Author
|
Topic: to mo enzyme: re your bizarre behaviour (Read 6368 times) |
|
Mermaid
Archon
Posts: 770
Reputation: 8.45
Rate Mermaid
Bite me!
|
 |
Re:to mo enzyme: re your bizarre behaviour
« Reply #15 on: 2010-02-19 16:41:28 » |
 |
*any* mention of alan turing's sexuality goes against everything i believe in...when i say that i dont care about one's sexuality, i really do mean it.
when i say that i do not judge anyone on the basis of their sexual preference, i really do mean it.
when i say that i dont care if a fellow citizen of this cold blue rock is gay, i really do mean it. i also dont care if he/she/it is hetero, bi or asexual.
i have no judgement. no opinion. no interest in the personal choices people make as long as it doesnt do harm to me or to my planet.
i dont wish to treat a personal hero and a potential cov saint as a victim. i dont think the british govt's dubious laws about homosexuality and it's legality has anything to do with virian sainthood. there have been homosexuals before wilde and turing in england. that loopy little law was used as a weapon against people by others who had other agendas against the victims of the anti-homosexuality law.
i also do not wish to see cov take *any* position for or against personal choices people make..as members or saints. when will it stop? where will it stop? what is going to be our position against racism, sexism, ageism...rapists and paedophiles...fetishists, sadists and masochists...about those who like to sniff glue, shoes and armpits...about butchers, bakers and candlestickmakers?
what if i support the official stand of cov re homosexuality, but am repelled by the cov tolerance of..say..i dont know..men who like to fantasise about rape. what would that make me?
just asking.
p.s. i havent voted *yes* on turing's sainthood because you insist on not unlocking the thread to clarify and resolve why some of us do not wish to taint turing's sainthood with voyeuristic peeks into his personal life and choices. i havent voted because of you and the issues you raised..because i respect alan turing and he is a personal hero.
Quote from: MoEnzyme on 2010-02-19 15:53:59
Quote from: Hermit on 2010-02-19 14:21:22 His faculties apparently in a fragile state, Mo Enzyme elected to assign me a reputation of 1. I have reciprocated to reduce his influence.
On a point of order, as far as the voting on Turing is concerned, not having finalized the current beautification process and not having established a wikipage before the vote was established I am not sure that the result changes anything, although it does confirm that Turing is much admired. It may be that those advocating him for beatitude ought to look at the links to the wiki posted by me in the Saint Alan Turing thread before MoEnzyme had a brainstorm, deleted all his posts on that thread, and locked the thread.
|
For Hypatia who had an extremely small amount of source material a wikipage made a lot of sense, for interpretation as well as informational purposes. For Alan Turing, on the other hand there is abundant material very readily available on the Internet. A wikipage would only be redundant and pointless. We all know who Alan Turing was and he needs no interpretation - if anyone is unfamiliar its very easy research. He's much more like Darwin in that regard, in fact even more so. The only reason I considered a wikipage on Turing was because you suggested it; at the time you suggested it sounded like a simple if unnecessary task and so for the sake of consensus I went along at the time. The only purpose creating wiki at this point would serve would be for you to delay the process, and continue your obsessive filibuster about whether or not Alan Turing is a "gay icon" - which apparently you've decided would disqualify Alan Turing for sainthood if in fact he were. That kind of thinking and behavior rates a "1" on its merits and as long as you continue, that's the rating you will receive from me.
Apparently deciding things on the merits is beyond your current capacity. Turing can't be a Saint - not because he doesn't reflect our values in the CoV - but because the citizens of the US are homophobic; Mo deserves a "1" because he gave you a "1" and you want to retaliate. On the merits you continue to display moronic reasoning . . . not only that, you seem unashamed to publicly share that with others and frankly I find it embarrassing to share the same conversations with you because of it. I know you are capable of better; Joe Dees is capable of better too, but somewhere along the line he took leave of his better senses and never returned. I hope you make it back one day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MoEnzyme
Acolyte
Gender: 
Posts: 2256
Reputation: 4.69
Rate MoEnzyme
infidel lab animal
|
|
Re:to mo enzyme: re your bizarre behaviour
« Reply #16 on: 2010-02-19 16:50:19 » |
|
Mermaid quoted an unedited version of my previous post. I should probably do a better job of finishing before I hit the "post" button. Whether I agree with her or not, I think her response makes sense with my current version as well.
