From: "David McFadzean" <david@lucifer.com> To: <virus@lucifer.com> Subject: Re: virus: Re:Notice and Proposal of Importance to all Virians Date sent: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 14:59:37 -0400 Send reply to: virus@lucifer.com
> ----- Original Message ----- > From: "metahuman" <hidden@lucifer.com> > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 6:21 AM > > > There's absolutely no reason to trust the membership to use the peer > > rating system honestly. > > You don't have to. You only have to assume that the majority of > the most highly respected members of the community will use the > rating system honestly. > > The system is the most fair and most objective system that I have come > across. If you have a better system, please describe it. > According to the peer rating system, Hermit is one of the most highly respected members of the community, although, considering his actions, I have a hard time figuring out why. Does anyone actually believe that he would use such a system honestly with respect to myself, Bill Roh, or anyone who dares to disagree with him? There may be no better system available, but that does not entail that the present one profferred is any good. As long as political prejudices, personal biases and emotions, which are inextricably human components, are factored into peer ratings, they will be less than fair and objective, and I see no way around this. > > David > --- > To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to > <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
Re: virus: Re:Notice and Proposal of Importance to all Virians
« Reply #16 on: 2003-08-04 16:12:23 »
Joe Said:
>According to the peer rating system, Hermit is one of the most highly >respected members of the community, although, considering his >actions, I have a hard time figuring out why. Does anyone actually >believe that he would use such a system honestly with respect to >myself, Bill Roh, or anyone who dares to disagree with him? >There may be no better system available, but that does not entail that >the present one profferred is any good. As long as political prejudices, >personal biases and emotions, which are inextricably human >components, are factored into peer ratings, they will be less than fair >and objective, and I see no way around this. >
I have to agree with Joe. There is no possible way that Hermit or his Hermitites are going to even make an attempt of honesty in this regard. The notion makes me throw my head back in laughter - having witnessed the ugly underneath first hand. Anyone who dares to research Hermit's posts, will find them rife with dishonesty and obfuscation. It is the nature of the beast. Hermit's stated goal, according to the Notice and proposal thread explicitly state that Hermit has a political goal for the CoV, and any attempt on the part of the members to keep him from taking us into the political arena means effectively that they will be continuosly slandered - yet none research his slanders except for a very few and so most remain quiet, waiting for Hermits poison pen to find them. Remember the battle that happened here happened to prevent Hermit from moderating or speaking for the rest of us - not to remove him from the congregation. Contrary to Hermit's statements that we tried to "out" him, which never happened except in his own head. Setting this reputation system up, is simply coming up with a new way to put Hermit back at the mouthpiece, be it deliberate or not, the result will be the same.
That said - it looks interesting and I would rather see us experimenting with it than not simply for curiosities sake.
As for making it better: A fair system would include objective researchers. If a member was found after research to be engaging in obfiscation or deception, these ratings would need to reflect that prominently. Otherwise it's a popularity and manipulation contest in disguise with no means of checking for legitimacy.
Reason - Vision - Empathy Tools for a healthy mind
Re: virus: Re:Notice and Proposal of Importance to all Virians
« Reply #17 on: 2003-08-04 16:55:46 »
> As for making it better: A fair system would include objective > researchers. If a member was found after research to be engaging in > obfiscation or deception, these ratings would need to reflect that > prominently. Otherwise it's a popularity and manipulation contest in > disguise with no means of checking for legitimacy.
Anyone is free to point out obfuscation and deception at any time. Everyone else is free to take that into consideration when rating those concerned. Whether or not that affects the reputations depends on how convincing the evidence is, and no doubt issues concerning the credibility of the critic such as whether they use ad hominen attacks in presenting the case against someone.
In other words, the system already implements your suggestion.
