Total Posts:88|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

'Abolitionism' or whatever...

YYW
Posts: 36,392
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 2:39:00 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
I can't take any member who is actually advocating abolishing the presidency seriously. It's all a totally absurd impulse to destroy.... and that's it. Nothing more. It's like when the kid who makes an ugly sand castle on the beach goes and tries to kick down someone else's sand castle because he couldn't make one as good as that.

To those who want to "abolish" the presidency because it's "meaningless," consider how meaningless that effort is. If something has no meaning, then to remove it would also have no meaning, because there was no meaning to remove. Ironically, the efforts to "abolish" this "meaningless" office have given it meaning, through the misguided resistance to it.

Especially the members who have been here a while... engaging in this sort of behavior, trying to kick down other people's sand castles because you can't build a better one... it's totally pathetic.
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,392
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 2:49:47 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
Abolitionists: "ARGHHHH!!!! FVCK YOUR POSITION ARGHHH!!!! MUST SMASH ALL THINGS!!!! ARGHHHHHH!!!!! I'M 13-29 YEARS OLD BUT I'm GOING TO ACT LIKE A TODLER ON A BEACH WHO IS PISSED THAT SOMEONE ELSE MADE A BETTER SAND CASTLE THAN ME!!!!!!!!!! ARGHHHHHH!!!!"

People who support the presidency and/or Bsh1: "WAHHHHH!!!!! WHY ARE YOU TRYING TO DESTROY MY SAND CASTLE??!?!??!?!?!??!?! YOU'RE ALL SO MEAN!!!!!!!!!!! ARGHH!!!!! STOP ACTING LIKE THI!!!!!!!!!!!"

People who think just leaving well enough alone is the best course of action:

http://www.reactiongifs.com...
Tsar of DDO
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 2:59:31 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
It's so much more tragic than that. The desire to see the Presidency destroyed, though it burns in the hearts of only a handful of members, is not a benevolent desire. It is not about creation or even neutrality. It is rejection. It is violent. It is a backlash against Juggle and their continued disinterest in the site. Put bluntly, it is a rejection of fantasy.

Those users no longer wish to operate within the comfort provided by social norms and customs. They know the president's soft power stems entirely from how much believe in it, and rather than believe in it and thereby promote a kinder, more efficient, better DDO, they choose to reject it. They want a visceral reality. A time where everyone can freely submit tournaments, which means we'll have three or four running at once, which means everyone will burnout, the tournament's will crash, and the quality of debating on the site will drop immensely. They believe individual users can resurrect forums on their own, and while this is true on the surface, they ignore that the president has a greater likelihood of leading successful initiatives purely by the symbolic power of his title.

Right here, funnily enough, if Jif ever happens to read this, is exactly why anarchism would never work. People have rejected the soft power and voluntary associations of DDO. Without any coercive power behind the presidency, many now view it as useless. The difference is that believing in the fantasy hurts no one while rejecting it hurts us all.

Many instead go so far as to reject democracy entirely, insisting that Airmax's autocratic rule is sufficient. The president is our best representative to both moderators and Juggle. Any initiative he suggests has to be seriously considered whereas the initiatives of ordinary members may be dismissed. And while we all trust and love Airmax, he will not be the moderator forever. It's downright silly, no, naive, to assume that he will always be around to do everything.
YYW
Posts: 36,392
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 3:11:14 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
Yeah.... Max will not be around forever... and I probably won't either. There will come a time when I have outgrown this site, and that time comes closer every day. As petulant, childish members and their stupid feuds become more and more pervasive, for example, I get tired of seeing it.

I've tried to (and I think successfully) raised the intellectual caliber of discussion in the politics and society forums, and that's been a good thing. There is some good, hard hitting analysis in the forums, for sure. However, some can't keep up... and I've seen the impact of that too. For example, there are also very stupid members who want to wage their silly little wars against each other or whoever there too... and it's just pathetic to watch.

In reality, I think people take the site too seriously, and the personal conflicts on it WAY too seriously, though. When you've got people b!tching about other members in indirect ways, and when you've got a militia of people just going through the preverbal streets and rioting just to watch the forums burn (read: what metaphorically happened in this election) you've really got a membership problem.

The problem is just the total lack of maturity of some of this site's members.