Mermaid, I felt that a simple up or down vote bypassed all these issues and that a wikipage is unnecessary and would only serve to allow Hermit more public space to obsess about Alan Turing's homosexuality. Its the same reason I'm not going to open that particular discussion thread again. Even though Hermit has decided that Alan Turing is a "gay icon", people can have many different opinions about homosexuality and still agree on Alan Turing as a saint. Considering the historical circumstances of his death re: his trial, chemical castration, and subsequent suicide I think it would probably be difficult to have an extensive discussion about his life without at least addressing that much, but it certainly doesn't have to imply anything more.
-Mo
Final edit of my previous message to Hermit:
Quote:Quote from: Hermit on Today at 13:21:22
His faculties apparently in a fragile state, Mo Enzyme elected to assign me a reputation of 1. I have reciprocated to reduce his influence.
On a point of order, as far as the voting on Turing is concerned, not having finalized the current beautification process and not having established a wikipage before the vote was established I am not sure that the result changes anything, although it does confirm that Turing is much admired. It may be that those advocating him for beatitude ought to look at the links to the wiki posted by me in the Saint Alan Turing thread before MoEnzyme had a brainstorm, deleted all his posts on that thread, and locked the thread. |
Hermit,
For Hypatia who had an extremely small amount of source material a wikipage made a lot of sense, for interpretation as well as informational purposes. For Alan Turing, on the other hand there is abundant material very readily available on the Internet. A wikipage would only be redundant and pointless. We all know who Alan Turing was and he needs no interpretation - if anyone is unfamiliar its very easy research. He's much more like Darwin in that regard, in fact even more so. The only reason I considered a wikipage on Turing was because you suggested it; at the time you suggested it sounded like a simple if unnecessary task and so for the sake of consensus I went along at the time. The only purpose creating wiki at this point would serve would be for you to delay the process, and continue your obsessive filibuster about whether or not Alan Turing is a "gay icon" - which apparently you've decided would disqualify Alan Turing for sainthood if in fact he were.
That kind of thinking and behavior, rates a "1" on its merits, doubly so given this latest lack of discretion you display. As long as you continue, that's the rating you will receive from me, and I share that only because you publicly whined about it. I normally don't advertise my Meridion ratings of other people on the BBS mostly because they are available to other Meridion participants if they care, because I change them somewhat from time to time, and of course because normally unless someone joins the system an individual's rating of someone else isn't available to the public at large . . . unless of course we start advertising them on the BBS as you have now chosen to do.
Apparently deciding things on the merits is beyond your current capacity. Turing can't be a Saint - not because he doesn't reflect our values in the CoV - but because the citizens of the US are homophobic; Mo deserves a "1" because he gave you a "1" (however quietly) and you want to retaliate and publicly brag about it. On the merits you continue to display moronic reasoning . . . not only that, you seem unashamed to publicly share that with others and frankly I find it embarrassing to share the same conversations with you because of it. I know you are capable of better; Joe Dees is capable of better too, but somewhere along the line he took leave of his better senses and never returned. I hope you make it back one day.
|
I will fight your gods for food,
Mo Enzyme
(consolidation of handles: Jake Sapiens; memelab; logicnazi; Loki; Every1Hz; and Shadow)
|
|
|
Mermaid
Archon
Posts: 770
Reputation: 8.45
Rate Mermaid
Bite me!
|
|
Re:to mo enzyme: re your bizarre behaviour
« Reply #17 on: 2010-02-19 19:50:54 » |
|
Quote from: MoEnzyme on 2010-02-19 16:50:19 Mermaid, I felt that a simple up or down vote bypassed all these issues and that a wikipage is unnecessary and would only serve to allow Hermit more public space to obsess about Alan Turing's homosexuality. Its the same reason I'm not going to open that particular discussion thread again. Even though Hermit has decided that Alan Turing is a "gay icon", people can have many different opinions about homosexuality and still agree on Alan Turing as a saint. Considering the historical circumstances of his death re: his trial, chemical castration, and subsequent suicide I think it would probably be difficult to have an extensive discussion about his life without at least addressing that much, but it certainly doesn't have to imply anything more.
