Steerzing in a New Direction...

fafnir
.
.
Posts: 516
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 6:16 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3541

Post by fafnir »

Service Dog wrote: I built a training-crate for Steersman, back in 2016.

My notion was that-- if Steersman refused to abide by minimal standards of civil discourse...

that any Pitter could refuse to engage with him... anywhere _except_ in his little box.

No need for a hard-coded shunning, then.

https://slymepit.com/phpbb/viewtopic.ph ... 78#p356278
Did it work? I think maybe Steersman wouldn't want to play with me in there.

fafnir
.
.
Posts: 516
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 6:16 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3542

Post by fafnir »

Service Dog wrote:
fafnir wrote: The pit is weak if my chat with Steersman is killing it.
The point is contrary to everything you so-eloquently argued against Steers. You sound like a progressive, punishing us with your ugly performance art... fafnir: "Pearls before swine!"
Deputy Barney Fife: "Sir, this is a children's Easter Egg hunt."
fafnir: "Weakling!"

Would you be willing to confine your marathon steers debates-- to a subforum-- if that would stop the impending eviction?

(I'd read 'em! you're sharper than the supreme court open arguments I'm listening-to today.)



the closure is weighing-on me tonight. Over the years I've had fallings-out with so many friends & family. Now I'm not welcome in restaurants and public gatherings in my city. Not even the public library. They don't just demand a mask or vax card-- they're snippy about it. Self-appointed brownshirts put their hand on my chest, or pull on my sleeve-- utterly confident they won't be smashed. I'm 6'2" 235lbs. I take pride in my ability to turn the other cheek. But I worry that I've become 'anorexic' about taking-a-Loss. Conditioned to do-so. Forgetting how to take a stand. I'm hyper-sensitive, depressive...sure. This week's feverish nights had a soul-searching component. Like, "am I living my life wrong?" A 'come to Jesus moment' as they say. Figuratively. Not an enormous one, but... still. (The Coof Demon seems to be done wrestling with me. Just a little leftover weakness.)
I’m certainly not intending to punish you guys. I guess there are strengths and weaknesses to everything being in one thread.

I certainly don’t want to be responsible for making this place non workable. I lurked on the forum for years, and very much see myself as a bit of an intruder. You guys were my first jumping off point into the culture war after I realised there was something written in the JREF.

It’s a pity that the rabbit hole went deeper than Anita, PZ and the perverts running the JREF. Those days of unity on here are never coming again.

Anyway, if you think saving Steersman would also save the Pit, I will let him go.

Pit saved?

fafnir
.
.
Posts: 516
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 6:16 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3543

Post by fafnir »

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
fafnir wrote: The pit is weak if my chat with Steersman is killing it. I had much longer pointless arguments on the JREF just before everybody left and it went into terminal decline.
You're 2-for-2.
I didn’t ask for this power.

John D
.
.
Posts: 5452
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:23 am
Location: Detroit, MI. USA

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3544

Post by John D »

The Pyt has been an important part of my life over the last many years. I will miss it if it dies.

I am not an IT guy. I am reasonably smart, but am not highly qualified to take over the reigns. My normal practice to solving IT problems is to turn everything off... and then turning them on again. If that doesn't work I figure out who to call.

If there is a money problem I am happy to make a donation to keep things running.

The Steers vs. faf debate doesn't bother me. I just skip past all their posts. I will read a post by them if it is on a different topic than their "cultural decline" discussion. It is pretty easy to slide past a wall-o-text.

I suspect a bunch of you skip past my posts... especially about my family problems... or bird watching... but I don't really care. It's up to you. There is no "need" to actually read anything here.

The Pyt really does not have a strong theme these days. When the Pyt started I think we had the idea that we could actually work to avoid the "woke" cultural taking over the atheist sphere. While we did help destroy PZ, Becci, and a few other individuals, we did not change the wave of SJ change that has taken over every sphere of culture. Now I think we spend our time pointing out bullshit to ourselves... as we watch the world change.

Still, even if we don't really change things, it is nice to have a place that contains some people with similar ideas.

and... it is nice to be in a place that will provide me with honest thoughts... even when they are different than mine.

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 7314
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3545

Post by Service Dog »

fafnir wrote: Did it work?
The failure was mine. It's always the trainer's fault for not-applying the program consistently/ not the animal's fault. (Ask Matt.)

Doesn't work to give-in to the animal's whining or bad behavior.

I also saw the Steersman Wonderbox as an elegant, democratic solution to the problem. At the time, the Tit was threatening to simply ban Steers... which would be stooping to FreeThoughtBlogs tactics. Steers hadn't actually violated any rules... he was just annoying.

My alternative was that anyone who was fed-up with Steers-- could 'ignore' him in the main thread. If Steers wanted to be an ass badly-enough... he could do it in the box. Or he could unilaterally babble in the main thread. But his frustrated opponent wouldn't be 'feeding the troll' in the living room.

Either a critical number of Pitters would decide to only-visit Steers in the box. Or else they would engage in the main thread... but that would be an active decision on their part. A vote in favor of keeping Steers in the general population. And thus time to stop complaining about him.