As a note, though: I think there is some merit to what Skep said, with respect to the idea that if people had the chance to vent off this steam (like in a singular part of the forum with no rules other than no doxxing) that these kinds of incidences would be less common. I hope that becomes a reality, but we'll see.
Tsar of DDO
imabench
Posts: 21,230
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 3:12:58 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/14/2015 2:39:00 PM, YYW wrote:
I can't take any member who is actually advocating abolishing the presidency seriously. It's all a totally absurd impulse to destroy.... and that's it. Nothing more. It's like when the kid who makes an ugly sand castle on the beach goes and tries to kick down someone else's sand castle because he couldn't make one as good as that.

To those who want to "abolish" the presidency because it's "meaningless," consider how meaningless that effort is. If something has no meaning, then to remove it would also have no meaning, because there was no meaning to remove.

But there are reasons to remove the presidency. Despite the meaninglessness of the position... How much pointless drama would be cut down if the presidency was removed? The entire election has pretty much been a top producer of drama in DDO year after year, and the number of pointless threads made about the election also would be done away with in the absence of an election.... As we also saw in this election, some people could get shaken up about the election, as both Bsh and Harder have displayed their distaste for the site after what happened, and they are two members who are quality members of the site.

Ironically, the efforts to "abolish" this "meaningless" office have given it meaning, through the misguided resistance to it.

Especially the members who have been here a while... engaging in this sort of behavior, trying to kick down other people's sand castles because you can't build a better one... it's totally pathetic.
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 3:15:24 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/14/2015 3:11:14 PM, YYW wrote:
Yeah.... Max will not be around forever... and I probably won't either. There will come a time when I have outgrown this site, and that time comes closer every day. As petulant, childish members and their stupid feuds become more and more pervasive, for example, I get tired of seeing it.

I've tried to (and I think successfully) raised the intellectual caliber of discussion in the politics and society forums, and that's been a good thing. There is some good, hard hitting analysis in the forums, for sure. However, some can't keep up... and I've seen the impact of that too. For example, there are also very stupid members who want to wage their silly little wars against each other or whoever there too... and it's just pathetic to watch.

In reality, I think people take the site too seriously, and the personal conflicts on it WAY too seriously, though. When you've got people b!tching about other members in indirect ways, and when you've got a militia of people just going through the preverbal streets and rioting just to watch the forums burn (read: what metaphorically happened in this election) you've really got a membership problem.

The problem is just the total lack of maturity of some of this site's members.

As a note, though: I think there is some merit to what Skep said, with respect to the idea that if people had the chance to vent off this steam (like in a singular part of the forum with no rules other than no doxxing) that these kinds of incidences would be less common. I hope that becomes a reality, but we'll see.

I very much support a loosening of the restrictions of what people can say. I like Skep's idea of limiting that to a single forum (miscellaneous). I think that would, in fact, go a long way toward benefitting the site. We should talk to Airmax about it.
YYW
Posts: 36,392
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 3:19:10 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/14/2015 3:12:58 PM, imabench wrote:
At 12/14/2015 2:39:00 PM, YYW wrote:
I can't take any member who is actually advocating abolishing the presidency seriously. It's all a totally absurd impulse to destroy.... and that's it. Nothing more. It's like when the kid who makes an ugly sand castle on the beach goes and tries to kick down someone else's sand castle because he couldn't make one as good as that.

To those who want to "abolish" the presidency because it's "meaningless," consider how meaningless that effort is. If something has no meaning, then to remove it would also have no meaning, because there was no meaning to remove.

But there are reasons to remove the presidency. Despite the meaninglessness of the position... How much pointless drama would be cut down if the presidency was removed? The entire election has pretty much been a top producer of drama in DDO year after year, and the number of pointless threads made about the election also would be done away with in the absence of an election.... As we also saw in this election, some people could get shaken up about the election, as both Bsh and Harder have displayed their distaste for the site after what happened, and they are two members who are quality members of the site.

How much drama would be removed if we banned like every member on the site? The site would be drama free!

The problem isn't the existence of the position, especially where some good has been achieved by it. The problem is people being stupid.

Ironically, the efforts to "abolish" this "meaningless" office have given it meaning, through the misguided resistance to it.

Especially the members who have been here a while... engaging in this sort of behavior, trying to kick down other people's sand castles because you can't build a better one... it's totally pathetic.
Tsar of DDO
KingofEverything
Posts: 590
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 3:20:04 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/14/2015 2:39:00 PM, YYW wrote:
I can't take any member who is actually advocating abolishing the presidency seriously. It's all a totally absurd impulse to destroy.... and that's it. Nothing more. It's like when the kid who makes an ugly sand castle on the beach goes and tries to kick down someone else's sand castle because he couldn't make one as good as that.