-Mo |
you are such a fucking liar. is this why you deleted all your posts so there is no evidence of your sneaky behaviour. i have had many many MANY disagreements with hermit, but the one thing he isnt is homophobic. nor is he 'obsessed' with turing's homosexuality. what the fuck is wrong with you? earlier i thought that you were in some sort of unfortunate mental state that is causing your erratic behaviour...clearly, this is all premeditated.
you opened the whole fucking can of worms about cov now 'being forced to take a position on homosexuality' with turing's nomination.
if you admit that you made a mistake by dragging in turing's homosexuality due to your crass voyeurism into the tragic life of one of science's greatest contributors...AND if you unlock the turing thread, perhaps 'a simple up and down vote' is possible.
you have poisoned and tainted everything by bringing in turing's homosexuality and further muddied any credibility you had left by deleting all your posts thereby destroying evidence of your own obsessions re turing's homosexuality.
admit. unlock. if you do, you will have redeemed yourself and i can cast a clear vote on a nomination that i support....that of alan turing as a virian saint for his invaluable contributions.
eta: i cannot understand..simply CAN.NOT understand..why you are so resistant to a wikipage for turing? why would you oppose the wikipage...first you delete your posts and lock up a thread that has contributions from other members. now you decide..on your own...that alan turing doesnt need a wikipage. the man's been dead for a while...he cna wait until there is a wikipage for him on virus before he is made a virian saint.
this isnt just 'bizzare behaviour'...you are just making up this shit as you go along..and for what? i dont get it. are you going to drop dead if turing gets a wikipage?
|
|
|
|
|
MoEnzyme
Acolyte
Gender:
Posts: 2256
Reputation: 4.69
Rate MoEnzyme
infidel lab animal
|
|
Re:to mo enzyme: re your bizarre behaviour
« Reply #18 on: 2010-02-19 20:03:59 » |
|
For the umpteenth fucking time . . . . . . . open your own f*****g thread. I don't know why you people think it has to be the thread I started. Do your own. Denounce me on it if you want. Call it all my fault. I don't give a shit. I'm not stopping you from having the same conversations over and over and over and over, just because I don't want to participate or share the same conversation space with Hermit on that topic anymore (and likely on any other topic given his latest lack of discretion). Call me a liar . . . I don't care, I'm just not going to get involved in the discussion anymore and given Hermit's attitude, I'm sorry I ever did. I'm never going to unlock that thread as long as its my decision to make, so please stop asking me. Start your own if its so important to you. Perhaps it really isn't.
-Mo
|
I will fight your gods for food,
Mo Enzyme
(consolidation of handles: Jake Sapiens; memelab; logicnazi; Loki; Every1Hz; and Shadow)
|
|
|
Mermaid
Archon
Posts: 770
Reputation: 8.45
Rate Mermaid
Bite me!
|
|
Re:to mo enzyme: re your bizarre behaviour
« Reply #19 on: 2010-02-19 20:06:57 » |
|
NO. we replied to your thread. you have no right to lock it. you can delete your words if you want..clearly, even you dont put a lot of stock on them. what gives you the right to make three virians look like fools when all they were doing is reply to YOUR FUCKING THREAD?
i am not asking you to unlocking the thread. did you ever hear me say "please"?
i am TELLING you to FUCKING UNLOCK THE THREAD.
Quote from: MoEnzyme on 2010-02-19 20:03:59
For the umpteenth fucking time . . . . . . . open your own f*****g thread. I don't know why you people think it has to be the thread I started. Do your own. Denounce me on it if you want. Call it all my fault. I don't give a shit. I'm not stopping you from having the same conversations over and over and over and over, just because I don't want to participate or share the same conversation space with Hermit on that topic anymore (and likely on any other topic given his latest lack of discretion). Call me a liar . . . I don't care, I'm just not going to get involved in the discussion anymore and given Hermit's attitude, I'm sorry I ever did. I'm never going to unlock that thread as long as its my decision to make, so please stop asking me. Start your own if its so important to you. Perhaps it really isn't.
