Usenet and dishonesty
Andrew Usher
to censor me because they can't stand my truth-telling. Truly, they
had basically no reasonable argument against any of my stuff, so
resorted to personal attack, and when I called them on it, their only
response was that I was a 'troll' and such.
While there are some decent people on the site, they are marginalised.
The main guys are clearly more interested in right-wing politics and
feeling morally superior to 'misogynists' (gee - just like liberals)
than in really defending men.
Usenet really is superior because no one ever gets banned. While it
does mean there's a lot of crap, people that want serious discussion
are forced to argue seriously because they can't run anyone off.
Andrew Usher
Moderator
> Well, the assholes athttp://standyourground.comhave finally decided
I trust your quest is just and if so you will not loose providing your
path is true and you remain just. You must clearly see now that the
unjust authority is a fraud, a trickster and a magician each giving
him strength which he has not yet tested the limits of. He has now
come across his nemesis but is not worried because he is sound in his
untested strength, which he will realize is unstable only too late.
You will already know your victory before the battle although you may
not yet know the path from here to there. So long as you remain true
to the path of justice, your direction will be sound and the victory
will become within reach.
But I tell you this; even as hero and perhaps future victor, should
you veer from the path of truth or from seeking justice or become
unsound, you will be usurped either by a greater author be they just
or unjust.
Andrew Usher
> I trust your quest is just and if so you will not loose providing your
> path is true and you remain just. You must clearly see now that the
> unjust authority is a fraud, a trickster and a magician each giving
> him strength which he has not yet tested the limits of. He has now
> come across his nemesis but is not worried because he is sound in his
> untested strength, which he will realize is unstable only too late.
>
> You will already know your victory before the battle although you may
> not yet know the path from here to there. So long as you remain true
> to the path of justice, your direction will be sound and the victory
> will become within reach.
>
> But I tell you this; even as hero and perhaps future victor, should
> you veer from the path of truth or from seeking justice or become
> unsound, you will be usurped either by a greater author be they just
> or unjust.
What is this, an auto-troll message?
Andrew Usher
Moderator
Looks to me like its a proposal of a fundamental truth which if sound
can apply in many areas, Family Law included such as the author's
case, or in the area you are addressing.
Nomen Nescio
Aww poor baby couldn't subvert another group to the feminists. Go rub Day Brown's clit and maybe he'll rub yours for you.
Fuck you. For the record, Usenet - and especially soc.men - has been controlled by an invisible network of useless parasictical scum for many years now in practically the same way. Every time the wrong people start getting their asses knocked onto the ropes - or just the wrong word is spoken to them - this group goes into lockdown and the posts start trickling through as each one is arbitrarily approved or rejected by these whores and their submissives. I'll be glad to see the farce that is called Usenet finally restructured into a corporatized entity when a small group of friendless freaky misfits finally has its public private playground taken the fuck away from them. Let's see how far you never been kissed fucking losers get when you really have to start plugging your archaic cobbled pieces of shit into the modern blogs and servers before your stupid little hacker community becomes the new forgotten woody allen cult following because the last outpost of your empire has finally been broken up. Blow it out your ass, Woody.
Andrew Usher
> Fuck you. For the record, Usenet - and especially soc.men - has been controlled by an invisible network of useless parasictical scum for many years now in practically the same way. Every time the wrong people start getting their asses knocked onto the ropes - or just the wrong word is spoken to them - this group goes into lockdown and the posts start trickling through as each one is arbitrarily approved or rejected by these whores and their submissives. I'll be glad to see the farce that is called Usenet finally restructured into a corporatized entity when a small group of friendless freaky misfits finally has its public private playground taken the fuck away from them. Let's see how far you never been kissed fucking losers get when you really have to start plugging your archaic cobbled pieces of shit into the modern blogs and servers before your stupid little hacker community becomes the new forgotten woody allen cult following because the last outpost of your empire has finally been broken up. Blow it out your ass, Woody.
soc.men is not moderated and can not be controlled as you allege. The
rest of your post is just bullshit.
Andrew Usher
Masculist
This thread is a hoot!