This was an astute critique: "
Steersmen, in a debate, you need to respond to the argument the other side made, not completely rewrite what they said so it is the position you attack in all your posts regardless of what the other person said. I can play that game too, but it would be pointless." The Wonderbox would give you a form of enforcement-power, to hold him accountable. If he plays nice... you agree to talk to him in the main thread. If he 'cheats' like that... you say he has to get in the box. Or be ignored. "Extinction" is the animal-behavior term.
I think maybe Steersman wouldn't want to play with me in there.
That's a feature not a bug. He can follow your rule, or lose the attention he desperately seeks.


Steersman complains that I appoint myself his master. That I'm the boss who gets to tell him what to do. Yep. Everyone who engages in a dialogue is entitled to apply whatever minimum standards they feel is appropriate. He can follow my rules, or fuck off. But if I let him break the rule I just decreed... and reward him with main-thread attention... that's on me.

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 7314
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3546

Post by Service Dog »

Justice Sotomayor's claim-- that Omicron is just-as lethal as Delta-- means that basic matters are in dispute.

The Supreme Court is arguing over interpretations 'What happened?', like a daytime television Judge show. Like a "which of these black men is the father?" paternity-test show.

That's a far-cry from deliberating on some fine point of philosophical principle. Or weighing to competing values-- freedom vs. safety. Or interpreting the framer's intent.

This is some dum-dum shit.

---


Dr. Jill Harkonnen says "Free catmilk ice cream, with your Third Heart-Plug! Children 5 to 12 can sit on the lap of The Beast Hunturrr. Volunteer now-- completely optional!-- or else the Oh-Sha Sardukar will administer the Gom Jabbar!"

--

Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
Posts: 11405
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 5:58 pm
Location: Punggye-ri

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3547

Post by Lsuoma »

Fuck it, I see no reason not to keep it open - it's co-hosted on a server that has a couple of paying sites, si I'll just let it roll along...

John D
.
.
Posts: 5452
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:23 am
Location: Detroit, MI. USA

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3548

Post by John D »

The squirrels are living in the moment today. It is 15 degrees and was down to 5 overnight. I thought they would have already gone into their winter torpor where they find a nest and sleep... sleep... sleep and their body temperature plummets. But no. Today they are romping in my yard. They are chasing each other in lines of three or four. It is a squirrel party. They are leaping through the trees and running everywhere. The boldest of them try to drop from my tree to my feeder but none have succeeded today. They hang off a thin branch and drop onto my bird feeder... but they cannot hang on. They fall to the ground in a plop... a ten foot fall. It must hurt... because after they fail they do not try again. The Juncos and Jays have spilled seed on the ground so there is some food for the little fur balls to eat. I keep a bowl of water heated so that there is some open water for the squirrels and birds to drink after all other sources are frozen. I have not seen the chipmunks in weeks... they must be asleep under my deck... in their little holes.

It is too cold for the squirrels to keep this up. I suspect they will go into torpor tonight. It is joyful and sad to watch them today. For many of them this may be their last good day before they freeze or starve in the next two harsh winter months. They are probably mostly young. Many have never survived a winter. Play while you can!

fafnir
.
.
Posts: 516
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 6:16 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3549

Post by fafnir »

Service Dog wrote: Steersman complains that I appoint myself his master. That I'm the boss who gets to tell him what to do. Yep. Everyone who engages in a dialogue is entitled to apply whatever minimum standards they feel is appropriate. He can follow my rules, or fuck off. But if I let him break the rule I just decreed... and reward him with main-thread attention... that's on me.
I'm not sure that I really have minimum standards. Have you ever heard of a guy called Nando Ronteltap, also went by the name of Mohammad Nur Syamsu? He'd had some kind of mental breakdown/religious awakening and was obsessed by Richard Dawkins. He'd been arguing the same thing since the old usenet days. Something about the "logic of choosing". He'd take random quotes that he'd misunderstood on things like quantum mechanics, and sentences from Wikipedia articles, to construct some kind of incoherent mess of a worldview that was then passed into English from whatever his first language was.

An example of his work is below:
https://groups.google.com/g/talk.origins/c/FOQsz55gW68
Nando wrote:Darwinists destroy knowledge about freedom by perverting the meaning of choosing with calculating an optimum. For example according to Darwinists choosing means calculating the survival benefits of every option, and then going the way of the highest survival value. In normal understanding of choosing you can go alternative ways, but in Darwinist understanding of choosing you can only go the optimal way. Darwinists oppose concepts of origins based on freedom, like free will, or creationism.
I spent months talking to that guy.

I think partly I really don't like the idea of not "getting" people, that's what first got me spending time with conservatives and eventually switching teams. Mostly, and probably the part that you are objecting to, is that I enjoy trying to nail jelly to walls. I enjoy anti-humour as well. Those things may be related.

Anyway, it would be a shame if there were no more stories about the art scene in New York, the goings on in John's life and all the rest. This feels like an island of sane people, even if there is more disagreement these days and fewer photoshopped images of Richard Carrier.

fafnir
.
.
Posts: 516
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 6:16 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3550

Post by fafnir »

Lsuoma wrote: Fuck it, I see no reason not to keep it open - it's co-hosted on a server that has a couple of paying sites, si I'll just let it roll along...
:-) Thank you! A New Year miracle.

The Pit lives!

MarcusAu
.
.
Posts: 7769
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:49 am
Location: Llareggub

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3551

Post by MarcusAu »

I see the libertarians have made an effort to defend Scrooge (iin his pre-reform state).