-Mo
|
|
|
|
|
|
MoEnzyme
Acolyte
Gender:
Posts: 2256
Reputation: 4.69
Rate MoEnzyme
infidel lab animal
|
|
Re:to mo enzyme: re your bizarre behaviour
« Reply #20 on: 2010-02-19 20:14:13 » |
|
No
PS. the following appeared in Mermaid edit after my latest denial:
Quote:| eta: i cannot understand..simply CAN.NOT understand..why you are so resistant to a wikipage for turing? why would you oppose the wikipage...first you delete your posts and lock up a thread that has contributions from other members. now you decide..on your own...that alan turing doesnt need a wikipage. the man's been dead for a while...he cna wait until there is a wikipage for him on virus before he is made a virian saint. |
Do your own wikipage for Turing. You don't need me. I don't know why you feel you need me, I suppose I should feel flattered, but really you don't need me. I don't think a wikipage for Turing is necessary, but if you want one get busy. You don't need my permission.
Just as an afterthought since you and Hermit can't seem to stop whining about it, its interesting to me how neither of you currently seem capable of taking responsibility for things you claim are important. Somehow you both must sit around and blame me for your lack of initiative. Somehow Hermit has to blame his "no" vote on me. Stop whining and do something for yourselves for a change, and leave me out of it.
|
I will fight your gods for food,
Mo Enzyme
(consolidation of handles: Jake Sapiens; memelab; logicnazi; Loki; Every1Hz; and Shadow)
|
|
|
Hermit
Archon
Posts: 4287
Reputation: 8.94
Rate Hermit
Prime example of a practically perfect person
|
|
Re:to mo enzyme: re your bizarre behaviour
« Reply #21 on: 2010-02-20 02:40:51 » |
|
Why ever would I want to leave MoEnzyme out of it, even if he has tried to wipe up his mess like a guilty child? After all, it is incontrovertible that he deliberately introduced Turing's sexuality to the "Saint Allan Turing"thread, and claimed that this means that the CoV will have to "take a stance on homosexuality," has used totally unwarranted invective against others, has deliberately acted not only to cut short discussion and deleted his words making the responses almost worthless; and is even now prancing about like some queer sort of attorney attempting to use rhetorical contrivances in a futile attempt to convince the court that the steaming turd planted in the middle of the jury box has nothing to do with him, sneeringly asserting that people pointing out that they are responding to his strange behaviour are not taking responsibility for their own decisions.
Perhaps he could have succeeded in persuading people that this is the case, only, I think he has gone far too far in his campaign in ways that cannot be easily hidden. Not content with acting dishonestly in obliterating his messy trail and calling for David to eliminate the entire thread (something we didn't even do to Joe Dees), he rated me to a 1, and established alts on Meridion, apparently in an effort to further game the system before reporting the skewed voting results attained through these actions. Why he ever imagined that I would keep silent when he seemingly decided to use the Meridion system in a further attempt to nullify my voice while playing whatever games he has embraced, I cannot imagine; any more than I can understand why he should whine when his machinations are exposed to light. If we allow Meridion to be used this way, to silence dissent in the dark, without responding appropriately, it would effectively reduce its utility to near zero.
Which is why, contrary to MoEnzyme's poisonous words, I have not only acted to nullify his efforts, but have also exposed my actions to everyone and invite anyone with an interest to see what he has been playing at with Meridion and to join me in expressing dismay in what is currently transpiring on our forums.
|
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
|
|
|
Hermit
Archon
Posts: 4287
Reputation: 8.94
Rate Hermit
Prime example of a practically perfect person
|
|
Re:to mo enzyme: re your bizarre behaviour
« Reply #22 on: 2010-02-20 13:42:06 » |
|
This post is a comment and call to action on MoEnzyme based on Church of Virus BBS, General, Church Doctrine, Saint Alan Turing 1.1, 2010-02-20, MoEnzyme and copied below for the record.
In a further step to stifle discussion and leave his dishonest assertions standing alone, MoEnzyme has created another thread filled with assertions by him about others which is locked to prevent its demolition even as he asserts, "Yes, I locked it, and deleted my posts, effectively ending that particular conversation which was the point. I've never done that before, and I hope to never do it again." in another post where he has done exactly the same thing again. So much for reason..
