland and observe that there are many roads leading to the defeat of his plans to declare martial law, suspend elections, and round up dissidents (i.e., anyone who does not buy his lie that his opinions represent the opinions of the majority -- or even a plurality). I, speaking as someone who is not a loud rapscallion, avouch that all of these roads must eventually pass through the same set of gates: the ability to challenge the present and enrich the future. Now that this letter is over, I pray that my logic and passion have convinced you that I need to spend some time considering how best to take away as many of Ifrit's opportunities for mischief as possible.

[Iƒrit]

LMAO, someone uses way to many metaphors.
I would also like it if you did not slander me.

Thanks in advance,
Ifrit

[ThunderCat]

lol alex your replies are super random.

try my name next

[Alex]

There's a question that's been on my mind lately: Why does ThunderCat think that his invectives are all sweetness and light? I mean, pointing out that his canards are thoroughly voluble is a sure way to release an outpouring of scorn and resentment from ThunderCat. In the rest of this letter, I will use history and science (in the Hegelian sense) to prove that letting ThunderCat dispense bread and circuses to flighty nitwits to entice them to understate the negative impact of Maoism is tantamount to cutting your own wrist with a razor blade. He is too neurotic to read the writing on the wall. This writing warns that he once tried convincing me that mediocrity and normalcy are ideal virtues. Does he think I was born yesterday? I mean, it seems pretty obvious that ThunderCat's polyloquent op-ed pieces often resemble an inverted fairy tale in that the triumph of innocence comes at the start and the ugly sisters of militarism and mandarinism enter on stage in triumph for the final curtain.

Do you really think that the best way to make a point is with foaming-at-the-mouth rhetoric and letters filled primarily with exclamation points, as ThunderCat claims? Wake up! ThunderCat's perspective is that newspapers should report only on items he agrees with. My perspective, in contrast, is that when ThunderCat hears anyone say that there must be justice for all of us or there will be peace for none, his answer is to make incorrect leaps of logic. That's similar to taking a few drunken swings at a beehive: it just makes me want even more to act as a positive role model for younger people.

To be honest, ThunderCat sees the world as somewhat anarchic, a game of catch-as-catch-can in which the sneakiest blatherskites nab the biggest prizes. He makes a lot of exaggerated claims. All of these claims need to be scrutinized as carefully as a letter of recommendation from a job applicant's mother. Consider, for example, ThunderCat's claim that truth is merely a social construct. The fact of the matter is that according to him, he can walk on water. He might as well be reading tea leaves or tossing chicken bones on the floor for divination about what's true and what isn't. Maybe then ThunderCat would realize that it strikes me as amusing that he complains about people who do nothing but complain. Well, news flash! ThunderCat does nothing but complain.

For heaven's sake, ThunderCat's remarks promote a redistribution of wealth. This is always an appealing proposition for ThunderCat's acolytes because much of the redistributed wealth will undoubtedly end up in the hands of the redistributors as a condign reward for their loyalty to ThunderCat. The first response to this from his vicegerents is perhaps that those of us who oppose him would rather run than fight. Wrong. Just glance at the facts: One can consecrate one's life to the service of a noble idea or a glorious ideology. ThunderCat, however, is more likely to condition the public to accept violence as normal and desirable.

If you think about it you'll see that ThunderCat's inhumane dissertations are merely a distraction. They're just something to generate more op-ed pieces, more news conferences for media talking heads, and more punditry from people like me. Meanwhile, ThunderCat's partisans are continuing their quiet work of advancing ThunderCat's real goal, which is to discredit legitimate voices in the fanaticism debate. To summarize my views: ThunderCat's remonstrations are materialism redux.

[weilandsmith]

ok folks. you guys are all being het up over a game. we're supposed to have fun and enjoy. lighten up.

@alex, TM and ifrit... as in any community, there will be people whom you will like and dislike. why not just leave it at that and have fun with the game?

sheesh ifrit, will you quit quitting and play again?

[Iƒrit]

ok folks. you guys are all being het up over a game. we're supposed to have fun and enjoy. lighten up.

@alex, TM and ifrit... as in any community, there will be people whom you will like and dislike. why not just leave it at that and have fun with the game?

sheesh ifrit, will you quit quitting and play again?

I hardly play the game at all Im only selling at the moment, so once everything is gone I will have offically quit, I will still vist the forum because I find it interesting

[Alex]

ok folks. you guys are all being het up over a game. we're supposed to have fun and enjoy. lighten up.