From: "David McFadzean" <david@lucifer.com> To: <virus@lucifer.com> Subject: Re: virus: Re:Notice and Proposal of Importance to all Virians Date sent: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 16:55:46 -0400 Send reply to: virus@lucifer.com
> > As for making it better: A fair system would include objective > > researchers. If a member was found after research to be engaging in > > obfiscation or deception, these ratings would need to reflect that > > prominently. Otherwise it's a popularity and manipulation contest in > > disguise with no means of checking for legitimacy. > > Anyone is free to point out obfuscation and deception at any time. > Everyone else is free to take that into consideration when rating > those concerned. Whether or not that affects the reputations depends > on how convincing the evidence is, and no doubt issues concerning the > credibility of the critic such as whether they use ad hominen attacks > in presenting the case against someone. > > In other words, the system already implements your suggestion. > Not when irrational emotions and cabalistic alliances rule, and people ignore the obfuscations and deceptions of their droogies whilst claiming nonexistent obfuscations and deceptions on the part of those on their enemies list - as is already manifestly happening onlist. > > David > --- > To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to > <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
RE: virus: Re:Notice and Proposal of Importance to all Virians
« Reply #19 on: 2003-08-04 17:23:45 »
[Joe] According to the peer rating system, Hermit is one of the most highly respected members of the community, although, considering his actions, I have a hard time figuring out why. Does anyone actually believe that he would use such a system honestly with respect to myself, Bill Roh, or anyone who dares to disagree with him? <snip>
[Kalkor] That you have a hard time figuring out why does not change the fact. Do we 'believe' that he would use such a system honestly? I don't 'believe' much of anything, Joe. Why not give it a try, instead of assuming that you're going to be treated the way you expect us to treat you? I find it personally insulting that you assume we're going to rank you the way you expect you'll be ranked.
Although, in the immortal words of Kurt Kobain... "just because you're paranoid/don't mean they're not after you"
RE: virus: Re:Notice and Proposal of Importance to all Virians
« Reply #20 on: 2003-08-04 17:32:45 »
[Bill] <snip> Anyone who dares to research Hermit's posts, will find them rife with dishonesty and obfuscation. <snip>
[Kalkor] I stopped reading your post after I got to this line, Bill. I will continue when you clarify and/or support the assertion. To paraphrase:
"I assert 'A'. I provide no support for my assertion; the reader must take my assertion at face value as true and I further instruct the reader to perform his/her own research to verify the validity of MY assertion."*
Please treat us like rational humans. And please don't make the same assumption that I have already responded to Joe about, namely that we will rate you unfairly simply because you think we will. Give us a bit more credit than that, please.
(* also note that a logic truth table will show your statement to be false most of the time... someone biased towards hermit who dares to research hermit's post will most certainly find nothing of the sort <wink>)
Re: virus: Re:Notice and Proposal of Importance to all Virians
« Reply #21 on: 2003-08-04 17:36:57 »
You seem to have missed my point entirely. Let me rephrase.
Human's in general, and especialy under stress are often incapable of making "objective" decisions about information presented to them. My question was: is there an objective party that can, at the top level, say that something is false, and have that reflected regardless of the opinions of the people signed up? From what you wrote, I gather the answer is "no". Unchallanged flasehoods are to remain as truths in this system. It's about the ability to convince, not integrity.
"Anyone is free to point out obfuscation and deception at any time." To what end? What you are saying here is that if one does not point them out, they do not exist. Every flamee must respond to every flame, or the flamer is telling the truth? Is that what you are suggesting? That if one can cow people back into sleepy pens, one can be the top dog?
Ad hominen seems to be working in the opposite manner you suggest. Hermit, who is near the top of your list, has by far the longest and most aggressive history of ad hominen here, with the possible exception of Joe. I avoided ad hominen for years, until this last year and a half - of which I was gone for half. I doubt people would be able to find more than one or two attacks of such a nature by me prior to the last 1.5 years. What about Jonathan, no history of ad hominen and a great history of contribution? Or Rhino who not only refrains from attacks, but offers loads of insight and comment without prejiduce?
As for convincing evidence - how can un researched attacks qualify as convincing evidence? Because people are too lazy to research. People historically do not research something when they like hearing other results. It's not about convincing evidence as you point out, it's about popularity of opinion and the ease at arriving at that opinion with a minimal investment of energy.
Of course, if the systems purpose is only to rate reputation based on the opinions of those that sign up, with no external system of checking integrity, then this sounds fine. It will do that exactly, I have no doubt.