It is largely pointless dealing with unsupported, specious, misleading and dishonest assertions in a different location. And make no mistake, MoEnzyme's ramblings are all of the above. For example, he uses the passive voice to assert that "we never got around to actually writing any wiki" without noting that in the beatification protocol we have to date, which is not optional although it could be amended, it is the proposer's responsibility to write a wiki entry; he elides his introduction of "taking a stance on homosexuality" with "I don't really see any way to avoid at least some mention of homosexuality and suicide" and then in the same post claims, "A simple up or down Meridion vote is appropriate" when it is absolutely not clear why he thinks that proposing Alan Turing as a Virian Saint is not now "forcing the CoV to take a stance on homosexuality" when he previously asserted that it did. After all, nobody reading that will necessarily find this post, and vice versa, while starting a new thread to respond to his would mean that he could merely delete his posts again, as he has already done, and again assert something to the effect of, "Hermit's quotes of me on there are technically accurate as far as they go, but taken out of context." without mentioning that he removed the context; or he could repeat things like, "pontificating about how enlightened he is about sexuality in general" while omitting to mention that he was the one who repeatedly accused me of being homophobic before deleting his posts and making mine appear like unprompted assertions.
What is not pointless is observing that this is not how the CoV has done business in the past, which is to support robust discussion and the contributions of all but the utterly delusional to discussions, with the community placing their own weight upon them. Now we have a new regime where a relatively highly-rated Virain vituperatively goes off the rails at multiple people, and repeatedly precludes discussion or even response; and further obliterates his poisonous rantings to prevent people from being able to form their own opinion of the worth, or lack of it, in his scribblings. Perhaps it is time to let MoEnzyme know what you think of his current actions with an appropriate note or adjustment of his Meridion rating. Or you could do the same for me of course. I only ask that you make up your own mind.
As a final point, as MoEnzymes retraction as sponsor leaves the proposal to make Turing a Saint of the CoV without a sponsor, meaning that the current vote to this effect is completely pointless without introduction of a new protocol prior to holding a vote on the issue or people will not know what they are voting for or against.
Copy of Church of Virus BBS, General, Church Doctrine, Saint Alan Turing 1.1, 2010-02-20, MoEnzyme
This is a locked thread with one post. To vote on Alan Turing as a saint go to http://www.churchofvirus.org/bbs/index.php?board=4;action=voteResults;idvote=95
Re: The demise of the first Saint Alan Turing thread.http://www.churchofvirus.org/bbs/index.php?board=4;action=display;threadid=43266
Yes, I locked it, and deleted my posts, effectively ending that particular conversation which was the point. I've never done that before, and I hope to never do it again. Its an extreme thing to do, no doubt, but it was the only way to effectively extract myself, my name, and my support from what has essentially become Hermit's project. Everyone else's posts are still there. As far as I can tell all of Hermit's quotes of me on there are technically accurate as far as they go, but taken out of context. (with the exception of where he allegedly quotes me saying, "becaus he is teh gey!" That was Hermit's pure fabrication.) Hermit's interpretation of me that I wished our wiki to be exclusively or even primarily about Turing's death and homosexuality was simply never true. Of course we never got around to actually writing any wiki.
Re: Alan Turing
My position regarding Turing sainthood is and always has been that his work and accomplishments more than sufficiently qualify him as a Saint. Hermit has somehow convinced himself that I have ulterior motives of championing Alan Turing because he's a "gay Icon". That's not true, however, considering the circumstances of his death, I don't really see any way to avoid at least some mention of homosexuality and suicide. That was mostly the gist of my side of the conversation up to the point I deleted my posts.
Re: wiki
We did a wikipage for Hypatia when we sainted her. Considering the very small quantity of source material on her and her relative obscurity compared to Darwin, a certain amount of information and interpretation seemed appropriate. Hermit drew up some procedures at that time which we used for Hypatia's circumstances. We never finalized these procedures for any future Saints, although Hermit has proposed them as such. Alan Turing's life is far better documented and recent than either Darwin or Hypatia and is easily researched on the Internet - as Blunderov commented Turing is the grandfather of the "intertubes". We all know who he is and he needs no interpretation. A simple up or down Meridion vote is appropriate.