To those who want to "abolish" the presidency because it's "meaningless," consider how meaningless that effort is. If something has no meaning, then to remove it would also have no meaning, because there was no meaning to remove. Ironically, the efforts to "abolish" this "meaningless" office have given it meaning, through the misguided resistance to it.

Especially the members who have been here a while... engaging in this sort of behavior, trying to kick down other people's sand castles because you can't build a better one... it's totally pathetic.

New quote
You're sweet. Thank you :) <3 -ESocial

I am sorry Debate.org -KingofEverything

You guys can stop the circlejerk started around the election. It stopped being funny faster than Mirza's anti-American rants. -Jonbonbon

It's like when the kid who makes an ugly sand castle on the beach goes and tries to kick down someone else's sand castle because he couldn't make one as good as that. -YYW
Subutai
Posts: 3,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 3:21:28 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/14/2015 2:39:00 PM, YYW wrote:
I can't take any member who is actually advocating abolishing the presidency seriously. It's all a totally absurd impulse to destroy.... and that's it. Nothing more. It's like when the kid who makes an ugly sand castle on the beach goes and tries to kick down someone else's sand castle because he couldn't make one as good as that.


TheGreatAndPowerful is right. This is a bad analogy. It rests on the assumption that the president can make the best sand castle. In reality, we are all equally capable of building the best sand castle. Doing away with the analogous language, we all have the power to improve DDO without the need for an elected official to dictate how that should go.
To those who want to "abolish" the presidency because it's "meaningless," consider how meaningless that effort is. If something has no meaning, then to remove it would also have no meaning, because there was no meaning to remove. Ironically, the efforts to "abolish" this "meaningless" office have given it meaning, through the misguided resistance to it.


I never said the presidency was meaningless. It clearly isn't. But just because something has meaning doesn't mean it should exist.
Especially the members who have been here a while... engaging in this sort of behavior, trying to kick down other people's sand castles because you can't build a better one... it's totally pathetic.

Again, that's a false analogy.
I'm becoming less defined as days go by, fading away, and well you might say, I'm losing focus, kinda drifting into the abstract in terms of how I see myself.
TheGreatAndPowerful
Posts: 3,012
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 3:24:00 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/14/2015 3:21:28 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 12/14/2015 2:39:00 PM, YYW wrote:
I can't take any member who is actually advocating abolishing the presidency seriously. It's all a totally absurd impulse to destroy.... and that's it. Nothing more. It's like when the kid who makes an ugly sand castle on the beach goes and tries to kick down someone else's sand castle because he couldn't make one as good as that.


TheGreatAndPowerful is right. This is a bad analogy. It rests on the assumption that the president can make the best sand castle. In reality, we are all equally capable of building the best sand castle. Doing away with the analogous language, we all have the power to improve DDO without the need for an elected official to dictate how that should go.
To those who want to "abolish" the presidency because it's "meaningless," consider how meaningless that effort is. If something has no meaning, then to remove it would also have no meaning, because there was no meaning to remove. Ironically, the efforts to "abolish" this "meaningless" office have given it meaning, through the misguided resistance to it.


I never said the presidency was meaningless. It clearly isn't. But just because something has meaning doesn't mean it should exist.
Especially the members who have been here a while... engaging in this sort of behavior, trying to kick down other people's sand castles because you can't build a better one... it's totally pathetic.

Again, that's a false analogy.

My main issue is that sandcastle building is an activity in which individuals or groups participate in isolation from each other. By it's very nature, the presidency isn't like that. The entire point is to engage the site as a whole and enforce the rules upon the entire populace.

But it's a good soundbite, so who case about accurately portraying an idea?
YYW
Posts: 36,392
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 3:31:11 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/14/2015 3:21:28 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 12/14/2015 2:39:00 PM, YYW wrote:
I can't take any member who is actually advocating abolishing the presidency seriously. It's all a totally absurd impulse to destroy.... and that's it. Nothing more. It's like when the kid who makes an ugly sand castle on the beach goes and tries to kick down someone else's sand castle because he couldn't make one as good as that.


TheGreatAndPowerful is right. This is a bad analogy. It rests on the assumption that the president can make the best sand castle. In reality, we are all equally capable of building the best sand castle. Doing away with the analogous language, we all have the power to improve DDO without the need for an elected official to dictate how that should go.

