Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Straight raze or Ms. Razer

Expand Messages
  • fictiveparrot
    ... Am I the no-one you are talking about, because I find it remotely amusing. Or, Ms. Razey Susan, are you purporting to speak for the group? I think it is
    Message 1 of 11 , Mar 20, 2012
      > [sigh] Bill, would you please stop this.
      > No one finds it remotely amusing.

      Am I the "no-one" you are talking about, because I find it remotely amusing. Or, Ms. Razey Susan, are you purporting to speak for the group?

      I think it is always dangerous to assume for a group, even if you are a Siamese twin. For one whose major contribution to this group is some sort of stealthy power-mongering oversight that squelches conversation while allowing all the shit to float in the barrel, you might consider that too much torque on a tourniquet could remove the limb... I think the volume of discussion is a testament to that here.

      The best discussion admins are invisible. You might try the vanishing potion on the next shelf.

      Knotta Vailable
    • William
      ... Bookboc, The siamese twins done messed it all up . The recent dust up was a knot that even our acedemic lords could not untangle. Who did what to whom and
      Message 2 of 11 , Mar 20, 2012
        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "fictiveparrot" <knott12@...> wrote:
        >
        > > [sigh] Bill, would you please stop this.
        > > No one finds it remotely amusing.
        >
        > Am I the "no-one" you are talking about, because I find it remotely amusing. Or, Ms. Razey Susan, are you purporting to speak for the group?
        >
        > I think it is always dangerous to assume for a group, even if you are a Siamese twin. For one whose major contribution to this group is some sort of stealthy power-mongering oversight that squelches conversation while allowing all the shit to float in the barrel, you might consider that too much torque on a tourniquet could remove the limb... I think the volume of discussion is a testament to that here.
        >
        > The best discussion admins are invisible. You might try the vanishing potion on the next shelf.
        >
        > Knotta Vailable
        >
        Bookboc, The siamese twins done messed it all up . The recent dust up was a knot that even our acedemic lords could not untangle. Who did what to whom and even who they were is beyond understanding. I kept writing after threats and multiple insults because I had a constant identity. If I bent some noses so be it. There are things that should be discussed here but have been silenced so I have kept a sparse sililoque to secure a consistant thread.
        I find it useless to try to figure out who was who in the conflict but have a good idea who was acting in good faith. The one who cannot be spoken of was a sharp player and took appreciaple risks in having his way with the powers that be. He has guts and a sneaky tact that confounded the powers that be. I know he is off on a private path that does not need this site.
        As to the leftist caball that has abandoned existlist I say good riddance. There are bigger fish to fry than those half baked cod pieces. They might be of use in contending with the religous creeps like Santorum and The Mormon but would only spout leftist rhetoric from disjointed sources.
        The politics de jour is rife with anti modernist attacks and I see answering the religios not political but highly existential. The razor lady should know that and keep her blade to herself. Santorum is a hyper catholic and The Morman is a throwback to Joeseph Smith, If she wants those sort in control she is sicker than I thought. She should let us talk,here ,because there are six hundred plus readers who have some respect for this old site.
        I am glad to see you still remain above sod and hope all is well. Bill
      • Jim
        Mr Knott, I don t think the decline in activity on this list is due to our moderator, although I think some of your other points are valid. We know that Mary
        Message 3 of 11 , Mar 21, 2012
          Mr Knott,

          I don't think the decline in activity on this list is due to our moderator, although I think some of your other points are valid.

          We know that Mary and Wil left the group because of Bill's rude, aggressive, paranoid posts. (We know that because they said so, but no doubt you can mount your usual sceptical challenges here as well as elsewhere.)

          Dick Richardson's verbal diarrhoea also contributed to people switching off, I think.

          However, I think the main reason for the decline on the list is due to existentialism itself becoming a spent force. Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Heidegger, Sartre and the others are no longer hot topics of conversation, and perhaps the remaining existentialists on this list just ran out of worthwhile things to say?