Re: Hermit
On the second post of the thread Hermit suggested the same wikipage procedure for Turing, and since it seemed like a simple enough if unnecessary thing at the time I considered it for the sake of maintaining consensus with him, and so this was the context of the rest of the now-defunct thread. I didn't realize that Hermit would use the rest of the thread and the wiki procedure to develop his justifications for reversing his support for Alan Turing, pontificating about how enlightened he is about sexuality in general, and that this enlightenment would cause him to nobly oppose Alan Turing's sainthood because Turing is a "gay icon". Feeling rather duped by Hermit's strategy - he after all started out "You have no disagreement on Alan Turing from me, indeed, I have proposed him a saint before" - I removed my participation in Hermit's soliloquy by deleting my posts and locking the thread. If his is such a compelling treatise, he doesn't need me to sponsor or help him make it. All of his material is still there if he wants to paste it into his own efforts.
Re: Turing Discussion
I welcome anyone else to start a discussion thread on Turing, I'm just not going sponsor or participate in one until the vote is determined one way or another.
Re: unlocking the thread.
I've been asked numerous times by Hermit and Mermaid to unlock the thread and I've considered it a couple of times since, but you can stop wasting the effort. The BBS lists me as the creator of the thread, and so I'm not going to allow my name to be associated with any further discussion there. I'm never unlocking that thread.
|
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
|
|
|
MoEnzyme
Acolyte
Gender:
Posts: 2256
Reputation: 4.69
Rate MoEnzyme
infidel lab animal
|
|
Re:to mo enzyme: re your bizarre behaviour
« Reply #23 on: 2010-02-20 14:05:34 » |
|
Congratulations on your influence Hermit. Your call to action seems to be working. You managed to drive down the equity for Turing sainthood two days in a row despite the fact that we've had one more actual vote in favor of it. No one could accuse you of not know how to game the Meridion system.
|
I will fight your gods for food,
Mo Enzyme
(consolidation of handles: Jake Sapiens; memelab; logicnazi; Loki; Every1Hz; and Shadow)
|
|
|
Hermit
Archon
Posts: 4287
Reputation: 8.94
Rate Hermit
Prime example of a practically perfect person
|
|
Re:to mo enzyme: re your bizarre behaviour
« Reply #24 on: 2010-02-20 14:40:10 » |
|
[MoEnzyme] Congratulations on your influence Hermit. Your call to action seems to be working. You managed to drive down the equity for Turing sainthood two days in a row despite the fact that we've had one more actual vote in favor of it. No one could accuse you of not know how to game the Meridion system.
[Hermit] I don't need to play games. When you reduced my rating, it lowered the significance of the "no" vote. When I responded with a rating matching my opinion of your recent actions, it made your vote and your opinion of my reputation count less, which made my vote count more. As your reputation has continued to decline, so too the value of your vote has declined, as has the reputations and votes of those whom you support, so reducing the voted equity. That is the way Meridion works. It is documented in the Wiki. The fact that you don't understand this is no reason to accuse me of gaming the system.
|
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
|
|
|
MoEnzyme
Acolyte
Gender:
Posts: 2256
Reputation: 4.69
Rate MoEnzyme
infidel lab animal
|
|
Re:to mo enzyme: re your bizarre behaviour
« Reply #25 on: 2010-02-20 17:57:04 » |
|
Hermit:
Quote: <snip> . . . Turing would not make a suitable saint for the CoV due to the probability that many Americans would assume that he had been selected as a "gay icon" rather than as a memeticist and contributor to humanity.
Should the US become less sexually obsessed and less homophobic, or should the CoV appoint a number of other less easily misinterpreted thinkers as Saints prior to beautifying Turing, reducing the probability of miscommunication, I will probably change my stance. |
Hermit,
I've talked with Lucifer, and I've decided on leaving the Turing Sainthood vote open for at least 30 days from the time I opened it. Unlike the rest of us who rather seem intent on bickering, he went ahead and wrote some CoV wiki on Turing. Even though he didn't sponsor the vote, I have no objection to his writing or editing the wiki, although I don't count my vote for Turing Sainthood as an endorsement of any particular wiki. If you have some point of order issues about that, you may address those to him. I predict you will abandon this ridiculous thinking you display above and change your vote to "yes" by the time the vote closes. That should be plenty of time for you to come to your senses - at least one would hope. Be sure to have some fun in the meantime, but until then I don't think we have much left to say to each other.