The point of the analogy is that destruction for arbitrary reasons is stupid. Just as stupid as a toddler on a beach destroying another kid's sand castle is stupid, so too is destroying the presidency. Clearly, that was lost on both of you... but w/e.

And no, we're not all "equally capable" of building the best sand castle, because not everyone is willing to engage in labor to benefit the site. The people I have seen going out trying to tear down the presidency, in that way, are among the least likely to actually improve the site... either because they are irrelevant members, or because all they do is criticize.

To those who want to "abolish" the presidency because it's "meaningless," consider how meaningless that effort is. If something has no meaning, then to remove it would also have no meaning, because there was no meaning to remove. Ironically, the efforts to "abolish" this "meaningless" office have given it meaning, through the misguided resistance to it.


I never said the presidency was meaningless. It clearly isn't. But just because something has meaning doesn't mean it should exist.

You have produced no legitimate reason why it shouldn't... and nor has anyone else. The only reason I've seen is that "I don't like the presidency existing!" That's it.

Well, that's fine... maybe have a referendum (not in the midst of an election) on whether having a re-election is something the forum wants to do. That would be fine... but the problem, as I have seen it for the last several elections, is very stupid members taking out their sh!t on people who don't deserve it.

Especially the members who have been here a while... engaging in this sort of behavior, trying to kick down other people's sand castles because you can't build a better one... it's totally pathetic.

Again, that's a false analogy.

http://www.reactiongifs.com...
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,392
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 3:31:48 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/14/2015 3:24:00 PM, TheGreatAndPowerful wrote:
At 12/14/2015 3:21:28 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 12/14/2015 2:39:00 PM, YYW wrote:
I can't take any member who is actually advocating abolishing the presidency seriously. It's all a totally absurd impulse to destroy.... and that's it. Nothing more. It's like when the kid who makes an ugly sand castle on the beach goes and tries to kick down someone else's sand castle because he couldn't make one as good as that.


TheGreatAndPowerful is right. This is a bad analogy. It rests on the assumption that the president can make the best sand castle. In reality, we are all equally capable of building the best sand castle. Doing away with the analogous language, we all have the power to improve DDO without the need for an elected official to dictate how that should go.
To those who want to "abolish" the presidency because it's "meaningless," consider how meaningless that effort is. If something has no meaning, then to remove it would also have no meaning, because there was no meaning to remove. Ironically, the efforts to "abolish" this "meaningless" office have given it meaning, through the misguided resistance to it.


I never said the presidency was meaningless. It clearly isn't. But just because something has meaning doesn't mean it should exist.
Especially the members who have been here a while... engaging in this sort of behavior, trying to kick down other people's sand castles because you can't build a better one... it's totally pathetic.

Again, that's a false analogy.

My main issue is that sandcastle building is an activity in which individuals or groups participate in isolation from each other. By it's very nature, the presidency isn't like that. The entire point is to engage the site as a whole and enforce the rules upon the entire populace.

But it's a good soundbite, so who case about accurately portraying an idea?

You could build a sand castle with friends... it isn't necessarily a solitary activity.
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,392
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 3:34:03 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
And it's pretty clear that tgap and Sub don't like the comparison... so maybe I'll hold their hand through it...

Arbitrary destruction is stupid.

Focus your points on the rule that made the analogy (which you both clearly missed), rather than the analogy itself, moving forward, because quibbling about whether you understand the rule that govern's an analogy is stupid (like arbitrary destruction... lol).
Tsar of DDO
imabench
Posts: 21,230
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 3:38:04 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/14/2015 3:19:10 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/14/2015 3:12:58 PM, imabench wrote:
At 12/14/2015 2:39:00 PM, YYW wrote:
I can't take any member who is actually advocating abolishing the presidency seriously. It's all a totally absurd impulse to destroy.... and that's it. Nothing more. It's like when the kid who makes an ugly sand castle on the beach goes and tries to kick down someone else's sand castle because he couldn't make one as good as that.

To those who want to "abolish" the presidency because it's "meaningless," consider how meaningless that effort is. If something has no meaning, then to remove it would also have no meaning, because there was no meaning to remove.

