|
jrodefeld posted:But, if anyone bans me again for an illegitimate reason and wants me to pay for the privilege of posting again, I won't do so. For someone so in love with market forces, you should probably understand the way "incentives" work to modify behavior.
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 21:37 |
|
|
Seriously though jrod, we can't control the mods and wouldn't want to anyway. This thread is for discussing libertarianism. Do you have any words on that topic you'd like to share? Do you have far too many words on that topic you'd like to share? Please do so!
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:28
|
|
|
Would you like to share your neg hole????
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
Sometimes dreams do come true! The catholic in me feels that the shitstorm in my native Brazil is somehow retribution for how much I enjoyed the Trump debacle. But now my original fix of political amusement returns from the grave, like Jesus did to show his apostles the nail marks on his palms, before loving off to Libertopia (Chilean or Eastern European branch, depending on the bitcoin exchange rate). No chargebacks, Jrod. I thought ibertarians considered that a feature. I've been banned for writing about Democratic party issues in the USpol thread; it wasn't a Hillary Vs. Bernie post per se, but it fed into the shitstorm that leaks there every few days, so out to pasture I was. Plenty of other berniacs and HillPeeps also got stomped in the same batch, so it was fair. Also, as a med student, I consider it both hilarious and monstrous how broken your mindset is. "That guy sold me sugar pills saying they were cancer medication! I want a refund and compensation!" "Sorry, fellow entrepreneur-to-be! He never openly disclaimed it -wasn't- sugar, or actually low-grade fructose. And it's not been proven that fructose does NOT treat cancer. Inform yourself better next time." ---- "I got banned from a comedy forum that is proudly infamous of banning people for subjective reasons, after deliberately laving the place there made just for me where I routinely indulged for years in behavior that would have gotten be kicked out in any other thread!" "My sweet lamb of light, this aggression shall not stand. Even joining forces with anathema, vile institutions such as Big Government Regulations and Consumer Protections is acceptable to defend your holy tenner. It is needed for its natural purpose, of course: funding some Dark Enlightenment kickstarter somewhere!"
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
Caros posted:Remember all those times you defended the rights of property owners to discriminate whenever they wanted for whatever reason they want? It loving sucks doesn't it? Literally the most hilarious part of this. "Property owners have the unfettered right to set the terms for access to their property except when it costs me $10 of my vast income from selling bootleg movies!!  "eta oh my loving god: jrodefeld posted:I'll let it slide this time, but I won't be so generous if this happens yet again. 
GunnerJ fucked around with this message at 16:05 on May 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 15:59
|
|
|
jrodefeld posted:I will decide that this forum is absolutely inhospitable to non-leftist and libertarian opinions. I hope you are better than that. I was never banned for being a libertarian. Maybe because I didn't post impenetrable walls of nonsense. And because I wasn't an impenetrable jerk. jrodefeld posted:Fraud is property theft. Property theft is opposed by all libertarians. Actually I've known a couple who would not term fraud as property theft. Caveat emptor, a man's reputation is all he has, etc. To have a law against fraud is to have a law against freedom of speech, in a man's own store! How could that be allowed? jrodefeld posted:I'll let it slide this time, but I won't be so generous if this happens yet again. You don't understand what fraud is if you think this behavior is acceptable. Because the best thing to do when you've just paid $10 to someone is threaten them with legal action. Also, if that truly was money to burn, then why do you care if it was wasted?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 16:07
|
|
|
We laugh now, but when Jrodefeld owns The Interent after captaining the industry at it hard enough we'll be the ones having to repay 10 Jrod Coins to be able to post in the forums again.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 16:08
|
|
|
jrodefeld posted:What's good Caros! If I can participate in a particular thread without concern for getting banned for sharing my opinion, then great. The problem is that the last time I was put on probation, I was confining my discussion to a particular thread and was put on probation for six weeks for the completely incoherent charge of "arguing in bad faith". I respectfully asked the moderators to explain WHY I was put on probation and they refused. On returning to this site, I felt like discussing Climate Change so I posted a single reply to the Climate Change thread and was immediately banned for doing so. The more reasonable approach for the moderators in my view would be to simply say "hey, move this discussion to a particular thread because we don't want this thread being taken over by you". I'd have done so immediately.  