Article:
https://mises.org/library/case-ebenezer


or if you prefer Youtube:


Bhurzum
Brassy, uncouth, henpecked meathead
Posts: 4785
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 2:08 am
Location: Lurking in a dumpster

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3552

Post by Bhurzum »

Lsuoma wrote: Fuck it, I see no reason not to keep it open - it's co-hosted on a server that has a couple of paying sites, si I'll just let it roll along...
I'll cancel the hit.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 14589
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3553

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

Dickens was Ur-Woke. Fuck him.

fafnir
.
.
Posts: 516
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 6:16 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3554

Post by fafnir »

MarcusAu wrote: I see the libertarians have made an effort to defend Scrooge (iin his pre-reform state).

Article:
https://mises.org/library/case-ebenezer


or if you prefer Youtube:

That reminds me of a Christmas message from somebody I follow. Due to the deflationary environment of the 1840s Bob Cratchit actually received a real terms pay rise.

John D
.
.
Posts: 5452
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:23 am
Location: Detroit, MI. USA

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3555

Post by John D »

MarcusAu wrote: I see the libertarians have made an effort to defend Scrooge (iin his pre-reform state).

Article:
https://mises.org/library/case-ebenezer
Haha. I love it. There is an interesting balance between producers and those who depend upon producers. When Dickens wrote there was an idea that the wealthy had to care for those who were less fortunate. The state was not involved so there was pressure on the wealthy to distribute their wealth voluntarily to others. The wealthy would do so if they would receive additional praise or notoriety. "Oh... bless you sir... bless you".

Dickens audience was the new middle class. He did not write for the rich which was often the only way a writer could make a living. Instead, he and others of his time, wrote books in a series that was sold in installments in newspaper type format. Imagine how many people in the middle and lower classes would love a story like "A Christmas Carol". Also, much wealth at the time was trapped within a family. There really was less opportunity for people of intelligence and hard work to succeed because the wealthy did control more of the cash flow. Mercantilism is not capitalism.

So.. I have always found "A Christmas Carol" to be a comic fantasy. A sort of workers vengeance story. Even as I kid I saw it this way. I think I am really weird.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 14589
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3556

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

Sonia Sotomayor is proving that, so long as you cram for the Bar, you can be dumb as a box of rocks yet rise up the ladder solely on your political fealty.

Dog has already noted her assertion that 100,000 children are currently on ventilators due to covid.

Now this. During the jab mandate arguments, SS mused, if OSHA can regulate a piece of factory machinery throwing off sparks, why not a worker throwing off germs?
"Why is a human not like a machine when it is spewing bloodborne [sic] viruses?"
Maybe we should set up Sotomayor and Steerz on a blind date. I think they'd hit it off. I imagine scintillating dinner conversation about when a person is a human, or just a machine with honorary human status.

Bhurzum
Brassy, uncouth, henpecked meathead
Posts: 4785
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 2:08 am
Location: Lurking in a dumpster

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3557

Post by Bhurzum »

Matt Cavanaugh wrote: Maybe we should set up Sotomayor and Steerz on a blind date. I think they'd hit it off. I imagine scintillating dinner conversation about when a person is a human, or just a machine with honorary human status.
Whilst you're match-making, can you hook me up with Jessica Collins?



Sweet Jesus!

Keating
.
.
Posts: 2318
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2015 3:18 pm
Location: South of anteater guy

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3558

Post by Keating »

Lsuoma wrote: Fuck it, I see no reason not to keep it open - it's co-hosted on a server that has a couple of paying sites, si I'll just let it roll along...
Prick tease

another lurker
.
.
Posts: 4733
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:39 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3559

Post by another lurker »

Bhurzum wrote:
Matt Cavanaugh wrote: Maybe we should set up Sotomayor and Steerz on a blind date. I think they'd hit it off. I imagine scintillating dinner conversation about when a person is a human, or just a machine with honorary human status.
Whilst you're match-making, can you hook me up with Jessica Collins?



Sweet Jesus!
boobs

another lurker
.
.
Posts: 4733
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:39 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3560

Post by another lurker »

John D wrote: The Pyt has been an important part of my life over the last many years. I will miss it if it dies.

I am not an IT guy. I am reasonably smart, but am not highly qualified to take over the reigns. My normal practice to solving IT problems is to turn everything off... and then turning them on again. If that doesn't work I figure out who to call.

If there is a money problem I am happy to make a donation to keep things running.

The Steers vs. faf debate doesn't bother me. I just skip past all their posts. I will read a post by them if it is on a different topic than their "cultural decline" discussion. It is pretty easy to slide past a wall-o-text.

I suspect a bunch of you skip past my posts... especially about my family problems... or bird watching... but I don't really care. It's up to you. There is no "need" to actually read anything here.

The Pyt really does not have a strong theme these days. When the Pyt started I think we had the idea that we could actually work to avoid the "woke" cultural taking over the atheist sphere. While we did help destroy PZ, Becci, and a few other individuals, we did not change the wave of SJ change that has taken over every sphere of culture. Now I think we spend our time pointing out bullshit to ourselves... as we watch the world change.

