I consider that we always had constructive, intelligent discussion, each learning from the other, in a respectful manner. I think that it is cultural. Although you seem to be quite broad-minded (and perhaps much moreso than I am), you have an appreciation for the finer things of this world... - from history to ancient poets to ancient languages. ...and moreover, you enjoy intelligent discussion. Your oeuvre primarily revolves around extended posts on contemporary history and current events: Cypherpunks, Assange, etc. Some people want to be the highest and the best. Others race to the bottom. However else people may be divided up, I think that those two categories are irreconcilable; whereas those in the first category may find a natural basis for mutual respect—well, sooner or later. From my own experience, I observe that some people with whom I had little forum fights a few years ago are now on mutually amicable terms with me. Curiously, we never argued. And I say curiously because even similar minds think differently at some points. Oh well, curiously, it didn't happen. We learned from each other in the debated subjects (maybe I learned more from him than he learned from me), but the point is that we always talked politely to each other and it was constructive as we both learned new things in life. Curiously, that conceptually approximates what I myself recently said about Lauda! She and I had our disagreements. We had some rousing debates in private. For one thing, she was what I considered to be softhearted (LOL). [...]
And she once told me that if I agreed with her about everything, it would be boring.
Whoever she is, she is a rare mind.
* nullius slaps himself with a large trout. Isn't that a mIRC expression? It made me laugh remembering the old, good, mIRC times  Although to my knowledge, the trout slap was made net.famous by the most popular MS Windows IRC client, the meme about slapping people in the face with a fish seems to antedate the Internet. When this thread first started, YouTube didn’t exist! (I have not verified the statements on that thread; DYOR.) |
|
|
|
Like he says - if you don't like someone's trust or judgement, use the ~. I'm done here, have a great weekend everyone, even you Lord McNasty Dogg!  Thanks owlcatz (assuming I'm Lord McNasty Dogg which has a nice ring to it), you have a great weekend too! Nice to see you agreeing with common sense and pointing out that nullius did the wrong thing with his trust abuse when he should have used the ~ instead. Besides the obvious point that your trolling, your scamming, your trust abuse, etc., etc. are reasons for complete distrust of you, not only distrust of your trust judgments, I must remind the newcomers here: - I have had ~OgNasty in my trust list, and publicly said so, since February of 2018.*
- You excluded me in a fit of paranoia when I was at
Junior “Member” rank (!), and democratic DT wasn’t even a thing! (Edited for accuracy: Then recently ranked up from “Jr.”)
Edit: Money quote:
Just to be clear to anyone confused, nullius was never on Default Trust. You can be excluded without ever being on the system (case in point, me).
And me... OG so buthurt over people calling him out for running a massive scam that he takes preemptive strikes against people. Anyone who looks like a threat he blocks from DT so he doesn't get a tag himself. Watch out..
So... LOLWUT?
About tagging trolls: this should be handled by the forum rules, not through the feedback system: 3. No trolling. A very significant word is thereby highlighted.
* I accidentally deleted another good post in a locked thread by reaching for the nonexistent quote button. * nullius slaps himself with a large trout. I can’t find any archives. Reconstructed from an open browser tab, in pertinent part: Fix your trust list to one that isn't played due to greed and whatnot. Here you go: [long list] My own trust list became much more reliable with just two simple entries: gmaxwell
~OgNasty Being new here, I’ve as yet had only limited time to evaluate whom I’d trust to the degree of bringing into my level 0. I am ultra-conservative about trust, as a matter of principle; and level 0 requires not only great honesty, but also great wisdom. [...] |
|
|
|
Nullius's neg on OgNasty in which he calls him a scammer is fine, and he should have just stopped there.
Fuck you Pharmacist. I've never scammed a satoshi from anyone and everyone here knows that. Unlike you, I actually contribute to Bitcoin, whereas you are completely worthless to this community except to spread negativity and support trolling. Why don't you follow TMAN and Lauda out the door and bring nullius and Vod with you, maybe owlcatz and suchmooon could even tag along? This community would be so much better off... That's a great idea for you OGMcNasty.... get rid of the people who call out your NastySCAM Ponzi scheme!!!! You're such a tool and you don't even know why which makes it humorous. ....and for the love of god, please stop beating your chest on how much you do for bitcoin, just makes you sound like more of a goober than you already are.  Indeed, this forum would be better off without idiots calling legitimate provable operations a Ponzi scheme out of jealousy. I guess you're mad that you're so worthless I didn't even mention you as one of them? LOL LOL, owlcatz got to you, didn’t he: Just gonna say, I agree with Nullius quite often. I trust his judgement more than many others here, that is for sure. Maybe you just weren't cool enough to be a real cypherpunk in your lifetime, IDK... People sure seems super jelly of this guy or something. Wow, that’s real “OG” talk about crypto. Though I should mention, Mr Nasty’s thin skin wouldn’t last even three seconds in the completely unrestricted free-fire zone free speech of cypherpunks. (For my part, I will admit that the abysmal signal-to-noise ratio caused by the trolls eventually drove me to the lne.com sublist... Cheers, owly!) |
|
|
|
Gawd this place is more toxic than reddit. Reddit? The place so heavily censored by Orwellian thought police that even the slightest whiff of political incorrectness “toxicity” is shadow-banned? Why can't we all get along and be a happy family?  If Mr Nasty was a member of my family, then I would probably kill myself seek voluntary sterilization so as to avoid spreading bad seed. |
|
|
|
Fuck you Pharmacist.