Love,
-Mo
|
I will fight your gods for food,
Mo Enzyme
(consolidation of handles: Jake Sapiens; memelab; logicnazi; Loki; Every1Hz; and Shadow)
|
|
|
Hermit
Archon
Posts: 4287
Reputation: 8.94
Rate Hermit
Prime example of a practically perfect person
|
|
Re:to mo enzyme: re your bizarre behaviour
« Reply #26 on: 2010-02-20 19:15:56 » |
|
Please reduce your smugness level.
Lucifer's well written wiki entry paying tribute to one of the truly great thinkers of history quite properly does not mention Turing's sexual stance, not does it "force the CoV to take a stand on homosexuality" and was written, like most of the material related to the CoV, without your input.
The introduction of forcing "the CoV to take a stand on homosexuality" is your insanity, which you asserted represented considered American thought on the issue. If I had rejected your assertion as coming from a trolling asshat my response might have been different. It was only because I respected you as a member of the CoV in good standing, at least when you were not playing Loki, that I paid careful attention to your words. As stated repeatedly between your flaming strawmen, my issue is not with Alan Turing but with asshats who seek to use his memory for their own purposes. I will not play a part in such. Had I regarded you as a troll I wouldn't have thought about what you had to say other than to correct the more egregious flaws. As I said once before, you have forced me to come a long way in a very short amount of time. People you ignore can't do that.
So now the call is between your credibility and my voting Alan Turing as a Saint. I might do it if I thought that you or others would not be attempting to use this to your advantage at a later stage. Your recent blatant dishonesty leaves me without the requisite degree of trust. I am no longer persuaded that people I respect ought to be saints of the CoV. Despite my investment here, I'm no longer even sure I should be.
|
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
|
|
|
MoEnzyme
Acolyte
Gender:
Posts: 2256
Reputation: 4.69
Rate MoEnzyme
infidel lab animal
|
|
Re:to mo enzyme: re your bizarre behaviour
« Reply #27 on: 2010-02-20 19:28:48 » |
|
okay, I'll abandon a few percentage points of smugness. I figured a third party (not you or I) writing the wiki would change your mind, even though I don't really think its necessary at all. Still . . . nothing about Turing has changed, and I don't think the wiki will let us off the hook on these issues you fear (and which I don't). Perhaps this may keep them off of our official webpage, but what if Turing really is a "gay icon"? You may be entirely correct about the US attitudes as well, once again not an important issue in my book. Anyway. We still probably don't have much to say for a while, and I certainly don't want to push you back over the edge now that you are showing some progress. So, go play wiki games with Lucifer and feel better. We'll talk another day I'm sure.
ps - I never really wanted to write the wiki, but if I had to I would have written more of a summary story of his life, in which case I think it would have sounded strange to not at least mention the trial/castration/death issue and at least a few details of his family life or some appropriate hints of his life outside of work . . he was a compulsive runner, an amateur athlete of olympian quality, etc. Those are the things I'd want to know about my saint in addition to the brag rag stuff. Of course that's all out there on the Intertubes for anyone to read many times over, so its all the same to me. (which is also why I don't think we'll avoid these fearsome issues that concern you)
If I didn't know more about Lucifer, I'd say his Turing wiki reads more like a resume, less like a story about a saint and comes off a bit flat to me. It lacks that "battling great odds" component we talk about, even though I know those Turing stories are "out there" anyway. However as Artificial Intelligence and computer programming is more of Lucifer's life and personally knowing Lucifer it seems fitting and meaningful to me coming from him. Although its well written, its not something I would have written, but in a way that's why I like it. Its good wiki for our process and purposes, but leaves the story-telling up to us. I'm okay with that. Are you? It puts a lot more responsibility on you to deal with the "gay icon" problem you cite.
|
I will fight your gods for food,
Mo Enzyme
(consolidation of handles: Jake Sapiens; memelab; logicnazi; Loki; Every1Hz; and Shadow)
|
|
|
Mermaid
Archon
Posts: 770
Reputation: 8.45
Rate Mermaid
Bite me!