Still, even if we don't really change things, it is nice to have a place that contains some people with similar ideas.

and... it is nice to be in a place that will provide me with honest thoughts... even when they are different than mine.
the pit was my saving grace after i finally saw the evil at FreeThoughtBlogs
a respite, with rational people, willing and able to fight the madness

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 7314
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3561

Post by Service Dog »

Matt Cavanaugh wrote: SS mused, if OSHA can regulate a piece of factory machinery throwing off sparks, why not a worker throwing off germs?
"Why is a human not like a machine when it is spewing bloodborne [sic] viruses?"
Sotomayor is correct that sick humans emit viruses like a broken machine emits sparks. She thinks her analogy is profound Bigbrain Jurisprudence.

Her error is that OSHA should not require spark-guards and sprinkler systems at yoga studios, sailboats, lemonade stands... as a one-size-fits all way to "stop sparks" in the places which do have big electric machines. OSHA's Covid mandate is too broad. Wichita Linemen & Lonely Maytag Repairmen & I-95 Snowplow drivers aren't coughing-on many co-workers. It's over-broad to require them to get jabbed-- as part of the effort to inoculate World's Largest Gangbang record-breakers.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 14589
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3562

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

Sotomayor is in the The Government Can Do Whatever The Fuck It Wants camp. Her most notable jurisprudence prior to joining the SC was upholding a shady eminent domain seizure, and allowing the New Haven CT fire dept to hire based on race.

Breyer, as mentioned, believes that, so long as a law does something we (i.e., the Left) want, the Constitution can be ignored.

Not sure what Kagan thinks, or even if she does much thinking at all.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 14589
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3563

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

Just thankful that the SC dodged a bullet of dumbness when Merrick Garland's nomination was blocked.

merrick.gif
(962.62 KiB) Downloaded 127 times

fafnir
.
.
Posts: 516
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 6:16 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3564

Post by fafnir »

Bhurzum wrote:
Matt Cavanaugh wrote: Maybe we should set up Sotomayor and Steerz on a blind date. I think they'd hit it off. I imagine scintillating dinner conversation about when a person is a human, or just a machine with honorary human status.
Whilst you're match-making, can you hook me up with Jessica Collins?



Sweet Jesus!
I thought Jenneke was the Pit mascot?

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10600
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3565

Post by Steersman »

another lurker wrote:
Bhurzum wrote:
Matt Cavanaugh wrote: Maybe we should set up Sotomayor and Steerz on a blind date. I think they'd hit it off. I imagine scintillating dinner conversation about when a person is a human, or just a machine with honorary human status.
Whilst you're match-making, can you hook me up with Jessica Collins?

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/OpenAthleticD ... ax-1mb.gif

Sweet Jesus!
boobs
Reminds me of a cartoon that I had seen ages ago as a kid - probably in Playboy when it may have had some credible claim to being "read" for its articles, and not simply for being a "gynecological gazette" as Hugh Hefner once said about other such magazines - that showed a couple on a dance floor, she being "well-endowed" and he being so short that he was more or less "wearing" her boobs like a pair of earmuffs, the caption to which was him saying, "My, you dance divinely Miss Crenshaw" ...

fafnir
.
.
Posts: 516
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 6:16 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3566

Post by fafnir »

Service Dog wrote: Her error is that OSHA should not require spark-guards and sprinkler systems at yoga studios, sailboats, lemonade stands... as a one-size-fits all way to "stop sparks" in the places which do have big electric machines. OSHA's Covid mandate is too broad. Wichita Linemen & Lonely Maytag Repairmen & I-95 Snowplow drivers aren't coughing-on many co-workers. It's over-broad to require them to get jabbed-- as part of the effort to inoculate World's Largest Gangbang record-breakers.
It feels to me like this is just the slippery slope of judicial activism. If you say B is kind of like A, so laws that apply to A should apply to B... you can then move the ratchet on and once everybody is used to the law applying to B you can say that C is kind of like B, so the law should apply to it as well. Some interpretation where you ask what the law was intended to mean, or what was it understood to mean when it was written seems like the only way to avoid legislating from the bench... which of course is what judicial activists want to do.

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10600
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3567

Post by Steersman »

fafnir wrote:
Steersman wrote: What unmitigated and self-serving horse crap - so vague as to be useless. Not to mention that it didn't at all address my point that championing a "faith in progress", at least in curing medieval diseases, is hardly prima facie evidence of promoting the risible view that transwomen are actually women (i.e., adult human females [those with functioning ovaries]). Which is basically what your "argument" boiled down into.
Again, you act like a fact checker and change the claim so that it can be debunked. I said that the totality of your liberal premises, of which a faith in progress was one, could be used to argue for many conclusions that you opposed or denied and that you picked and chose when to apply them as was convenient to get to your desired conclusion.
And where - exactly - have I or anyone else - been using any sort of "faith in progress" to justify the claim that transwomen are women [adult humans with functional ovaries]? I'll wait ... :think: :roll:

You make all these wild and bogus categorical accusations but turn turtle when shown they're not universally applicable. You're using that red herring to throw stones at what you suppose to be my "liberal premises", my supposedly own doctrinaire and unqualified "faith in progress", without making any effort to specify exactly which premises I'm supposedly using where, and how they're unjustified.