Tom
> Andrew Usher
Anonymous
Naturally, Mr. Indigient. You're the biggest parasite of all! You egg on every fight here against every normal human being that you can, lest your free public support group for human scum lose its cohesion and you have nowhere to go during your hard day of talking about the 60's while living off the public dole.
> Tom
>
> > Andrew Usher
>
>
Andrew Usher
> > soc.men is not moderated and can not be controlled as you allege. The
> > rest of your post is just bullshit.
>
> This thread is a hoot!
No, actually, it's not funny at all that I got banned from their
forums and what
it proves. They're supposed to be one of our most important forums and
yet they
have less than a dozen serious members. If the men's movement is to
succeed
we need thousands at least.
My wiki was an attempt to create (as much as I can) some place where
more of
us would talk to each other, as well as being a good thing in itself.
Andrew Usher
Masculist
> On Jul 4, 2:43 pm, Masculist <MASCUL...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > soc.men is not moderated and can not be controlled as you allege. The
> > > rest of your post is just bullshit.
>
> > This thread is a hoot!
>
> No, actually, it's not funny at all that I got banned from their
> forums and what
> it proves.
I didn't mean your post but the others. I'm sorry that happened to
you Andrew. I own a forum and only kick off proselytizing feminists.
Moderating a forum requires special skills plus it's a thankless
job.
> They're supposed to be one of our most important forums and
> yet they
> have less than a dozen serious members. If the men's movement is to
> succeed
> we need thousands at least.
There's lots of men's forums though many have slowed in activity.
That's happened in all areas with people moving more to the blog
format which IMO is lame in some respects but seems to have it's
function.
> My wiki was an attempt to create (as much as I can) some place where
> more of
> us would talk to each other, as well as being a good thing in itself.
You came to this game alittle late. This internet "social networking"
is still quite new and who knows how it will shake out. I think the
mailing list format will always be the primary venue for serious
social and ideological exchange but not all folks want that.
Tom
> Andrew Usher
ray ray
> Well, the assholes athttp://standyourground.comhave finally decided
> to censor me because they can't stand my truth-telling. Truly, they
> had basically no reasonable argument against any of my stuff, so
> resorted to personal attack, and when I called them on it, their only
> response was that I was a 'troll' and such.
unfortunately much of the visible "movement" concretizes into cliques,
usually around right-wing ideopolitics (inevitably leading back to
The Pit)
like SYG, they're v inbred and dismissive of thought not emerging from
their own hermetically sealed noggins -- threatened because the right
was, and is, hip-deep in enabling the global gynogulag
meaning righties can't just blame the Looney Left -- the endless
dialectic -- but must look at their own support of the matriarchy,
esp. their selfishness and worship of money
but that's hard
easier to ban folks and click glasses with one's cronies
>
> While there are some decent people on the site, they are marginalised.
> The main guys are clearly more interested in right-wing politics and
> feeling morally superior to 'misogynists' (gee - just like liberals)
> than in really defending men.
yup
they use the plight of boys and men to further their personal agendas
the honchos at SYG -- dr evil etc -- are control-nazis like the fems,
ruling despotically over their little queendom
mebbe they've been so disempowered by life in the fem-west that they
overcompensate once they establish their own cyberTurf?
but, i mean, The Gonzman? . . . lol puh-leeze . . .
>
> Usenet really is superior because no one ever gets banned. While it
> does mean there's a lot of crap, people that want serious discussion
> are forced to argue seriously because they can't run anyone off.
>
> Andrew Usher
petty tyrants have no power here, no delete key or ban button,
everyone's evaluated on their output
blogs solve the same problem, and are much more flexible in format --
a superb tool against Der Matriarchy
of course, some people that Should Know Better are threatened by them,
too!
:O)
the movement's wasted a lot of time and opportunity over the past
decade, playing internal politics and "banning" folks for childish and
egotistical reasons, wasting v limited "human resources," and ignoring
information that's a little too troubling for ideologues and
lighweights
folks who are serious about the terrible things being done to boys and
men in the western world know there isn't time to engage in alpha-dog
posturing and censorship of potential allies
we should be identifying the best of our work, and disseminating it
duh
but human nature has it's Own Ideas
feminism hasn't held back the men's movement as much as it's defeating
itself
Masculist
> On Jul 3, 8:38 pm, Andrew Usher <k_over_hb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
"Threatened"? I think not. They bore the hell out of me. While I
like talking politics and ideas I also like the social interplay.