          Jim
        • William
          ... Jim, another chicken comes home to roost. You are the archetiphal post modernist .Soon maid mary or her latest incarnation should show up to bolster your
          Message 4 of 11 , Mar 21, 2012
            --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Jim" <jjimstuart1@...> wrote:
            >
            > Mr Knott,
            >
            > I don't think the decline in activity on this list is due to our moderator, although I think some of your other points are valid.
            >
            > We know that Mary and Wil left the group because of Bill's rude, aggressive, paranoid posts. (We know that because they said so, but no doubt you can mount your usual sceptical challenges here as well as elsewhere.)
            >
            > Dick Richardson's verbal diarrhoea also contributed to people switching off, I think.
            >
            > However, I think the main reason for the decline on the list is due to existentialism itself becoming a spent force. Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Heidegger, Sartre and the others are no longer hot topics of conversation, and perhaps the remaining existentialists on this list just ran out of worthwhile things to say?
            >
            > Jim
            >
            Jim, another chicken comes home to roost. You are the archetiphal post modernist .Soon maid mary or her latest incarnation should show up to bolster your protestant ramblings. I will not accept your bull about bullying. Jimmy, you would be bullied by a butterfly. SOB
          • William
            ... Jim, your comment about existentialism shows your petticoats. You have never been an existentialist, you are a post modernist who has come to the end of
            Message 5 of 11 , Mar 21, 2012
              --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <vize9938@...> wrote:
              >
              >
              >
              > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Jim" <jjimstuart1@> wrote:
              > >
              > > Mr Knott,
              > >
              > > I don't think the decline in activity on this list is due to our moderator, although I think some of your other points are valid.
              > >
              > > We know that Mary and Wil left the group because of Bill's rude, aggressive, paranoid posts. (We know that because they said so, but no doubt you can mount your usual sceptical challenges here as well as elsewhere.)
              > >
              > > Dick Richardson's verbal diarrhoea also contributed to people switching off, I think.
              > >
              > > However, I think the main reason for the decline on the list is due to existentialism itself becoming a spent force. Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Heidegger, Sartre and the others are no longer hot topics of conversation, and perhaps the remaining existentialists on this list just ran out of worthwhile things to say?
              > >
              > > Jim
              > >
              > Jim, another chicken comes home to roost. You are the archetiphal post modernist .Soon maid mary or her latest incarnation should show up to bolster your protestant ramblings. I will not accept your bull about bullying. Jimmy, you would be bullied by a butterfly. SOB
              >
              Jim, your comment about existentialism shows your petticoats. You have never been an existentialist, you are a post modernist who has come to the end of that sorry road. Post modernism is a wrong turn into a dead end. You are a lost searcher who should listen to those here who have paid dues in rational thinking.Weather you should go to the protestant church or some eastern circular hide out could be a life choice for you. You have missed twice, the next time you turn into a muslim. WRH
            • Susan Schnelbach
              I think there is also a general decline in the use of Yahoo and other stranger-based discussion groups. I think a few studies have shown that most people
              Message 6 of 11 , Mar 22, 2012
                I think there is also a general decline in the use of Yahoo and other stranger-based discussion groups. I think a few studies have shown that most people interact online with friends and acquaintances via Facebook instead of strangers via Yahoo Groups. Something Scott read a few weeks ago said that Yahoo Groups users tend to be over 50 (or so) and users of the other social networks tend to be under 40.

                But yes, I would imagine that discussion groups about philosophy rank among the lowest in attendance. Groups discussing American Idol, etc, are probably more popular. :)

                - Sue


                On Mar 21, 2012, at 7:32 PM, Jim wrote:

                > Mr Knott,
                >
                > I don't think the decline in activity on this list is due to our moderator, although I think some of your other points are valid.
                >
                > We know that Mary and Wil left the group because of Bill's rude, aggressive, paranoid posts. (We know that because they said so, but no doubt you can mount your usual sceptical challenges here as well as elsewhere.)
                >
                > Dick Richardson's verbal diarrhoea also contributed to people switching off, I think.
                >
                > However, I think the main reason for the decline on the list is due to existentialism itself becoming a spent force. Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Heidegger, Sartre and the others are no longer hot topics of conversation, and perhaps the remaining existentialists on this list just ran out of worthwhile things to say?
                >
                > Jim
                >
                >