No doubt a "best of all possible worlds" faith in progress is untenable if not crippling. But even you admit that there has been some progress in some areas since the Dark Ages which you apparently have a questionable affection for, even if you're apparently incapable or unwilling to consider the reasons for, and principles behind that progress and how they might have wider applicability.

You blather on about how you "really don't like the idea of not 'getting' people", but you seem bound and determined to not get, to not even address, my arguments. "intellectually dishonest" is probably being charitable.
fafnir wrote: Somehow you have replaced the "totality of your liberal principles" part with you "championing" progress as having cured medieval diseases. You then replace the conclusion of the argument, that your premises can easily be used to argue for the conclusions you don't like or don't want to discuss, with the claim that you promote those conclusions.
So fucking what if some other people might easily use those premises in a way I wouldn't like or agree with? Am I doing so? Where?
fafnir wrote: Steersmen, in a debate, you need to respond to the argument the other side made, not completely rewrite what they said so it is the position you attack in all your posts regardless of what the other person said. I can play that game too, but it would be pointless. If you want to argue with yourself, you have a blog for that, I think.
If you make a categorical statement - as is your wont - then it's entirely justified to present "edge-cases" that show that you're blowing smoke out of your arse.

fafnir
.
.
Posts: 516
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 6:16 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3568

Post by fafnir »

Steersman wrote: And where - exactly - have I or anyone else - been using any sort of "faith in progress" to justify the claim that transwomen are women [adult humans with functional ovaries]? I'll wait ...
You want to do this in Service Dogs playpen? I'm happy to keep dancing if you are.

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10600
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3569

Post by Steersman »

fafnir wrote:
Steersman wrote: And where - exactly - have I or anyone else - been using any sort of "faith in progress" to justify the claim that transwomen are women [adult humans with functional ovaries]? I'll wait ...
You want to do this in Service Dogs playpen? I'm happy to keep dancing if you are.
Nope. He can avert his eyes if he has such delicate sensibilities - or inability to face facts.

Fegg
.
.
Posts: 94
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:31 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3570

Post by Fegg »

Matt Cavanaugh wrote: Dickens was Ur-Woke. Fuck him.
Dickens was interested in social justice, but he came at it from the conservative side influenced by Thomas Carlyle.

Butler Shaffer takes a liberal conception of value for granted - that value as determined by market forces is the only standard of value that ought to exist. Since it was always possible to hire competent young men to write business correspondence and do accounts for fifteen bob a week, it would be irrational to pay someone more than thirty nine quid a year for that sort of job.

The writer seems to think that Bob Cratchit could have easily obtained extra qualifications that would have improved his market value. I don't think Victorian England worked that way. There was nothing that Bob Cratchit could reasonably have done that would have made his value as a new hire to another employer greater than that of an equally capable young man just starting out. His value to Scrooge, his current employer, might well have been higher because of his loyalty and intimate knowledge of Scrooge's business. But since he is unwilling to make a serious threat to quit, Scrooge has no economic incentive to pay him better.

Dickens is not interested in levelling society or destroying the class system. He is disgusted by people using liberal economic theory to avoid having to answer to their consciences.

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10600
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3571

Post by Steersman »

Service Dog wrote: <snip>

Steersman complains that I appoint myself his master. That I'm the boss who gets to tell him what to do. Yep. Everyone who engages in a dialogue is entitled to apply whatever minimum standards they feel is appropriate. He can follow my rules, or fuck off. But if I let him break the rule I just decreed... and reward him with main-thread attention... that's on me.
What self-serving horse crap.

I asked question. In response to you telling me to never post that JPEG again:
Service Dog wrote: ↑
Like never post that same same same fucking chalkboard cartoon again again again. Broken record.
You're the enforcer now? Maybe Fafnir hadn't seen it? That WAS who it was directed to, not you. Or maybe you think it has some relevance to what you periodically pull out of your nether regions?
Or maybe you just didn't like the answers to those questions?

fafnir
.
.
Posts: 516
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 6:16 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3572

Post by fafnir »

Fegg wrote: Butler Shaffer takes a liberal conception of value for granted - that value as determined by market forces
Is there really such a thing as a liberal concept of value? I'd always thought of different theories of value that operated in the 18th and 19th centuries as representing different strands of liberal thought having a lot to do with the relative priority give to liberty or equality.

fafnir
.
.
Posts: 516
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 6:16 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3573

Post by fafnir »

Steersman wrote:
fafnir wrote:
Steersman wrote: And where - exactly - have I or anyone else - been using any sort of "faith in progress" to justify the claim that transwomen are women [adult humans with functional ovaries]? I'll wait ...
You want to do this in Service Dogs playpen? I'm happy to keep dancing if you are.
Nope. He can avert his eyes if he has such delicate sensibilities - or inability to face facts.
I wondered if the frisson of having other people watch wasn't part of the attraction. That's part of what appeals to me as well. Ah, well.... I guess we are done. It was fun while it lasted, and thanks for the recommendation of the Feser.

Fegg
.
.
Posts: 94
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:31 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3574

Post by Fegg »

fafnir wrote:
Fegg wrote: Butler Shaffer takes a liberal conception of value for granted - that value as determined by market forces
Is there really such a thing as a liberal concept of value? I'd always thought of different theories of value that operated in the 18th and 19th centuries as representing different strands of liberal thought having a lot to do with the relative priority give to liberty or equality.
I was thinking about J.S. Mill style liberalism, or the conservative reaction against this exemplified by John Ruskin who argued for something like a just price theory.
Maybe I have been talking to the wrong people, but I think much of the modern world takes for granted that anything resembling just price theory is the result of disordered thinking,

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 7314
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3575

Post by Service Dog »

fafnir wrote: even if there is more disagreement these days and fewer photoshopped images of Richard Carrier.