Mailing lists have both in spades. The problem is they are chaotic
and hard to follow until you get used to them and a bit threatening in
the context of email discussions which often cause paranoia and
misunderstandings. Blogs are highly structured and thereby help avoid
those problems, but they are no fun.
Tom
Anonymous
Hey, did someone say "deadbeat dad"? Just plain "deadbeats" is descriptive enough for dealing with such a sad group of sick little bottomfeeders. All of you just won't drop dead trolls who, year after year, engage in nothing but the same flaming and baiting are secret deadbeats in your whiny ass offline lives in some way or other. When you're not deadbeat dads you're just plain deadbeats: economically, socially and - yeah - MORALLY too. Andrew is as much of a deadbeat as Meldon.
You're useless quibblers and excuse makers to all the people you know. Forever using copouts and trying to get substitute respect for your lives of underachieving, because you're a bunch of six figure fucking zer0s. You think no one's on to you? You thrive on being the errand boys, saints, secret Santas and suckers of women without men and on causing serious trouble for the men who are unfortunate enough to be in the lives of these floozy whores so that someone, somewhere, will pretend to accept you. You pay attention to issues and business just enough to throw people off for being unambitious, and then you go for the gold by posing as the guardians of order like little Dr. Phils. Ultimately some of you scumbuckets find your ways here, where you preach your self-hatred at other men who don't suffer from your pitiful complexes.
Fuck YOU. Every day of your lives that ticks by without being openly spit on by those same people is another day that you're not found out by those around you. One more milestone for you in your great slime trailed journeys to becoming one again with the great cosmic pile of useless shit that incarnated you. The one you must get back to and complete your existences. You're lives are shams.
Andrew Usher
> > No, actually, it's not funny at all that I got banned from their
> > forums and what
> > it proves.
>
> I didn't mean your post but the others. I'm sorry that happened to
> you Andrew. I own a forum and only kick off proselytizing feminists.
OK. Ironically some of them though I must be a feminist troll or a
woman (no woman would ever use logic so consistently as I).
> There's lots of men's forums though many have slowed in activity.
Why doesn't someone have a big list of them? That would be useful, at
least.
> That's happened in all areas with people moving more to the blog
> format which IMO is lame in some respects but seems to have it's
> function.
Yeah. The biggest problem with blogs is that posts scroll off the
screen (literally or metaphorically) after a couple days at most, and
that's not long enough to have a decent conversation.
> > My wiki was an attempt to create (as much as I can) some place where
> > more of
> > us would talk to each other, as well as being a good thing in itself.
>
> You came to this game alittle late.
What do you mean by that?
By the way, something's wrong with the wiki site. I can no longer get
to any page by typing in its name, but only through the allpages list.
> This internet "social networking"
> is still quite new and who knows how it will shake out. I think the
> mailing list format will always be the primary venue for serious
> social and ideological exchange but not all folks want that.
By 'mailing list format', do you mean your forum? I know why you use
yahoo (it's free) but yahoo groups' format sucks.
Andrew Usher
Andrew Usher
> petty tyrants have no power here, no delete key or ban button,
> everyone's evaluated on their output
>
> blogs solve the same problem, and are much more flexible in format --
> a superb tool against Der Matriarchy
I normally ignore people that post in all lower case but I have to
correct you here. Blogs are useful, but primarily for individuals to
post their thought; they are not a substitute for discussion forums.
Otherwise I agree with your post (except for using all lower case! -
which is entirely obnoxious).
Andrew Usher
Andrew Usher
running
throughout is the hateful attitude that the posters 'in power' have
expressed
toward me. I really think there are only a few people behind it, and
that the
rest fall in line as in ordinary cases of bullying. You really have
to
suspend logic to take much of their stuff seriously. They think that
they can
accuse me of anything and it should stick, and I think in many cases
they're
projecting their own behavior.
I must single out three posters in particular: Gonzman, who is nothing
but a
bully; Mr. X, a typical dogmatic libertarian (though at least he
believes in
free speech and not in trying to censor me); and Askance, a
'politically
correct' type who uses the same tactics familiar from the left, such
as
labeling ideas 'bigotry' and generally doing anything to avoid honest
engagement.