                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • William
                ... The problem is friends reiterate the same old junk, over and over. It becomes a recognition exercise not a debate about ideas. I have been a proponent of
                Message 7 of 11 , Mar 23, 2012
                  --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, Susan Schnelbach <susan@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > I think there is also a general decline in the use of Yahoo and other stranger-based discussion groups. I think a few studies have shown that most people interact online with friends and acquaintances via Facebook instead of strangers via Yahoo Groups. Something Scott read a few weeks ago said that Yahoo Groups users tend to be over 50 (or so) and users of the other social networks tend to be under 40.
                  >
                  > But yes, I would imagine that discussion groups about philosophy rank among the lowest in attendance. Groups discussing American Idol, etc, are probably more popular. :)
                  >
                  > - Sue
                  > Susan, the hand held media do not lend themselves to extensive oratory about a subject. They are truly conversational while this media is paragraph or even essay prone. I agree it is difficult to communicate with strangers and the propriety inherant in essay media is of a distance inhabited by strangers, not friends.
                  The problem is friends reiterate the same old junk, over and over. It becomes a recognition exercise not a debate about ideas.
                  I have been a proponent of full throated airing of views . Bill Mahr represents that sort of explanation and he has recently decried the politically correct simplicity of the under forty peoples.That is why I get on your case about censorship. If you want to be superficial go tweet. If you want to deeply discuss a subject write here. The rise of the anti bullying facade has added to the propensity to only broadcasting platitudes and pleasantries. The post moderns are good little robots and never step on the cracks. Therefore they live in the headlines and never venture into the text. No truth is exposed but no feathers are roughed. No one is bullied because no one has thought about anything. I do not like those people and I do not like you when you side with them. Straight forwardness is not bullying and the over correct stance, so often proposed today, will take years of in court ,serious argument to square with constitutional rights of free speach. I blame the educators for leading us into this wasteland of frightened rabbits. Knowing you are of the academy that puts you and yours in my sights.
                  I do not think i could have tweeted that but you may wish I did. Bill
                  >
                  > On Mar 21, 2012, at 7:32 PM, Jim wrote:
                  >
                  > > Mr Knott,
                  > >
                  > > I don't think the decline in activity on this list is due to our moderator, although I think some of your other points are valid.
                  > >
                  > > We know that Mary and Wil left the group because of Bill's rude, aggressive, paranoid posts. (We know that because they said so, but no doubt you can mount your usual sceptical challenges here as well as elsewhere.)
                  > >
                  > > Dick Richardson's verbal diarrhoea also contributed to people switching off, I think.
                  > >
                  > > However, I think the main reason for the decline on the list is due to existentialism itself becoming a spent force. Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Heidegger, Sartre and the others are no longer hot topics of conversation, and perhaps the remaining existentialists on this list just ran out of worthwhile things to say?
                  > >
                  > > Jim
                  > >
                  > >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  >
                • Susan Schnelbach
                  I m unclear why you keep mentioning censorship. As far as I know, we ve never removed any posts except a few that were obvious spammers (advertising Viagra,
                  Message 8 of 11 , Mar 24, 2012
                    I'm unclear why you keep mentioning censorship. As far as I know, we've never removed any posts except a few that were obvious spammers (advertising Viagra, porn, etc). We don't block posts or delete them, so no censorship. Any missing or delayed posts are either user error or Yahoo being Yahoo.

                    Otherwise, yes, you are correct. People do not use Facebook for discussion groups or essays. People use Facebook to share media with friends and family in short, limited-attention-required bursts. And Twitter really isn't useful for much of anything except short humor.

                    But you have to admit that the studies analyzing Facebook use and narcissism are interesting... leading back to something Richard commented on. People collecting hundreds and hundreds of friends are either creating marketing networks or are in need of constant ego-stroking and "me, me, me" feedback.

                    As for the bullying: if only one person cried "bully," I would ignore it and let them deal with the problem on their own. When many cry "bully," there's a problem.



                    On Mar 23, 2012, at 10:32 AM, William wrote:

                    >
                    >
                    > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, Susan Schnelbach <susan@...> wrote:
                    > >
                    > > I think there is also a general decline in the use of Yahoo and other stranger-based discussion groups. I think a few studies have shown that most people interact online with friends and acquaintances via Facebook instead of strangers via Yahoo Groups. Something Scott read a few weeks ago said that Yahoo Groups users tend to be over 50 (or so) and users of the other social networks tend to be under 40.
                    > >
                    > > But yes, I would imagine that discussion groups about philosophy rank among the lowest in attendance. Groups discussing American Idol, etc, are probably more popular. :)
                    > >
                    > > - Sue
                    > > Susan, the hand held media do not lend themselves to extensive oratory about a subject. They are truly conversational while this media is paragraph or even essay prone. I agree it is difficult to communicate with strangers and the propriety inherant in essay media is of a distance inhabited by strangers, not friends.
                    > The problem is friends reiterate the same old junk, over and over. It becomes a recognition exercise not a debate about ideas.
                    > I have been a proponent of full throated airing of views . Bill Mahr represents that sort of explanation and he has recently decried the politically correct simplicity of the under forty peoples.That is why I get on your case about censorship. If you want to be superficial go tweet. If you want to deeply discuss a subject write here. The rise of the anti bullying facade has added to the propensity to only broadcasting platitudes and pleasantries. The post moderns are good little robots and never step on the cracks. Therefore they live in the headlines and never venture into the text. No truth is exposed but no feathers are roughed. No one is bullied because no one has thought about anything. I do not like those people and I do not like you when you side with them. Straight forwardness is not bullying and the over correct stance, so often proposed today, will take years of in court ,serious argument to square with constitutional rights of free speach. I blame the educators for leading us into this wasteland of frightened rabbits. Knowing you are of the academy that puts you and yours in my sights.
                    > I do not think i could have tweeted that but you may wish I did. Bill
                    > >
                    > > On Mar 21, 2012, at 7:32 PM, Jim wrote:
                    > >
                    > > > Mr Knott,
                    > > >
                    > > > I don't think the decline in activity on this list is due to our moderator, although I think some of your other points are valid.
                    > > >
                    > > > We know that Mary and Wil left the group because of Bill's rude, aggressive, paranoid posts. (We know that because they said so, but no doubt you can mount your usual sceptical challenges here as well as elsewhere.)
                    > > >
                    > > > Dick Richardson's verbal diarrhoea also contributed to people switching off, I think.
                    > > >
                    > > > However, I think the main reason for the decline on the list is due to existentialism itself becoming a spent force. Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Heidegger, Sartre and the others are no longer hot topics of conversation, and perhaps the remaining existentialists on this list just ran out of worthwhile things to say?
                    > > >
                    > > > Jim
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    > >
                    >
                    >