But there are reasons to remove the presidency. Despite the meaninglessness of the position... How much pointless drama would be cut down if the presidency was removed? The entire election has pretty much been a top producer of drama in DDO year after year, and the number of pointless threads made about the election also would be done away with in the absence of an election.... As we also saw in this election, some people could get shaken up about the election, as both Bsh and Harder have displayed their distaste for the site after what happened, and they are two members who are quality members of the site.

How much drama would be removed if we banned like every member on the site? The site would be drama free!

But people are what make this site great, the presidency on the other hand doesn't really add that much to the site. It used to in the past, but now it's just an overly hyped community organizer position

The problem isn't the existence of the position, especially where some good has been achieved by it. The problem is people being stupid.

How people acted in this election was stupid, and I condemn what they did as well. But that doesn't mean the idea of abolishing it is therefore stupid as well, it just means it was attempted very poorly

Ironically, the efforts to "abolish" this "meaningless" office have given it meaning, through the misguided resistance to it.

Especially the members who have been here a while... engaging in this sort of behavior, trying to kick down other people's sand castles because you can't build a better one... it's totally pathetic.
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 3:44:17 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/14/2015 2:39:00 PM, YYW wrote:
I can't take any member who is actually advocating abolishing the presidency seriously. It's all a totally absurd impulse to destroy.... and that's it. Nothing more. It's like when the kid who makes an ugly sand castle on the beach goes and tries to kick down someone else's sand castle because he couldn't make one as good as that.

To those who want to "abolish" the presidency because it's "meaningless," consider how meaningless that effort is. If something has no meaning, then to remove it would also have no meaning, because there was no meaning to remove.

This is really a bad fallacy of equivocation. The property of "meaningless-ness" doesn't extend to the action of abolishing the presidency.

If the presidency had the property of being "bad" would the action of abolishing the presidency also be "bad"?

The presidency may be meaningless, in the sense that it does not give the president special ability to do things which any normal user could.... but we could also make the argument that superfluous political positions, which are meaningless, ought to be abolished. In which case, there is reason to remove them, but they are still meaningless.

What if there was an entire DDO senate, that did absolutely nothing? Would it be meaningless to want to abolish the DDO senate, merely for the reason that it's pointless? I don't think so..

In any case, I don't have an opinion on the presidency. But I do think that this is a very weak argument.

Ironically, the efforts to "abolish" this "meaningless" office have given it meaning, through the misguided resistance to it.

Especially the members who have been here a while... engaging in this sort of behavior, trying to kick down other people's sand castles because you can't build a better one... it's totally pathetic.
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 3:46:47 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/14/2015 2:39:00 PM, YYW wrote:
I can't take any member who is actually advocating abolishing the presidency seriously. It's all a totally absurd impulse to destroy.... and that's it. Nothing more. It's like when the kid who makes an ugly sand castle on the beach goes and tries to kick down someone else's sand castle because he couldn't make one as good as that.

To those who want to "abolish" the presidency because it's "meaningless," consider how meaningless that effort is. If something has no meaning, then to remove it would also have no meaning, because there was no meaning to remove. Ironically, the efforts to "abolish" this "meaningless" office have given it meaning, through the misguided resistance to it.

Especially the members who have been here a while... engaging in this sort of behavior, trying to kick down other people's sand castles because you can't build a better one... it's totally pathetic.

If those who propose the abolition of the presidency can show that "Meaningless political positions ought to be abolished" is true, then I think their argument does hold water.
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
YYW
Posts: 36,392
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 4:02:46 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/14/2015 3:46:47 PM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 12/14/2015 2:39:00 PM, YYW wrote:
I can't take any member who is actually advocating abolishing the presidency seriously. It's all a totally absurd impulse to destroy.... and that's it. Nothing more. It's like when the kid who makes an ugly sand castle on the beach goes and tries to kick down someone else's sand castle because he couldn't make one as good as that.

To those who want to "abolish" the presidency because it's "meaningless," consider how meaningless that effort is. If something has no meaning, then to remove it would also have no meaning, because there was no meaning to remove. Ironically, the efforts to "abolish" this "meaningless" office have given it meaning, through the misguided resistance to it.

Especially the members who have been here a while... engaging in this sort of behavior, trying to kick down other people's sand castles because you can't build a better one... it's totally pathetic.

If those who propose the abolition of the presidency can show that "Meaningless political positions ought to be abolished" is true, then I think their argument does hold water.

Except the position it's meaningless... it's very meaningful, and even the actions of those who are saying that the presidency is meaningful support that contention, because outrage and vitriol like we've seen here does not follow from the existence of a "meaningless" position.