In a way, Askance's modus operandi is far worse, by being more
insidious.
Every neutral observer can see that there's something wrong with
Gonzman's
behavior, and every non-libertarian can see that there's something
very wrong
with Mr. X's 'reasoning', but it's hard of the average person to see
what's
wrong with Askance's garbage. That's why his method is used by
mainstream
leftists.
Selected examples:
http://standyourground.com/forums/index.php?topic=17758.30 - Yes, I
get
called a 'liar and fake' for trying to be honest. And apparently if I
don't
recall where I said something, I didn't say it and people can freely
bash me
for it
http://standyourground.com/forums/index.php?topic=17774.0 - Another
poster
recognises that I'm being abused, and of course gets censured for it
http://standyourground.com/forums/index.php?topic=17764.0 - More anti-
circ
nonsense. I give them what they asked for and they use to to further
bash me
http://standyourground.com/forums/index.php?topic=17757.0 - Askance
vigorously complains about my well-written essay, but refuses to point
out
anything wrong with it
http://standyourground.com/forums/index.php?topic=17741.15 - Askance
claims
the social science are of very low quality, though elsewhere he
demands that
I produce references therefrom
http://standyourground.com/forums/index.php?topic=17657.30 - Mr. X
caught
using a deceptive argument blames me
http://standyourground.com/forums/index.php?topic=17662.0 - Various
posters
ignore the original topic in order to bash me
http://standyourground.com/forums/index.php?topic=17602.0 - You have
to read
it to believe it. They not only disagree with me but deny that my
position
could be legitimate at all. Apparently no one could possibly believe
that
this couple were simply in a normal romantic/sexual relationship!
http://standyourground.com/forums/index.php?topic=17612.0 - Gonz and
the
libertarians dodge the real issue of what we should do with 'fuck-ups'
if
we're not going to have them work
http://standyourground.com/forums/index.php?topic=17597.0 - Another
poster
recognises the unfairness of my treatment and of course gets run off
too
http://standyourground.com/forums/index.php?topic=17532.0 - Triple
jackpot!
Gonz, Mr. X, and Askance all demonstrating that they don't understand
logic
or are willing to misuse logic aganist me
http://standyourground.com/forums/index.php?topic=17501.0 - I try to
post on
something serious, and well ... it's clear that they have double
standards.
Anything from an anti-circ source is considered truth, and yet they
refuse to
even read the Wikipedia article on circumcision, considering that it's
is
irredeemably biased toward circumcision.
http://standyourground.com/forums/index.php?topic=17505.0 - Oh my god!
I'm
hideous for believing that CPS problems might be systemic!
Andrew Usher
ray ray
> On Jul 5, 1:35 pm, ray ray <remarks...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > petty tyrants have no power here, no delete key or ban button,
> > everyone's evaluated on their output
>
> > blogs solve the same problem, and are much more flexible in format --
> > a superb tool against Der Matriarchy
>
> I normally ignore people that post in all lower case but I have to
> correct you here. Blogs are useful, but primarily for individuals to
> post their thought; they are not a substitute for discussion forums.
>
> Otherwise I agree with your post
well if andrew usher agrees, the world can rest easy
(except for using all lower case! -
> which is entirely obnoxious).
>
that's pretty control-freekie right there, andrew!
sure you didnt fit in at SYG? :O)
ray ray
> get
> called a 'liar and fake' for trying to be honest. And apparently if I
> don't
> recall where I said something, I didn't say it and people can freely
> bash me
> for it
>
> poster
> recognises that I'm being abused, and of course gets censured for it
>
> circ
> nonsense. I give them what they asked for and they use to to further
> bash me
>
> vigorously complains about my well-written essay, but refuses to point
> out
> anything wrong with it
>
> claims
> the social science are of very low quality, though elsewhere he
> demands that
> I produce references therefrom
>
> caught
> using a deceptive argument blames me
>
> posters
> ignore the original topic in order to bash me
>
> to read
> it to believe it. They not only disagree with me but deny that my
> position
> could be legitimate at all. Apparently no one could possibly believe
> that
> this couple were simply in a normal romantic/sexual relationship!