David McFadzean wrote:
>>As for making it better: A fair system would include objective >>researchers. If a member was found after research to be engaging in >>obfiscation or deception, these ratings would need to reflect that >>prominently. Otherwise it's a popularity and manipulation contest in >>disguise with no means of checking for legitimacy. >> >> > >Anyone is free to point out obfuscation and deception at any time. >Everyone else is free to take that into consideration when rating >those concerned. Whether or not that affects the reputations depends >on how convincing the evidence is, and no doubt issues concerning >the credibility of the critic such as whether they use ad hominen >attacks in presenting the case against someone. > >In other words, the system already implements your suggestion. > >David >--- >To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l> > > >
-- Reason - Vision - Empathy Tools for a healthy mind
From: "Kalkor" <kalkor@kalkor.com> To: <virus@lucifer.com> Subject: RE: virus: Re:Notice and Proposal of Importance to all Virians Date sent: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 14:23:45 -0700 Send reply to: virus@lucifer.com
> [Joe] > According to the peer rating system, Hermit is one of the most highly > respected members of the community, although, considering his actions, > I have a hard time figuring out why. Does anyone actually believe > that he would use such a system honestly with respect to myself, Bill > Roh, or anyone who dares to disagree with him? <snip> > > [Kalkor] > That you have a hard time figuring out why does not change the fact. > Yes, the fact that someone who refers to someone else's mother as 'drooling', a 'nutcase', and 'the cunt-that-shat-you' nevertheless enjoys a high karma ranking. > > Do we 'believe' that he would use such a system honestly? I don't > 'believe' much of anything, Joe. Why not give it a try, instead of > assuming that you're going to be treated the way you expect us to > treat you? I find it personally insulting that you assume we're going > to rank you the way you expect you'll be ranked. > > Although, in the immortal words of Kurt Kobain... "just because you're > paranoid/don't mean they're not after you" > And so they are, and have amply and repeatedly demonstrated as much. All, it takes to see that I speak sooth is to look at the present karma rankings; that should be evidence enough for any fair-minded individual. The proposed peer rankings would undoubtedly follow the same unjust course - and for the same unfair reasons. > > Kalkor > > --- > To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to > <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
RE: virus: Re:Notice and Proposal of Importance to all Virians
« Reply #23 on: 2003-08-04 17:39:24 »
[Joe] Not when irrational emotions and cabalistic alliances rule, and people ignore the obfuscations and deceptions of their droogies whilst claiming nonexistent obfuscations and deceptions on the part of those on their enemies list - as is already manifestly happening onlist.
[Kalkor] Perhaps you would be taken more seriously in future if you used fewer adjectives? Can emotion be other than irrational? (This may be a discussion for another thread, which I wouldn't mind continuing) Cabalistic? Enemies? Maybe remove the adjectives *AND* the words specifically chosen to incite emotion, especially after having condemned the use of emotion earlier in the sentence and the paragraph.
The tone of this statement feels to me like spittle, venom, unhappiness. I cringed when I read it. These are the emotions I felt. Other things on the list, when I read them, make me smile or giggle. And the majority of what I read on the list makes me think, and makes me do so as rationally as I know how. Please think about that.
From: "Kalkor" <kalkor@kalkor.com> To: <virus@lucifer.com> Subject: RE: virus: Re:Notice and Proposal of Importance to all Virians Date sent: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 14:39:24 -0700 Send reply to: virus@lucifer.com
> [Joe] > Not when irrational emotions and cabalistic alliances rule, and people > ignore the obfuscations and deceptions of their droogies whilst > claiming nonexistent obfuscations and deceptions on the part of those > on their enemies list - as is already manifestly happening onlist. > > [Kalkor] > Perhaps you would be taken more seriously in future if you used fewer > adjectives? Can emotion be other than irrational? (This may be a > discussion for another thread, which I wouldn't mind continuing) > Cabalistic? Enemies? Maybe remove the adjectives *AND* the words > specifically chosen to incite emotion, especially after having > condemned the use of emotion earlier in the sentence and the > paragraph. > > The tone of this statement feels to me like spittle, venom, > unhappiness. I cringed when I read it. These are the emotions I felt. > Other things on the list, when I read them, make me smile or giggle. > And the majority of what I read on the list makes me think, and makes > me do so as rationally as I know how. Please think about that. > > Kalkor > I am indeed unhappy at what hermit has repeatedly said about my mother, whom he has never met (and never will), and about what he continues to try to do to this list. Not to admit as much would be dishonest. > --- > To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to > <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
[Kalkor] That you have a hard time figuring out why does not change the fact. Do we 'believe' that he would use such a system honestly? I don't 'believe' much of anything, Joe. Why not give it a try, instead of assuming that you're going to be treated the way you expect us to treat you? I find it personally insulting that you assume we're going to rank you the way you expect you'll be ranked.
[Demon] Ah, the words of Hermit.