                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • William
                    Message 9 of 11 , Mar 24, 2012
                      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, Susan Schnelbach <susan@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > I'm unclear why you keep mentioning censorship. As far as I know, we've never removed any posts except a few that were obvious spammers (advertising Viagra, porn, etc). We don't block posts or delete them, so no censorship. Any missing or delayed posts are either user error or Yahoo being Yahoo.
                      >
                      > Otherwise, yes, you are correct. People do not use Facebook for discussion groups or essays. People use Facebook to share media with friends and family in short, limited-attention-required bursts. And Twitter really isn't useful for much of anything except short humor.
                      >
                      > But you have to admit that the studies analyzing Facebook use and narcissism are interesting... leading back to something Richard commented on. People collecting hundreds and hundreds of friends are either creating marketing networks or are in need of constant ego-stroking and "me, me, me" feedback.
                      >
                      > As for the bullying: if only one person cried "bully," I would ignore it and let them deal with the problem on their own. When many cry "bully," there's a problem.
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > On Mar 23, 2012, at 10:32 AM, William wrote:
                      >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, Susan Schnelbach <susan@> wrote:
                      > > >
                      > > > I think there is also a general decline in the use of Yahoo and other stranger-based discussion groups. I think a few studies have shown that most people interact online with friends and acquaintances via Facebook instead of strangers via Yahoo Groups. Something Scott read a few weeks ago said that Yahoo Groups users tend to be over 50 (or so) and users of the other social networks tend to be under 40.
                      > > >
                      > > > But yes, I would imagine that discussion groups about philosophy rank among the lowest in attendance. Groups discussing American Idol, etc, are probably more popular. :)
                      > > >
                      > > > - Sue
                      > > > Susan, the hand held media do not lend themselves to extensive oratory about a subject. They are truly conversational while this media is paragraph or even essay prone. I agree it is difficult to communicate with strangers and the propriety inherant in essay media is of a distance inhabited by strangers, not friends.
                      > > The problem is friends reiterate the same old junk, over and over. It becomes a recognition exercise not a debate about ideas.
                      > > I have been a proponent of full throated airing of views . Bill Mahr represents that sort of explanation and he has recently decried the politically correct simplicity of the under forty peoples.That is why I get on your case about censorship. If you want to be superficial go tweet. If you want to deeply discuss a subject write here. The rise of the anti bullying facade has added to the propensity to only broadcasting platitudes and pleasantries. The post moderns are good little robots and never step on the cracks. Therefore they live in the headlines and never venture into the text. No truth is exposed but no feathers are roughed. No one is bullied because no one has thought about anything. I do not like those people and I do not like you when you side with them. Straight forwardness is not bullying and the over correct stance, so often proposed today, will take years of in court ,serious argument to square with constitutional rights of free speach. I blame the educators for leading us into this wasteland of frightened rabbits. Knowing you are of the academy that puts you and yours in my sights.
                      > > I do not think i could have tweeted that but you may wish I did. Bill
                      > > >
                      > > > On Mar 21, 2012, at 7:32 PM, Jim wrote:
                      > > >
                      > > > > Mr Knott,
                      > > > >
                      > > > > I don't think the decline in activity on this list is due to our moderator, although I think some of your other points are valid.
                      > > > >
                      > > > > We know that Mary and Wil left the group because of Bill's rude, aggressive, paranoid posts. (We know that because they said so, but no doubt you can mount your usual sceptical challenges here as well as elsewhere.)
                      > > > >
                      > > > > Dick Richardson's verbal diarrhoea also contributed to people switching off, I think.
                      > > > >
                      > > > > However, I think the main reason for the decline on the list is due to existentialism itself becoming a spent force. Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Heidegger, Sartre and the others are no longer hot topics of conversation, and perhaps the remaining existentialists on this list just ran out of worthwhile things to say?
                      > > > >
                      > > > > Jim
                      > > > >
                      > > > >
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      > > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      >
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.