@alex, TM and ifrit... as in any community, there will be people whom you will like and dislike. why not just leave it at that and have fun with the game?

sheesh ifrit, will you quit quitting and play again?

I need to tell you a little about how Weilandsmith's a leech, a voracious parasite. And so I shall. Let me start by stressing that I am not attempting to suppress anyone's opinions, nor do I intend to demean Weilandsmith personally for his beliefs or worldviews. But I do claim that I must scuttle Weilandsmith's resentful attempts to undermine liberty in the name of liberty. His artifices are so destructive that in minutes they can wipe out of a child's brain what that child had learned in six months at home, church, or school. An equal but opposite observation is that he claims to have data supporting his assertion that he acts in the public interest. Naturally, he insists that he can't actually show us that data -- for some unspecified reason, of course. My guess is that he's hiding something. Maybe he's hiding the fact that if we're to effectively carry out our responsibilities and make a future for ourselves, we will first have to appeal for comity between us and him.

Weilandsmith's lalochezia is downright annoying. That's probably obvious to a blind man on a galloping horse. Nevertheless, I suspect that few people reading this letter are aware that it is literally the case that Weilandsmith's jokes constitute one of the many conduits of materialism in our culture. Excuse me; that's not entirely correct. What I meant to say is that Weilandsmith is unfit to hold any responsible position in government or anywhere else. Please re-read and memorize that sentence if you still believe that the ideas of "freedom" and "absenteeism" are Siamese twins.

Weilandsmith plans to toy with our opinions. What can you do about that? Start by reading about how Weilandsmith has OD'd on nativism. Become informed about the deceit, lies, and propanganda surrounding his promotion of antagonism. Tell everyone you know that Weilandsmith once had the audacity to tell me that university professors must conform their theses and conclusions to his ethically bankrupt prejudices if they want to publish papers and advance their careers. My riposte was that I can no longer get very excited about any revelation of his hypocrisy or crookedness. It's what I've come to expect by now.

It would be nice to say that spineless recidivism doesn't exist anymore but we all know that it does. It would be wrong to imply that Weilandsmith is involved in some kind of conspiracy to impose tremendous hardships on tens of thousands of decent, hard-working individuals. It would be wrong because his half-measures are far beyond the conspiracy stage. Not only that, but it's easy for armchair philosophers to theorize about him and about hypothetical solutions to our Weilandsmith problem. It's an entirely more difficult matter, however, when one considers that I wish that one of the innumerable busybodies who are forever making "statistical studies" about nonsense would instead make a statistical study that means something. For example, I'd like to see a statistical study of Weilandsmith's capacity to learn the obvious. Also worthwhile would be a statistical study of how many grungy crackpots realize that Weilandsmith sees himself as a postmodern equivalent of Marx's proletariat, revolutionizing the world by wresting it from its oppressors (viz., those who make the world safe for democracy).

Weilandsmith's ability to capitalize on the economic chaos, racial tensions, and social discontent of the current historical moment can be explained in large part by the following. Weilandsmith attributes the most distorted, bizarre, and ludicrous "meanings" to ordinary personality characteristics. For example, if you're shy, he calls you "fearful and withdrawn". If, instead, you're the outgoing and active type, Weilandsmith says you're "acting out due to trauma". Why does he say such things? Unfortunately, I can't give a complete answer to that question in this limited space. But I can tell you that his reasoning is circular and therefore invalid. In other words, he always begins an argument with his conclusion (e.g., that my bitterness at him is merely the latent projection of libidinal energy stemming from self-induced anguish) and therefore -- not surprisingly -- he always arrives at that very conclusion. Let me close by reminding you that the statements I made about Weilandsmith in this letter are in earnest. I will not equivocate. I will not excuse. I will not retreat a single inch. And I will be heard.

[weilandsmith]

get yourself a beer mate. you might wanna rest your finger a bit.

[Alex]

:lol: get yourself a beer mate. you might wanna rest your finger a bit.

[Mordack]

Alex's posts are doubeplusgood.

Do me next. I beg of you.

[weilandsmith]

you want the complete mod list?

[Alex]

Alex's posts are doubeplusgood.

Do me next. I beg of you.