David Lucifer Obviously, the actions of Hermit are unclear to you. He believes that a schism is needed in this church. However, that is not the case! To function and to meet its end goal, the Church of Virus must be unified. Its congregation requires united ideals and cooperative action. Hermit's destruction of this church has already started. He has long been a retrogressive member of this community and whether, consciously or unconsciously, he damages this church, a blind eye is turned toward him.
The enemies of the group are inside the group, consciously or unconsciously, working to diminish the value and the integrity of the group, to destroy its philosophy and its ideals. I cannot remain a member of a misorganized group whose problem members are the most influential and retain the most power over the membership. The better Virian is not the one with the highest peer rating or the most commonly spoken nom de plume. The better Virian is the one who strives to uphold the Virian Way with honor and love, and to grow its magnificence beyond the boundaries inevitably set by retrogressive Virians.
Unfortunately, Hermit, as previously mentioned, is a parasite and is not a Virian. He creates a following for himself and he leads! Was it not one of the characteristics of this church to not have a leader? Yes, it was. Empathy is a virtue not upheld by Hermit. He has stated that he will only be empathatic to those he deems worthy of his empathy. Hypocrisy is the sin he constantly utilizes. Dogmatism is the tool he uses to achieve his respectability.
Quote:
Vision is the name I give to the quality of possessing a perspective that goes well beyond the individual in terms of space and time. All too often people make perfectly rational decisions which turn out to be bad because they were framed with too limited a scope. They fail to consider the real consequences (meaning) of their actions.
Either Hermit has not considered the consequences of his parasitical actions towards burning down this church or is deliberately lighting the flame.
If Joe Dees, Bill Roh, and I are the only Virians left who will work towards the goal of David's Church of Virus and who will retain the qualities once treasured amongst Virians, then let it be so.
I am a Virian and it is that I will always remain. The Church of Virus must not be divided.
Re: virus: Re:Notice and Proposal of Importance to all Virians
« Reply #26 on: 2003-08-04 18:06:45 »
So, the COV basically needed a system to rate the influence of it's members for it to expand and become something more than a mere discussion group and forum. This is an action which I'm fully in support of.
Joe and Bill are frustrated with the system because Hermit seems to have carried along with it and ammassed a great deal more power than they're comfortable with, another point which I wholly agree with.
But, speaking as someone who doesn't ususally participate in COV discussions, save to interject every so often and say something wierd, I'd like to offer a few thoughts on the situation:
Yes, Hermit has a great deal of respect in the Virian community. I don't think this is because of his flunkies, minions, or droogs so much as the fact that a lot of people seem to go along with what he has to say. I'm willing to bet that most of the people in Virus are very liberal in their political outlook. I am rather liberal myself and find myself agreeing with a lot of what Hermit has to say. I don't have the patience or desire to sift through his sources (a situation I think is shared by most readers here), so I place most of my judgement upon how he lays out his arguments. He is *exceedingly* good at doing this, but that's my own opinion.
On the other hand, he does other things that piss me off a great deal, and that does lower my respect for him a significant ammount.
On the other side of the spectrum, I respect Joe and Bill because they do offer a more conservative outlook which does help to balance out the anti-government sentiment attitude which is very prevalent here. While I may not have their political outlook, I have a great deal of respect for their decision to stand up for this and challence a lot of remarks and statments that need to be really ought to be thought through.
Joe in particular, though: you are a superb writer, you've got a lot of brilliant posts out there, but you are far too easily driven into a rage. Perhaps it's because Hermit just pisses you off that much, and though I am wholly sympathetic and can see where you're coming from, it's no reason to attempt to strike down every goddamn thing he does. (I'm sure this isn't what you're doing, but it does seem like it sometimes). We *all* would respect you a *lot* more if you didn't act like this. Largely you've excused your behavior as being Hermit's fault, and a lot of it sounds whiny and it's exhaughsting.
Nonetheless- a lot of the whole "respect" business tends to come from agreement with personal politics, and despite the valididty of sources and the clarity of the arugment, people generally like to read things they agree with. Yay for cognitive dissonance...
Basically I just want to say that some people need to calm down about this, and be more open to comprimise and learn how to cooperate. If COV is going to be an organization instead of a group of squabblers, we need to start cooperating and finding a way to fucking work *around* personal politics. It's not a problem that's going to go away if we beat it over the head. The COV won't stand ground if it's position is ultra-liberal, and it won't ever function unless the members respect and listen to each other.