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10600
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3576

Post by Steersman »

fafnir wrote:
Steersman wrote: <snip>
Nope. He can avert his eyes if he has such delicate sensibilities - or inability to face facts.
I wondered if the frisson of having other people watch wasn't part of the attraction. That's part of what appeals to me as well. Ah, well.... I guess we are done. It was fun while it lasted, and thanks for the recommendation of the Feser.
Not just a matter of other people watching. Anything we might say may well have - apparently does have or should have - a much greater relevance and bearing on wider issues that the Pit in general might have some interest in reading about and commenting on. Unreasonable - at best - to think that I or we should be obliged to quarantine ourselves, wear our yellow stars to comport with Service Dog's biases or sensibilities.

So I wouldn't be too terribly concerned about what naysayers Matt and Service Dog are saying in that regard. Although Lsuoma has something of a point about us talking past each other - not too productive, kind of a waste of bandwidth. Not to mention our time.

But while I will accept - have accepted - some blame for that state of affairs, I think the bigger problem there is your inablity and unwillingness to answer my questions - Socratic dialogue and all that - including the most recent set. I will readily concede that you are - apparently, or more or less - an amoral utilitarian, tradition apparently being your touchstone or golden ruler. However, I think the biggest problem there is that you refuse to consider that many of those traditions are based on highly questionable if not on egregious and quite odious "morality", slavery for example which you more or less defended.

Interestingly, I see that many defenders of that time had recourse to the Bible - even the devil can quote scripture:
The advantage that the southern apologists had over the abolitionists in using Scripture is that while slavery is mentioned numerous times in the Bible, the references do not censure the institution. In fact, with Noah's curse on Canaan in Genesis 8:25-27, pro-slavery theorists believed that they had found biblical proof that the natural state of some people is bondage; in particular, they tried to prove that the curse on Canaan encompassed the Africans. Even more decisive for the pro-slavery apologists were the passages in Leviticus 25:44-46 and Joshua 9:27. In the former passage, God, speaking through Moses, authorizes the chosen people of Israel to make slaves of strangers in their promised land. In the latter passage Joshua and the Israelites turn the Gibeonites into their slaves. Furthermore, the advocates of slavery added that neither Jesus nor the apostles who had contact with the institution of slavery condemned it. A favorite book of the New Testament for the proslavery defenders to cite was Philemon because the apostle tells the runaway slave, Onesimus, to return to his master, Philemon.
https://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities ... es-slavery

But likewise your defense of and promotion of the "demonization and dehumanization" of prostitutes with your own contribution, "We at least know that looking down on prostitutes isn't that stupid". You may wish to read another Cathy Reisenwitz post to see how well that actually plays out, and ask yourself whether that might well justify calls to defund the cops if not for a revolution, letting the chips fall where they may:
Perhaps Wheeler-Weaver had heard that the Los Angeles Police Department described a dozen serial murders Lonnie Franklin committed between 1985 and 2010 as “N.H.I.,” an unofficial acronym that stands for “no human involved” because the victims were Black sex workers. Many cops are Lonnie Franklin fans and openly admire him for “cleaning up the streets.”
In any case, somewhat parenthetically or to kill the proverbial two birds with one stone, you had quoted "Nando" earlier:
Nando wrote:
Darwinists destroy knowledge about freedom by perverting the meaning of choosing with calculating an optimum. For example according to Darwinists choosing means calculating the survival benefits of every option, and then going the way of the highest survival value. In normal understanding of choosing you can go alternative ways, but in Darwinist understanding of choosing you can only go the optimal way. Darwinists oppose concepts of origins based on freedom, like free will, or creationism.
Won't delve very deeply into the links, but there's some justification for his argument in another book I had recomended earlier, Complexity by Waldrop. Apparently much of economics theory is based on the concept of "perfectly rational agents" who "know everything that can be known about the choices they will face infinitely far into the future, and they use flawless reasoning to foresee all the possible implications of their actions" [pg 141].

Makes the calculations easier, and the model more tractable, but, as Waldrop paraphrased the physicists saying, "you're solving the wrong problem if that's not reality". Likewise with the perfectly rational if not omniscient "agents" in the models of the Darwinists: marvelous theory, wrong species.

Far better - more accurate - are models of agents based on imperfect knowledge and learning, on heuristics and educated guesses. Largely the theme of the book and the concept.