So, what's the presidency's meaning, then? Well, Skep pretty much hit the nail on the head. The presidency is a symbol for what people in the forum regard as illegitimate authority. The real illigetimate authority that they want to b!tch and moan about is is Airmax and (more probably) Whiteflame, but they can't talk about that or they're afraid to talk about that so they go after the weaker, easier target.

It's all incredibly juvenile, petty and stupid.

I understand having issues with moderation. I've been, far more than most, willing to share my thoughts on the issues there, but most people are just afraid to b!tch about Max and Whiteflame so they are going after Brian instead because, ya know... he's not a mod. He's just the "sacrificial lamb" or whatever... which is why the entire talk about abolishing the presidency is stupid.

And no person on this site has connected the presidency's existence to any actual or extant harm on the site. No one has even approached the idea of articulating reasons why abolishing the presidency will accomplish anything good. And no one will, because the presidency is just the issue people are willing to talk about, when the real issue people have is moderation.

So, there it is...
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,392
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 4:04:19 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
And of course those who want to abolish the presidency aren't going to like my analogy... it would be profoundly unreasonable for them to say "Oh wow... you've got a point" because what I did is compare them to angry toddlers.

lol
Tsar of DDO
TheGreatAndPowerful
Posts: 3,012
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 4:29:35 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/14/2015 3:31:48 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/14/2015 3:24:00 PM, TheGreatAndPowerful wrote:
At 12/14/2015 3:21:28 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 12/14/2015 2:39:00 PM, YYW wrote:
I can't take any member who is actually advocating abolishing the presidency seriously. It's all a totally absurd impulse to destroy.... and that's it. Nothing more. It's like when the kid who makes an ugly sand castle on the beach goes and tries to kick down someone else's sand castle because he couldn't make one as good as that.


TheGreatAndPowerful is right. This is a bad analogy. It rests on the assumption that the president can make the best sand castle. In reality, we are all equally capable of building the best sand castle. Doing away with the analogous language, we all have the power to improve DDO without the need for an elected official to dictate how that should go.
To those who want to "abolish" the presidency because it's "meaningless," consider how meaningless that effort is. If something has no meaning, then to remove it would also have no meaning, because there was no meaning to remove. Ironically, the efforts to "abolish" this "meaningless" office have given it meaning, through the misguided resistance to it.


I never said the presidency was meaningless. It clearly isn't. But just because something has meaning doesn't mean it should exist.
Especially the members who have been here a while... engaging in this sort of behavior, trying to kick down other people's sand castles because you can't build a better one... it's totally pathetic.

Again, that's a false analogy.

My main issue is that sandcastle building is an activity in which individuals or groups participate in isolation from each other. By it's very nature, the presidency isn't like that. The entire point is to engage the site as a whole and enforce the rules upon the entire populace.

But it's a good soundbite, so who case about accurately portraying an idea?

You could build a sand castle with friends... it isn't necessarily a solitary activity.

I didn't say solitary. I said "individuals or groups."
YYW
Posts: 36,392
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 5:21:17 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/14/2015 4:29:35 PM, TheGreatAndPowerful wrote:
At 12/14/2015 3:31:48 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/14/2015 3:24:00 PM, TheGreatAndPowerful wrote:
At 12/14/2015 3:21:28 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 12/14/2015 2:39:00 PM, YYW wrote:
I can't take any member who is actually advocating abolishing the presidency seriously. It's all a totally absurd impulse to destroy.... and that's it. Nothing more. It's like when the kid who makes an ugly sand castle on the beach goes and tries to kick down someone else's sand castle because he couldn't make one as good as that.


TheGreatAndPowerful is right. This is a bad analogy. It rests on the assumption that the president can make the best sand castle. In reality, we are all equally capable of building the best sand castle. Doing away with the analogous language, we all have the power to improve DDO without the need for an elected official to dictate how that should go.
To those who want to "abolish" the presidency because it's "meaningless," consider how meaningless that effort is. If something has no meaning, then to remove it would also have no meaning, because there was no meaning to remove. Ironically, the efforts to "abolish" this "meaningless" office have given it meaning, through the misguided resistance to it.


I never said the presidency was meaningless. It clearly isn't. But just because something has meaning doesn't mean it should exist.
Especially the members who have been here a while... engaging in this sort of behavior, trying to kick down other people's sand castles because you can't build a better one... it's totally pathetic.