On a side note- the one here who I think is most deserving of respect is probably Lady Z, since she doesn't keep trying to argue their opinon on everyone else, but does make excellent and *concise* posts when they really do need to be made.
On a side side note- Athenonrex: please dear lord use correct capitalization! Your arguments look so terrible when they don't have correct grammar. You'd get a lot more respect that way ;]
[Kalkor] Please treat us like rational humans. ... Give us a bit more credit than that, please.
[Demon] It would be irrational to assume such a trait and it would be definitely idiotic to freely give credit undeserved.
[Kalkor] Perhaps you would be taken more seriously in future if you used fewer adjectives?
[Demon] Shall we also refrain from the use of nouns and verbs? I'm positive that would make communication between the members of this group difficult and that's not to say it is effective anyway.
Re: virus: Re:Notice and Proposal of Importance to all Virians
« Reply #28 on: 2003-08-04 18:13:16 »
----- Original Message ----- From: "metahuman" <hidden@lucifer.com> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 5:59 PM
> If Joe Dees, Bill Roh, and I are the only Virians left who will work towards the goal of David's Church of Virus and who will retain the qualities once treasured amongst Virians, then let it be so. > > I am a Virian and it is that I will always remain. The Church of Virus must not be divided.
I urge everyone that agrees with metahuman, Joe and Bill to join the reputation system and make your opinions count. You have the power to change everyone's reputation and influence.
Re: virus: Re:Notice and Proposal of Importance to all Virians
« Reply #29 on: 2003-08-04 18:43:32 »
Thanks for proving my point. Your answer is as it is because in the past, when evidence is given, you ignored it. Now it looks like you need more proof, and will you ignore that as well? I think so. If I have to prove the same thing over and over again, and you fail to research any one of them, the problem is yours. If you don't think that someone with a reputation of dishonesty will continue to be dishonest, that is your problem as well. At this stage, the argument is just repetative. Hermit's been convicted many a time, I have had him lie straight to my face, and demonstrated it here. It's not an hominen, it's a statement of fact. When Hermit was flaming me, did you ask him to prove his assertions? I don't remember seeing that. Did you even check what he wrote? Go ahead, tell me ya did. Did you stop reading his post immediately after his attacks on others as you have done in my case?
And, um, no. Looks to me like the boot of double standards fits here quite well. While I am in general fond of the group, the last few years have been dismal from my perspective. The integrity and values of the congregation has become more of mix of malcontents with angry agendas, then genuinely sincere, earnest people looking to a future religion. The people who challenged Hermit in the past have been flamed out, most before your arrival. There are still many here that I am close to, but most choose to remain silent on the relationships to protect each other from Hermit's flaming. How sad a statement, that after six years I have to hide my friendships with church members from other members. How sad that so many of you will discover this the hard way, and will be betrayed, but it is yours to discover.
And I could care less about the ratings. I am interested in this only in that it is a beta from David. My input requires my participation and I do like to help. My reputation and opinion of myself would not be, in any way, related to anything the CoV can do, so I could care less. The system simply sounds interesting to me, I usually enjoy tinkering with David's creations, betas, and recommendations.
I do not mean to be rude to you, Kalkor, and if I have been I am sorry. When you investigate for yourself, even using Hermit's provided leads, and find that I am correct, will you even be able to change your opinion? Will you be able to realize that any person who frequently practices deception, will not change once you catch them? Will you assume it is a sometimes error or will you assume that it is SOP? Do you think patterns of behaviour change all that much?
Kalkor wrote:
>[Bill] ><snip> >Anyone who dares to research Hermit's posts, will find them rife with >dishonesty and obfuscation. ><snip> > >[Kalkor] >I stopped reading your post after I got to this line, Bill. I will continue >when you clarify and/or support the assertion. To paraphrase: > >"I assert 'A'. I provide no support for my assertion; the reader must take >my assertion at face value as true and I further instruct the reader to >perform his/her own research to verify the validity of MY assertion."* > >Please treat us like rational humans. And please don't make the same >assumption that I have already responded to Joe about, namely that we will >rate you unfairly simply because you think we will. Give us a bit more >credit than that, please. > >(* also note that a logic truth table will show your statement to be false >most of the time... someone biased towards hermit who dares to research >hermit's post will most certainly find nothing of the sort <wink>) > >Kalkor > >--- >To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l> > > >
-- Reason - Vision - Empathy Tools for a healthy mind
Author
Logged