Fegg
.
.
Posts: 94
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:31 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3577

Post by Fegg »

Steersman wrote: Interestingly, I see that many defenders of that time had recourse to the Bible - even the devil can quote scripture:
The advantage that the southern apologists had over the abolitionists in using Scripture is that while slavery is mentioned numerous times in the Bible, the references do not censure the institution. In fact, with Noah's curse on Canaan in Genesis 8:25-27, pro-slavery theorists believed that they had found biblical proof that the natural state of some people is bondage; in particular, they tried to prove that the curse on Canaan encompassed the Africans. Even more decisive for the pro-slavery apologists were the passages in Leviticus 25:44-46 and Joshua 9:27. In the former passage, God, speaking through Moses, authorizes the chosen people of Israel to make slaves of strangers in their promised land. In the latter passage Joshua and the Israelites turn the Gibeonites into their slaves. Furthermore, the advocates of slavery added that neither Jesus nor the apostles who had contact with the institution of slavery condemned it. A favorite book of the New Testament for the proslavery defenders to cite was Philemon because the apostle tells the runaway slave, Onesimus, to return to his master, Philemon.
The Bible does condone slavery, but it specifically prohibits forcing escaped slaves to return to their masters (Deuteronomy 23:16). Paul persuades Onesimus to willingly return to Philemon - he says that he is sending him back, but it is clear that Onesimus is returning on his own together with the letter which urges Philemon to free his slave so that he can return to help Paul. This is completely at odds with the Fugitive Slave Act.

Turning the curse on Canaan into a justification for enslaving negroes requires more mental gymnastics than most forced bible interpretations - and that is really saying something.

What I find really interesting is that around 1800, American slaveowners weren't very interested in defending slavery and would most likely place slavery in the wrong in an ideal world, but justifiable in this one category. It is after abolitionism really starts to become a powerful force towards the mid 19th century that southerners start to vigorously defend their "peculiar institution."

Gumby
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 5466
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:40 am

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3578

Post by Gumby »

Damn, this place is verbose lately 🤣

Hello all.

Bhurzum
Brassy, uncouth, henpecked meathead
Posts: 4785
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 2:08 am
Location: Lurking in a dumpster

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3579

Post by Bhurzum »

fafnir wrote: I thought Jenneke was the Pit mascot?
You can't halt progress :P

https://c.tenor.com/IewEd1gh3NwAAAAd/je ... -nurse.gif

Bhurzum
Brassy, uncouth, henpecked meathead
Posts: 4785
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 2:08 am
Location: Lurking in a dumpster

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3580

Post by Bhurzum »

Gumby wrote: Damn, this place is verbose lately 🤣

Hello all.
Gumbazoid! How the bastarding fuck are you, old bean?

Gumby
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 5466
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:40 am

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3581

Post by Gumby »

I'm all right I guess. Inching my way toward whatever passes for my retirement. You still on Twitter? I never got the itch to go back there.

Gumby
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 5466
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:40 am

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3582

Post by Gumby »

I see the Steersman prose generator code needs to be tweaked, it's dangerously close to an infinite loop. The fafnir subroutines as well. Must be the Pit 😃

another lurker
.
.
Posts: 4733
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:39 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3583

Post by another lurker »

Gumby wrote: I'm all right I guess. Inching my way toward whatever passes for my retirement. You still on Twitter? I never got the itch to go back there.
gumby!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
hugs!!!!!!!!!!!111111

another lurker
.
.
Posts: 4733
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:39 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3584

Post by another lurker »

so who wants to see my boobs
i send matt pix of my boobs every week
but ill share one pic with you all

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 7314
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3585

Post by Service Dog »

John D wrote: the middle and lower classes would love a story like "A Christmas Carol". Also, much wealth at the time was trapped within a family. There really was less opportunity for people of intelligence and hard work to succeed because the wealthy did control more of the cash flow. Mercantilism is not capitalism.

So.. I have always found "A Christmas Carol" to be a comic fantasy.
A Christmas Carol was published in 1843. I would point to Edward Colston, who died in 1721. He owned merchant ships, became enormously wealthy, his cargo included a whole lotta slaves.

Rather than passing his wealth to family, he gave it away-- founding alms-houses, hospitals, schools, an endowment managed by Society of Merchant Venturers... and The Colston Society a charitable trust in Bristol which was still going strong in 2020 (at that point largely serving non-whites from former british colonies & recent immigrants.)

He died 50 years before the Abolitionist Movement began. Then, in 2020, idiots in the UK-- wishing they were American BLM idiots-- knocked-over his statue into the River Avon. And the Colston Society ceased operation, in shame.

So... Old Edward is one real-life counterpart to the fictional Scrooge. Useful to compare & contrast.

Heck-- the BBC could even use the Colston story. "Reboot" Dickens' Christmas Carol. Now with plenty of angry british blacks and muslims! And a strong moral lesson-- that Tiny Tim's unexamined cisgender privilege was the true villain.

After that?... a ride at your favorite section of Disneyland!

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10600
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3586

Post by Steersman »

Gumby wrote: I see the Steersman prose generator code needs to be tweaked, it's dangerously close to an infinite loop. The fafnir subroutines as well. Must be the Pit 😃
"The Singularity"l we of the cognescenti say "The Singularity" - any time soon now ... ;-)

Just looking the archives and see your "The Bjarte Foshaug Academy of Stick Pablum" :) :

http://slymepit.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=376

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times. Someone needs to go over to FTB and wave a red flag of sorts in their faces to get them to consider a rematch - sure provided endless entertainment ... ;-)

But how the hell you doing? Looking forward to retirement? Highly recommended - except, of course, for it being a bit closer to that "final exit". :-)

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 7314
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3587

Post by Service Dog »

shakin' that ass
shakin' that ass

All the other guys send dick pix.