>
> the
> libertarians dodge the real issue of what we should do with 'fuck-ups'
> if
> we're not going to have them work
>
> poster
> recognises the unfairness of my treatment and of course gets run off
> too
>
> jackpot!
> Gonz, Mr. X, and Askance all demonstrating that they don't understand
> logic
> or are willing to misuse logic aganist me
>
> post on
> something serious, and well ... it's clear that they have double
> standards.
> Anything from an anti-circ source is considered truth, and yet they
> refuse to
> even read the Wikipedia article on circumcision, considering that it's
> is
> irredeemably biased toward circumcision.
>
> I'm
> hideous for believing that CPS problems might be systemic!
>
> Andrew Usher
sorry no time for All That anymore, but thanks for being thorough
Andrew Usher
> > Otherwise I agree with your post
>
> well if andrew usher agrees, the world can rest easy
I don't know why the sarcasm here.
> (except for using all lower case! -
>
> > which is entirely obnoxious).
>
> that's pretty control-freekie right there, andrew!
No it isn't. The conventions of English writing are not arbitary, they
exist to make it easier to read (part of which is simply being
consistent). Unless you have a disability that makes it hard to type,
not using capitalisation, punctuation, etc. correctly simply indicates
that you don't care for your readers.
> sure you didnt fit in at SYG? :O)
Well, I'm not trying to ban you or personally attack you, so I'd say
no.
Andrew Usher
ray ray
> On Jul 5, 8:05 pm, ray ray <remarks...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > Otherwise I agree with your post
>
> > well if andrew usher agrees, the world can rest easy
>
> I don't know why the sarcasm here.
>
> > (except for using all lower case! -
>
> > > which is entirely obnoxious).
>
> > that's pretty control-freekie right there, andrew!
>
> No it isn't. The conventions of English writing are not arbitary, they
> exist to make it easier to read (part of which is simply being
> consistent). Unless you have a disability that makes it hard to type,
> not using capitalisation, punctuation, etc. correctly simply indicates
> that you don't care for your readers.
depends on them
>
> > sure you didnt fit in at SYG? :O)
>
> Well, I'm not trying to ban you or personally attack you, so I'd say
> no.
>
> Andrew Usher
fair enough
Masculist
> On Jul 6, 5:36 pm, Andrew Usher <k_over_hb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jul 5, 8:05 pm, ray ray <remarks...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Otherwise I agree with your post
>
> > > well if andrew usher agrees, the world can rest easy
>
> > I don't know why the sarcasm here.
>
> > > (except for using all lower case! -
>
> > > > which is entirely obnoxious).
>
> > > that's pretty control-freekie right there, andrew!
>
> > No it isn't. The conventions of English writing are not arbitary, they
> > exist to make it easier to read (part of which is simply being
> > consistent). Unless you have a disability that makes it hard to type,
> > not using capitalisation, punctuation, etc. correctly simply indicates
> > that you don't care for your readers.
>
> depends on them
If they are e e cummings fans.
Tom
Moderator
Please explain why we welcome enforcement?
Jack
> not using capitalisation, punctuation, etc. correctly simply indicates
> that you don't care for your readers.
No it doesn't.
Dustbin
inconsistent mess that we don't know what is
right and what is wrong.
D
--
=======================
Women have spent the last
30 years proving that men
have been right for the
last 30 centuries.
=======================
Jack
> Jack wrote:
> >> Unless you have a disability that makes it hard to type,
> >> not using capitalisation, punctuation, etc. correctly simply indicates
> >> that you don't care for your readers.
>
> > No it doesn't.
>
> Maybe the English language is such an illogical
> inconsistent mess that we don't know what is
> right and what is wrong.
>
> D
Nothing is wrong if you're willing to accept the results.
David Z
news:B0Gam.76710$TZ2....@newsfe13.ams2...
> Jack wrote:
>>> Unless you have a disability that makes it hard to type,
>>> not using capitalisation, punctuation, etc. correctly simply indicates
>>> that you don't care for your readers.
>>
>> No it doesn't.
> Maybe the English language is such an illogical inconsistent mess that we
> don't know what is right and what is wrong.
You hit the nail on the head. Jack Ass has a big problem telling right from
wrong.