Again, that's a false analogy.

My main issue is that sandcastle building is an activity in which individuals or groups participate in isolation from each other. By it's very nature, the presidency isn't like that. The entire point is to engage the site as a whole and enforce the rules upon the entire populace.

But it's a good soundbite, so who case about accurately portraying an idea?

You could build a sand castle with friends... it isn't necessarily a solitary activity.

I didn't say solitary. I said "individuals or groups."

You said "in isolation."
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,392
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 5:26:43 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
But again... I don't care, like, at all, if people who believe the presidency should be torn down do not like being compared to irate toddlers kicking other people's sandcastle's down. The analogy holds because the rule governing the relationships is this: arbitrary destruction is stupid.

When any member of this site proffers a reasonable argument that the presidency's existence of their particular, or any general grievance they have with the site, then I will take their ideas seriously. No one has done that, and I predict no one will because the presidency is just the 'scapegoat' of everyone's problems with how moderation has been implemented to stifle people's freedom to express ideas, such as how much they don't like other people, as Skep said in another post.

If only DDO were more like, say, one of my old boyfriend's families where they just air their grievances with one another in the open, and less like my family, where everyone complains about everything other than what they really have an issue with.

Really, we should be preparing to celebrate Festivus, as that might be a way to move to a point where people are less angsty and more reasonable; less stupid and more peaceful; less hostile and arbitrarily violent, and more community like and collected.
Tsar of DDO
TheGreatAndPowerful
Posts: 3,012
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 5:28:12 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/14/2015 5:21:17 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/14/2015 4:29:35 PM, TheGreatAndPowerful wrote:
At 12/14/2015 3:31:48 PM, YYW wrote:
At 12/14/2015 3:24:00 PM, TheGreatAndPowerful wrote:
At 12/14/2015 3:21:28 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 12/14/2015 2:39:00 PM, YYW wrote:
I can't take any member who is actually advocating abolishing the presidency seriously. It's all a totally absurd impulse to destroy.... and that's it. Nothing more. It's like when the kid who makes an ugly sand castle on the beach goes and tries to kick down someone else's sand castle because he couldn't make one as good as that.


TheGreatAndPowerful is right. This is a bad analogy. It rests on the assumption that the president can make the best sand castle. In reality, we are all equally capable of building the best sand castle. Doing away with the analogous language, we all have the power to improve DDO without the need for an elected official to dictate how that should go.
To those who want to "abolish" the presidency because it's "meaningless," consider how meaningless that effort is. If something has no meaning, then to remove it would also have no meaning, because there was no meaning to remove. Ironically, the efforts to "abolish" this "meaningless" office have given it meaning, through the misguided resistance to it.


I never said the presidency was meaningless. It clearly isn't. But just because something has meaning doesn't mean it should exist.
Especially the members who have been here a while... engaging in this sort of behavior, trying to kick down other people's sand castles because you can't build a better one... it's totally pathetic.

Again, that's a false analogy.

My main issue is that sandcastle building is an activity in which individuals or groups participate in isolation from each other. By it's very nature, the presidency isn't like that. The entire point is to engage the site as a whole and enforce the rules upon the entire populace.

But it's a good soundbite, so who case about accurately portraying an idea?

You could build a sand castle with friends... it isn't necessarily a solitary activity.

I didn't say solitary. I said "individuals or groups."

You said "in isolation."

Groups can be isolated from other groups.
YYW
Posts: 36,392
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 5:32:52 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/14/2015 5:26:43 PM, YYW wrote:
But again... I don't care, like, at all, if people who believe the presidency should be torn down do not like being compared to irate toddlers kicking other people's sandcastle's down. The analogy holds because the rule governing the relationships is this: arbitrary destruction is stupid.

When any member of this site proffers a reasonable argument that the presidency's existence of their particular, or any general grievance they have with the site, then I will take their ideas seriously. No one has done that, and I predict no one will because the presidency is just the 'scapegoat' of everyone's problems with how moderation has been implemented to stifle people's freedom to express ideas, such as how much they don't like other people, as Skep said in another post.

If only DDO were more like, say, one of my old boyfriend's families where they just air their grievances with one another in the open, and less like my family, where everyone complains about everything other than what they really have an issue with.

Really, we should be preparing to celebrate Festivus, as that might be a way to move to a point where people are less angsty and more reasonable; less stupid and more peaceful; less hostile and arbitrarily violent, and more community like and collected.