I send the ladies pix of my butthole.

another lurker
.
.
Posts: 4733
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:39 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3588

Post by another lurker »

Service Dog wrote: shakin' that ass
shakin' that ass

All the other guys send dick pix.

I send the ladies pix of my butthole.
show me

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 7314
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3589

Post by Service Dog »

i see you baby/ shakin' that ass (my gay black choreographer friend used to sing that to his Maltese, when he saw it wanted to go outside)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2aFOj0QNZw

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10600
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3590

Post by Steersman »

Fegg wrote:
Steersman wrote: Interestingly, I see that many defenders of that time had recourse to the Bible - even the devil can quote scripture:

<snip>
The Bible does condone slavery, but it specifically prohibits forcing escaped slaves to return to their masters (Deuteronomy 23:16). Paul persuades Onesimus to willingly return to Philemon - he says that he is sending him back, but it is clear that Onesimus is returning on his own together with the letter which urges Philemon to free his slave so that he can return to help Paul. This is completely at odds with the Fugitive Slave Act.

Turning the curse on Canaan into a justification for enslaving negroes requires more mental gymnastics than most forced bible interpretations - and that is really saying something.

What I find really interesting is that around 1800, American slaveowners weren't very interested in defending slavery and would most likely place slavery in the wrong in an ideal world, but justifiable in this one category. It is after abolitionism really starts to become a powerful force towards the mid 19th century that southerners start to vigorously defend their "peculiar institution."
Some pretty impressive mental gymnastics, though often with a grain or truth or justification. From another site I had looked into:
Defenders of slavery argued that the institution was divine, and that it brought Christianity to the heathen from across the ocean. Slavery was, according to this argument, a good thing for the enslaved. John C. Calhoun said, "Never before has the black race of Central Africa, from the dawn of history to the present day, attained a condition so civilized and so improved, not only physically, but morally and intellectually."
https://www.ushistory.org/us/27f.asp

Periodically wonder if the descendents of slaves in America ever give any thought to where they might have been if slavery hadn't existed. Or, in discussions about reparations, about having to pay back the cost of the trip over - and in current dollars ... ;-)

Humans sure do have a remarkable if problematic facility for rationalization; another passage from Shermer's The Believing Brain (highly recommended):
We form our beliefs for a variety of subjective, personal, emotional, and psychological reasons in the context of environments created by family, friends, colleagues, culture, and society at large; after forming our beliefs we then defend, justify, and rationalize them with a host of intellectual reasons, cogent arguments, and rational explanations. Beliefs come first, explanations for beliefs follow. I call this process belief-dependent realism, where our perceptions about reality are dependent on the beliefs that we hold about it. Reality exists independent of human minds, but our understanding of it depends upon the beliefs we hold at any given time.

fuzzy
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 2063
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 5:30 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3591

Post by fuzzy »

Ape+lust circa 2012
Attachments
lODAS.jpg
(147.34 KiB) Downloaded 88 times

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 7314
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3592

Post by Service Dog »

fafnir wrote: the slippery slope of judicial activism. If you say B is kind of like A, so laws that apply to A should apply to B... you can then move the ratchet on and once everybody is used to the law applying to B you can say that C is kind of like B, so the law should apply to it as well
Doesn't even require diabolical strategizing. It just... happens. A complete dumbfuck can do it.



Sotomayor

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10600
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3593

Post by Steersman »

Lsuoma - no Cunties 2021?

Did I miss it? On the back burner?

Well-populated field of contenders - Fauci, Dr. Robert Malone, Weinstein and Heying, Trump, Jacinda Ardern, etc ...; possibilities are practically endless ... ;-)

Keating
.
.
Posts: 2318
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2015 3:18 pm
Location: South of anteater guy

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3594

Post by Keating »

Steersman?

another lurker
.
.
Posts: 4733
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:39 pm

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3595

Post by another lurker »

i see how it is
fuck the lot of u

John D
.
.
Posts: 5452
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:23 am
Location: Detroit, MI. USA

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3596

Post by John D »

fuzzy wrote: Ape+lust circa 2012
Oh Man. This Ape-lust stuff is the best.

On reflection I think that Dennett was the only one who predicted the SJW movement we see today. One of my favorite books is "Darwin's Dangerous Idea". Highly recommended.

I remember when I first heard Dennett warn that we should be very careful if we destroy religion... because he said... "What will it be replaced by?" I remember when I heard this for the first time and I thought it was a silly thing to say. I was also reading Harris and Dawkins and Hitchens. All of these guys were clearly and fully anti-religious. I was very much anti-religion at the time. It took me some time to realize that people really have a kind of "god shaped hole" and that this hole must be filled by something. "Science" does not really fit into the god-shaped hole very well. Wokeness ended up being the kind of fake religion that Dennett warned about.

Dennett had a bunch of odd thoughts (remember his idea to call people "Brights"?) Haha.

MarcusAu
.
.
Posts: 7769
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:49 am
Location: Llareggub

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3597

Post by MarcusAu »

Steersman wrote: ...no Cunties ...?
You might have to pay.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 14589
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3598

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

Service Dog wrote:
fafnir wrote: even if there is more disagreement these days and fewer photoshopped images of Richard Carrier.
Pandemic of the spitters.


Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 14589
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Steerzing in a New Direction...

#3600

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

Did she really say that? Link?

Post Reply