|
|
Re:to mo enzyme: re your bizarre behaviour
« Reply #28 on: 2010-02-20 21:50:29 » |
|
Quote from: MoEnzyme on 2010-02-20 19:28:48
ps - I never really wanted to write the wiki, but if I had to I would have written more of a summary story of his life, in which case I think it would have sounded strange to not at least mention the trial/castration/death issue and at least a few details of his family life or some appropriate hints of his life outside of work . .
|
once again, you pretend that you implied something else entirely. of course, one cannot omit the trial. my problem is with cov 'taking a stance on homosexuality' and using turing to do so. its cheap. i dont think we should be 'forced' to take a stance on *anything* that is personal. especially while abusing a virian saint nominee.
this is tiresome. your behaviour reminds me of how cats try to bury their poop. they bury their poop because they want to hide the odour...you have covered all your past utterings by deleting and locking the original turing thread. cats too bury their poop because they dont want their potential prey to know that they have been in that area...i am sorry that i have to compare you to felines..they dont deserve being compared to you...
but...in a way...i am glad this shitfest happened. at least some of us know your true colours now.
|
|
|
|
|
MoEnzyme
Acolyte
Gender:
Posts: 2256
Reputation: 4.69
Rate MoEnzyme
infidel lab animal
|
|
Re:to mo enzyme: re your bizarre behaviour
« Reply #29 on: 2010-02-20 22:45:15 » |
|
Mermaid,
Do you actually think about anything you've read before you respond? In my last post I continue to deal with the same issues I always have. Yes, regardless of the wiki, sainting Alan Turing may "force" us to deal with some issues concerning the circumstances of his death, and his homosexual behavior (gasp! horror! shock!) may be one of them - in addition to his suicide which you both seem oddly indifferent about in comparison.
Of course if anyone thinks those things are evil we've got escape clauses too . . . our saints don't have to be "perfect", but I'm definitely not going to be in the camp making apologies for Turing on these counts. If Hermit thinks being a gay icon is going to disqualify Turing, I'm not going to help Hermit out on this except to point out that it isn't relevant to whether or not we should saint Alan Turing. If he insists on that position, you both can expect me to be on the "other side", when these issues arise as they inevitably will after we've sainted Alan Turing . . . which will likely happen regardless of your backwardness or Hermit's publicly bragging about the "1" rating he's given me. Its all already been figured into the problem even if these things haven't yet crossed your currently shrunken consciousness.
If you'd pull your head out of your ass you'd recognize that, and if these are important issues to perhaps you and Hermit SHOULD consider these things seriously instead of just chastising me for it. And although I may be the person currently mentioning them, I'm not the one bringing it up, its all over the fucking intertubes for crissakes! Both wikipedia and Turing's official biography site go into far more detail about "teh gey" issues than I've even begun to. Next time it will be some other asshat making it "an issue" for you sensitive anti-sexual folk. Yes, the sky is still falling, and many Americans are still homophobic, but my position remains the same, I'm just not writing the wiki . . . not that I even wanted to.
You are right to be concerned about the fact I might be an invective asshole bastard to deal with when I think people are acting stupid, but dishonesty is not one of my "issues". Locking the thread was absolutely the right thing to do to stop a conversation that had gone way too stupid already - I never claimed I was proud of it. If Hermit wants to make this his issue, he's welcome to it, I'm just not going to help him out with that. If I could link some new thread of his from mine without unlocking it, I'd consider that . . . as it is I'm sure it will sink to the bottom of the "Doctrine" pile through inactivity as it probably well should.
How many fucking times to I have to repeat myself? Please, go talk about it to somebody smarter, friendlier than me who actually gives a shit about blogging/BBS ethics more than you do. This conversation is obviously doing you no good. Go do a godammed google search or two on Alan Turing yourself and I think you'll get the picture especially if you haven't done one since Sept 2009. I don't have anything left to say to you either. I can only handle repeating myself so many times. I'm not the most patient person in the world that way unless people are paying me money for it, so please remember that next time and in the meantime go fuck off!
:::Mo takes a few deep breaths and feels better:::
|
I will fight your gods for food,
Mo Enzyme
(consolidation of handles: Jake Sapiens; memelab; logicnazi; Loki; Every1Hz; and Shadow)
|
|
|
|
Logged