/done
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,392
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 5:41:13 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
And let's be clear about something else:

The *cause* of all of this nonsense is NOT the presidency; the CAUSE is the individual choices of members who have intentionally and willfully persisted in a course of conduct which just made everyone (including themselves) miserable.

To suggest that the presidency's existence was a "cause" of what followed is like saying that a girl who happens to walk down the street caused herself to be raped by walking down the street, or that the west's existence causes incidences of terrorism, or the fact that a person was wearing a watch in the presence of a thief caused the thief to take it, or the fact that a high school existed caused a group of miscreants to vandalize it. That whole method of argumentation is just as stupid as the misguided, delusional impetus to tear down the presidency.
Tsar of DDO
TheGreatAndPowerful
Posts: 3,012
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 5:43:11 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/14/2015 5:41:13 PM, YYW wrote:
And let's be clear about something else:

The *cause* of all of this nonsense is NOT the presidency; the CAUSE is the individual choices of members who have intentionally and willfully persisted in a course of conduct which just made everyone (including themselves) miserable.

To suggest that the presidency's existence was a "cause" of what followed is like saying that a girl who happens to walk down the street caused herself to be raped by walking down the street, or that the west's existence causes incidences of terrorism, or the fact that a person was wearing a watch in the presence of a thief caused the thief to take it, or the fact that a high school existed caused a group of miscreants to vandalize it. That whole method of argumentation is just as stupid as the misguided, delusional impetus to tear down the presidency.

/done now?
YYW
Posts: 36,392
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 5:46:44 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/14/2015 5:43:11 PM, TheGreatAndPowerful wrote:
At 12/14/2015 5:41:13 PM, YYW wrote:
And let's be clear about something else:

The *cause* of all of this nonsense is NOT the presidency; the CAUSE is the individual choices of members who have intentionally and willfully persisted in a course of conduct which just made everyone (including themselves) miserable.

To suggest that the presidency's existence was a "cause" of what followed is like saying that a girl who happens to walk down the street caused herself to be raped by walking down the street, or that the west's existence causes incidences of terrorism, or the fact that a person was wearing a watch in the presence of a thief caused the thief to take it, or the fact that a high school existed caused a group of miscreants to vandalize it. That whole method of argumentation is just as stupid as the misguided, delusional impetus to tear down the presidency.

/done now?

Idk... maybe. I might think of some other aspect of why all this talk of abolishing the presidency is dumb and misguided.

If I do, I'll let you know ;)

Until such time as that, see this panda: http://www.reactiongifs.com...
Tsar of DDO
TUF
Posts: 21,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 5:55:33 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/14/2015 2:39:00 PM, YYW wrote:
I can't take any member who is actually advocating abolishing the presidency seriously. It's all a totally absurd impulse to destroy.... and that's it. Nothing more. It's like when the kid who makes an ugly sand castle on the beach goes and tries to kick down someone else's sand castle because he couldn't make one as good as that.

To those who want to "abolish" the presidency because it's "meaningless," consider how meaningless that effort is. If something has no meaning, then to remove it would also have no meaning, because there was no meaning to remove. Ironically, the efforts to "abolish" this "meaningless" office have given it meaning, through the misguided resistance to it.

Especially the members who have been here a while... engaging in this sort of behavior, trying to kick down other people's sand castles because you can't build a better one... it's totally pathetic.

I think this was said perfectly.
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
YYW
Posts: 36,392
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2015 6:08:37 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/14/2015 5:55:33 PM, TUF wrote:
At 12/14/2015 2:39:00 PM, YYW wrote:
I can't take any member who is actually advocating abolishing the presidency seriously. It's all a totally absurd impulse to destroy.... and that's it. Nothing more. It's like when the kid who makes an ugly sand castle on the beach goes and tries to kick down someone else's sand castle because he couldn't make one as good as that.

To those who want to "abolish" the presidency because it's "meaningless," consider how meaningless that effort is. If something has no meaning, then to remove it would also have no meaning, because there was no meaning to remove. Ironically, the efforts to "abolish" this "meaningless" office have given it meaning, through the misguided resistance to it.

Especially the members who have been here a while... engaging in this sort of behavior, trying to kick down other people's sand castles because you can't build a better one... it's totally pathetic.

I think this was said perfectly.

Thanks :)
Tsar of DDO