I cannot say it any more clearly than this. This is in your Rap Sheet as a result of your ban in 2013. It unequivocally states why the mods chose to ban you last time, and suggests exactly what will happen if you come back to the forums and post an absurdly long rant about libertarianism. Your most recent post quotes this exact thing as the reasoning that you got banned in the environmental thread. I honestly have to ask, what did you expect would happen based on previous experience with these forums? Do you have the feeling that the mods are especially generous and open minded when you go into a random thread to poo poo all over it? You want to talk about libertarianism, you do it in the libertarian thread. If I want to talk about Metal Gear Solid I don't do it in the pokemon thread, and if I want to talk about Gundam I don't do it in FYAD. And before you argue it, no, you weren't there to talk about climate change. You were there specifically to talk about libertarianism as it pertains to climate change, which is something that should go in the loving libertarian thread. If a scientologist went into the climate change thread and started talking about how climate change wasn't real and hey, also, here is the scientology solutions for climate change he'd get his rear end banned the same way you did. You are not a special unique snowflake my friend. The mods are not your mother, they are not your babysitter. You registered on these forums nearly four years ago. By now you are a big boy and if you actually bothered to learn anything about the community you are constantly barging in on you would know that what you are doing is unacceptable. From the mod's point of view what you are doing is low effort trolling and you have been warned and/or censured something like twelve times before this. If you haven't figured it out by now they aren't going to default to treating you with baby gloves. Which finally brings me back to one of the general conduct rules of the forums: Lurk before posting! The whole point of this rule is for people who are new to the forums to stop and think before they poo poo up someone's thread and get themselves banned. You have been here for four loving years and you still haven't figured out that creating what amounts to a 'Debate me, Jrodefeld, personally" thread and then abandoning it will get you probated. That isn't a fault of the mods, that is a fault of you. I have been probated something like five times: Once for disobeying a mod instruction to shut the gently caress up, twice for loving up with forum emoticons, once for a bad Post/Avatar joke and once for a slap fight involving G-reco (which sucks). Only a single one of those issues is actually against any real forum rules, and I often see people doing exactly what i was probated for and getting nothing but laughs as a result. The twist is that I wasn't being amusing when I did it I was being annoying and the mods wisely understood that and probated me for being a retard. Pro-Tip: Don't be a retard and they won't probate you. quote:Frankly, I don't really care to spend much more time bitching about the moderators. Recent behavior on their part in conjunction with their unwillingness to respond to emails and questions left me with the conclusion that I was being targeted for my political views and little else. I'm honestly surprised they haven't banned you again for being annoying to them. They can do that btw. Shut up, stop being a whiny baby and if you want to talk about libertarianism then talk about it in the libertarian thread. And no you aren't being targeted for your political views you whiny baby. You are begin probated and banned because you are loving annoying and the only thing you ever talk about is libertarianism, which is fine in the libertarian thread but is lovely when you go literally anywhere else. quote:If you want to start another thread, fine. You might not know this, but I am actually quite interested in the responses I get to my posts. Honestly I've looked, but I haven't found a comparable alternative message board as far as leftist political debate is concerned. I like to share my opinions and hear responses and criticisms by either left-wing or conservative critics. I don't want to be living in a bubble surrounded by self-reinforcing political viewpoints. I'd rather subject my views to scrutiny. Again with the goddamned leftist thing.  Actually, you know one thing that makes me sad? You've been here for four years and you've never once used many of our fancy forum emoticons. That is  quote:I'll probably post again this evening or later. I've got a busy day so I won't be able to get into a lengthy discussion as of now. If you can get the moderators to leave me the hell alone as long as I agree to post my opinions in a designated thread, that would be appreciated. I've tried, but they don't seem to want to respond to my requests. I'm still waiting to hear back from AA (Hey look maybe they aren't just singling you out!) but be sure to actually look before you post because there might be a shiny new libertarian thread with your name on it. Speaking of which, what should we call the Libertarian Thread 2: Electric Boogaloo?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 17:28
|
|
|
Libertarianism: We Just Want Child Workers And Slaves, Is That So Wrong?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 17:37
|
|
|
jrodefeld posted:What's good Caros! If I can participate in a particular thread without concern for getting banned for sharing my opinion, then great. The problem is that the last time I was put on probation, I was confining my discussion to a particular thread and was put on probation for six weeks for the completely incoherent charge of "arguing in bad faith". I respectfully asked the moderators to explain WHY I was put on probation and they refused. On returning to this site, I felt like discussing Climate Change so I posted a single reply to the Climate Change thread and was immediately banned for doing so. The more reasonable approach for the moderators in my view would be to simply say "hey, move this discussion to a particular thread because we don't want this thread being taken over by you". I'd have done so immediately. you're a terrible spokesman for your philosophy, a terrible communicator because you prefer to bludgeon people with unscalable cliffs of boring as gently caress prose, and you are apparently delusional as well for getting banned repeatedly for the same thing and blaming other people for your own obvious mistakes. nobody wants to debate you sincerely, people just want to make fun of you for being a giant nerdy crybaby and you continue to let them for unknown reasons that indicate nothing good about your character offline boner confessor fucked around with this message at 17:40 on May 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 17:37