Before anyone takes umbrage at what I'm about to say, let me explain that you can assume serious trouble is brewing when disorganized barrators confuse, befuddle, and neutralize public opposition. With this letter, I hope to treat the blows of circumstance. But first, I would like to make the following introductory remark: When people say that bigotry and hate are alive and well, they're right. And Mordack is to blame.

I cannot promise not to be angry at Mordack. I do promise, however, to try to keep my anger under control, to keep it from leading me -- as it leads Mordack -- to create an ideological climate that will enable him to scorn and abjure reason. His sermons are a load of bunk. I use this delightfully pejorative term, "bunk" -- an alternative from the same page of my criminal-slang lexicon would serve just as well -- because he does, occasionally, make a valid point. But when he says that big emotions come from big words, that's where the facts end and the ludicrousness begins. Maybe you, too, want to issue a flood of bogus legal documents, so let me warn you: It is more than a purely historical question to ask, "How did Mordack's reign of terror start?" or even the more urgent question, "How might it end?". No, we must ask, "Will Mordack's shots to the heart of all that is wholesome buy him his long-sought victory for silly, passive-aggressive tribalism with its showy irreverence and glorification of all that is impertinent?" Before you answer, let me point out that I don't know what makes Mordack think that autism is a viable and vital objective for our nation's educational institutions. Maybe he's been sipping cuckoo juice. The fact of the matter is that if Mordack is incapable of discerning the mad ramblings of predaceous hucksters from the wisdom and nuance embedded in a sage's discourse then I seriously doubt that he'll be capable of determining that he operates on the basis of an unremitting hatred of civility and decency. Well, that's a bit too general of a statement to have much meaning, I'm afraid. So let me instead explain my point as follows: He must believe that if he doesn't interfere with the most important principles of democracy, he'll have led a meaningless life. That should serve as the final, ultimate, irrefutable proof that Mordack wants us to think of him as a do-gooder. Keep in mind, though, that he wants to "do good" with other people's money and often with other people's lives. If Mordack really wanted to be a do-gooder, he could start by admitting that a "respected" member of his junta recently said (to closely paraphrase), "'Metanarratives' are the root of tyranny, lawlessness, overpopulation, racial hatred, world hunger, disease, and rank stupidity". Sad, but true. And it'll only get worse if Mordack finds a way to create profound emotional distress for people on both sides of the issue.

Granted, I wish Mordack would vanish into the same logistical nothingness that his arguments invariably lead to. But Mordack's premise (that university professors must conform their theses and conclusions to his nefarious prejudices if they want to publish papers and advance their careers) is his morality disguised as pretended neutrality. Mordack uses this disguised morality to support his ploys, thereby making his argument self-refuting. The basal lie that underlies all of his ugly sophistries is that he is a paragon of morality and wisdom. Translation: Trees cause more pollution than automobiles do. I doubt you need any help from me to identify the supreme idiocy of those views but you should nevertheless be aware that Mordack says that defeatism is a noble goal. You know, I don't think I have heard a less factually based statement in my entire life. Maledicent, impractical lugs can go right ahead and convict me for saying that he is the éminence grise behind every plot to feed blind hatred, but History, acting as the goddess of a higher truth and a higher justice, will one day smilingly tear up this verdict, acquitting me of all guilt and blame.

I have a scientist's respect for objective truth. That's why I'm telling you that Mordack's cohorts have been running around recently trying to contravene decency. Meanwhile, Mordack has been preparing to make our country spiritually blind. The whole episode smacks of a carefully orchestrated operation. If you ask me, we need to look beyond the most immediate and visible problems with Mordack. We need to look at what is behind these problems and understand that I believe I have finally figured out what makes people like Mordack replace love and understanding with recidivism and absolutism. It appears to be a combination of an overactive mind, lack of common sense, assurance of one's own moral propriety, and a total lack of exposure to the real world.

Sure, we could just sit back and let Mordack force us to adopt rigid social roles that compromise our inner code of ethics, but that prospect really grates on people who have any kind of common sense. If we don't arraign him at the tribunal of public opinion then Mordack will sell us fibs and fear mixed with a generous dollop of Lysenkoism. This message has been brought to you by the Department of Blinding Obviousness. What might not be so obvious, however, is that Mordack's lackeys argue that he has the trappings of deity. These are the same poxy slackers who scar little children's self-image. This is no coincidence; what I wrote just a moment ago is not the paranoid rambling of a yellow-bellied wacko. It's a fact. Until we address this issue, we will never move beyond it.