|
|
|
Mod fiat is rule 1. I know the f word is a terrible one but it's true.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 17:40
|
|
|
Caros posted:Speaking of which, what should we call the Libertarian Thread 2: Electric Boogaloo?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
Caros posted:
Libertarians: Republicans Feeling Their Johnsons on Fox News Libertarians: Feeling our Johnsons together Libertarians 2016.5: McAfee Premier Edition Libertarians: Or Why I'm Voting for Donald Trump edit: lol word filter for the current Republican Presidential Candidate
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 17:55
|
|
|
Libertarians: Melon Fuckers at Malhuer
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
Libertarians: The Only Thread Jrod Can Post In Because anything less and Jrod is going to get himself banned too quickly.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 18:02
|
|
|
Libertarians Thread: SA Fraud Syndicate DRO HQ
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
Libertarian Thread: Jrode is a Coward Who Won't Fight Dickeye
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 18:18
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:Libertarian Thread: Jrode is a Coward Who Won't Fight Dickeye It's shameful that we can get Smash Mouth to eat the eggs, but can't get Jrod to fight Dickeye. 
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:Libertarian Thread: Jrode is a Coward Who Won't Fight Dickeye This got my vote. Gotta keep people informed.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 18:24
|
|
|
Jamram punch the Dickie
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 18:29
|
|
|
Literally any sentence from this Hoppe quote:quote:The current situation in the United States and in Western Europe has nothing whatsoever to do with “free” immigration. It is forced integration, plain and simple, and forced integration is the predictable outcome of democratic one-man-one-vote rule. Abolishing forced integration requires the de-democratization of society and ultimately the abolition of democracy. More specifically, the power to admit or exclude should be stripped from the hands of the central government and reassigned to the states, provinces, cities, towns, villages, residential districts, and ultimately to private property owners and their voluntary associations. The means to achieve this goal are decentralization and secession (both inherently undemocratic, and antimajoritarian). One would be well on the way toward a restoration of the freedom of association and exclusion as is implied in the idea and institution of private property, and much of the social strife currently caused by forced integration would disappear, if only towns and villages could and would do what they did as a matter of course until well into the nineteenth century in Europe and the United States: to post signs regarding entrance requirements to the town, and once in town for entering specific pieces of property (no beggars, bums, or homeless, but also no Moslems, Hindus, Jews, Catholics, etc.); to expel as trespassers those who do not fulfill these requirements... true libertarians cannot emphasize enough... that the restoration of private property rights and laissez-faire economics implies a sharp and drastic increase in social “discrimination” and will swiftly eliminate most if not all of the multi-cultural-egalitarian life style experiments so close to the heart of left libertarians.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 18:32
|
|
|
How prominent, exactly, is Hoppe among libertarian thinkers relative to Mises, Hayek, Friedman, and Rothbard? Because if one of your leading lights flat-out admits that he's a libertarian because he believes libertarianism will lead to feudal enclaves, that's absolutely damning.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
Libertarians Thread: Abandon all hope, ye with low time preference.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 18:48
|
|
|
Generally speaking libertarians seem to be in a huge rush to distance themselves from HHH whenever his "peculiarities" are brought up. "What, this guy? Never heard of him." It's pretty hard to get a bead on who really counts because who counts seems to depend on whether they are saying anything completely beyond the pale without any coding/dog-whistles. At that point it's a matter of going through the tedium of seeing whether the individual disclaiming someone has ever quoted that someone approvingly. Alternately, showing how these hideous opinions flow from core libertarian principles is even worse imo.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 18:49
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:How prominent, exactly, is Hoppe among libertarian thinkers relative to Mises, Hayek, Friedman, and Rothbard? Because if one of your leading lights flat-out admits that he's a libertarian because he believes libertarianism will lead to feudal enclaves, that's absolutely damning. Not if you follow that with a wordy explanation of why feudal enclaves are actually the ultimate form of freedom.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 18:50
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Not if you follow that with a wordy explanation of why feudal enclaves are actually the ultimate form of freedom. "I want to speak briefly about the tyrant Abraham Lincoln and the War of Northern Aggression..."
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 18:51
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:How prominent, exactly, is Hoppe among libertarian thinkers relative to Mises, Hayek, Friedman, and Rothbard? Because if one of your leading lights flat-out admits that he's a libertarian because he believes libertarianism will lead to feudal enclaves, that's absolutely damning. I'd say he's quite possibly the most prominent living ancap. Murray Rothbard heaped praise on him, mises.org and Lew Rockwell publish his articles and shill for his books on the regular, and so on. He doesn't have the institutional backing of your Hayek/Friedman "minarchist" types, but among the internet set he's pretty huge. Though it's difficult to say for sure, because of this: GunnerJ posted:Generally speaking libertarians seem to be in a huge rush to distance themselves from HHH whenever his "peculiarities" are brought up. "What, this guy? Never heard of him." It's pretty hard to get a bead on who really counts because who counts seems to depend on whether they are saying anything completely beyond the pale without any coding/dog-whistles. At that point it's a matter of going through the tedium of seeing whether the individual disclaiming someone has ever quoted that someone approvingly.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 18:54
|
|
|
Oh, great. 60 replies since I last checked, probably some dumb forums slapfight and/or fishmech derailing tho-jrodefeld posted:
 Caros posted:Speaking of which, what should we call the Libertarian Thread 2: Electric Boogaloo? Libertarianism: Liars, Guns, and Money.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 19:04
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:It's shameful that we can get Smash Mouth to eat the eggs, but can't get Jrod to fight Dickeye. The whole "if you said that to me irl I would fight you so I bet you wouldn't" thing was hilarious to me because I am in fact exactly the dude who will say it to your face because you're too much of a basic rear end bitchmade chickenshit coward to do anything about it And if you do I have been punched many times and it will not phase me
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 19:09
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:Libertarianism: Liars, Guns, and Money. This! Also good to know that physically attacking someone for saying something you don't like is kosher with the NAP. I guess insulting someone counts as initiating force and punching them is a reaction in proportional self-defense. eta: Oh, poo poo, that's good too... \/\/\/\/
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 19:15
|
|
|
Libertarian Thread - Endorse the Non-Aggression Principle or I will fight you
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 19:15
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:This! NAP, likely virtually all other libertarian principles, exists solely to act as a paper-thin justification why they get to have/do whatever they want, and no one is allowed to stop or restrict them. 
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 19:17
|
|
|
Libertarian Thread: NAP For All But Me
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 19:22
|
|
|
Libertarian Thread - Freedom is a Commodity
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 19:22
|
|
|
Libertarian Thread - Non-Agression Pride, Worldwide
Stinky_Pete fucked around with this message at 19:39 on May 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 19:27
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:NAP, likely virtually all other libertarian principles, exists solely to act as a paper-thin justification why they get to have/do whatever they want, and no one is allowed to stop or restrict them. 
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 19:37
|
|
|
Jrod is sort of pathetic in that he has not realized that he is an exhibit at the internet moron zoo, and keeps trying to escape the enclosure. Unlike with capbybaras the only choice is to put him down when he does. 
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
Libertarians: All regulated bodies are void, unless for charge backs.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 21:06
|
|
|
Libertarians: From the people who brought you "Slavery is good!"
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 21:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 21:37 |
|
|
Capybaras are cool animals.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 21:19
|
|