And you as well. But just FYI, I was commenting more on the nature of the negative nullius left rather than whether it's accurate or not. Negging members for scamming is proper; giving negs to trolls is not. Christ, you've got thin skin. Moreover: Nastily attacking someone who is coolly, somewhat begrudgingly defending your interests is— typical of a certain type.
P.S., Mr Pharmacist, do you agree with this tag on Mr Nasty’s nasty pal*? Trust summary for nulliusSent feedback| KaneVWE | 2020-09-18 | Reference | Troll with insane delusions that would actually be funny, if he did not seem to be serious. (See reference link.) |
* Among other things. Just exemplary.Since the conniving cat is likely about to being pulling a long stretch from cell block C or some such karma has struck lauda.
First TMAN and now Lauda... Next up, Vod? |
|
|
|
I don’t have time for others right now. This is important, because it’s a reasonable question reasonably stated: Nulli buddie...
Are you trying to make enemies out of everyone?
I don’t care, as I said in my reply to you in another thread, and in my post that OgNasty deleted. Why would I care about DT? - Almost immediately after I returned to the forum in January 2020, I predicted that democratic DT would be an horrific mess. My contempt for DT is not sour grapes: It is my response after my foresight proved correct. And I have been consistently critical of democratic DT ever since then.
- I don’t do business on the forum. I have no reason to play DT politics. People with wise judgment will include me, so that they can see my tags up top—regardless of any exclusions. And with Lauda gone, although I have some other forum friends whom I respect and value, I am not so closely, publicly associated with anyone here that I need to worry about blowback to my friends from the petty spite of some of the characters hereby involved. My DT status (or lack thereof) does not affect me in any way.
- You know how so many precious snowflakes like to say, “I don’t care what others think of me”? Guess what: I really don’t. I am constitutionally immune to caring about an opinion just because it is somebody’s opinion—or just because it is many people’s opinion. Most usually, I care only if an opinion is right or wrong. If you’re wrong, you’re wrong—the only question is if I will waste my time futilely attempting to educate the ineducable.
It is this attitude that made me popular, when I only directed it against unpopular people. Review some of my earliest Newbie posts applying a blowtorch to Bcash shills. Same attitude. Or look at how suchmoon was delighted when I tore into QS in early 2018 (I privately apologized to Quickseller for some of that in early 2020—peace, QS!). If you don’t want to taste the same medicine, don’t behave like a total idiot. - It’s an Internet forum. Not a kingdom. My life does not revolve around it; I could leave tomorrow, not look back, and be better off for it. Some perspective is in order.
So, I will just call ’em as I see ’em. In the course of my life, I usually have done just that.
Edit in preview (writing long-ish post while multitasking): The Pharmacist: OK, that was more reasonable than some of the other responses. You understand, we disagree about tags for trolling. I've got no beef with nullius or anyone involved here, but the trust system shouldn't be used to point out that someone is a troll (which is very subjective anyway). In this case, it is quite clear-cut if the word has any meaning at all. In a CH troll thread, Mr Nasty participated in gloating with extremely malicious ill-wishes for Lauda (plus TMAN and Vod). And that was only the straw that broke the camel’s back: I have seen him do trollish shitposting from petty personal spite many times before. He is a troll. I am not inclined to catalogue and quote all of his trolling, because (0) that would amplify it, and (1) it’s not worth my time. If you trust my judgment, then include me so that you will be well-informed by my tag. If you don’t, don’t. If you fundamentally disagree with me about the use of the trust system (and you’re not just rationalizing a defence of Mr Nasty’s indefensible behaviour), then ~nullius works just fine. <snip> Check my feedback history; I have issued a number of troll tags, going back to February of 2018, plus other tags that you may find disagreeable. If you do not want to see my tags, that is what exclusions are for.
I'd never looked at your trust page before, just did, and the forum's stance on how the trust system should be used has changed a lot since 2018. If you don't believe me, just ask Theymos. Be that the case, then it would mean that I disagree with theymos. Who marks the trust system as “unmoderated”, and provides you with a handy ~ key if you disagree with my use of the trust system. IMO, the trust system went from the frying pan to the fire while I was gone. I have been complaining about that quite consistently, ever since I returned; see the above link for what was only my first criticism of it.
Edit after posting: Nullius's neg on OgNasty in which he calls him a scammer is fine, and he should have just stopped there.
Fuck you Pharmacist. I've never scammed a satoshi from anyone and everyone here knows that. Unlike you, I actually contribute to Bitcoin, whereas you are completely worthless to this community except to spread negativity and support trolling. Why don't you follow TMAN and Lauda out the door and bring nullius and Vod with you, maybe owlcatz and suchmooon could even tag along? This community would be so much better off... Mr Nasty, that is no way to speak of your kindred spirit. You and Miss suchmoon make a nice couple of lunatics. An objective review of your and her behaviour shows, you’re a match! Why, you and she even both enjoy bumping CH’s troll thread! |
|
|
|
I’ll just leave this here, By the way, what is it with this trend of blocking polite PMs from people who have never sent you rude, harassing, or annoying PMs? As usual, Og man Mr Nasty is ahead of the game! He pre-emptively blocked my PMs in early 2018, when I had never sent him any at all. His soulmate suchmoon blocked my PMs sometime between February and April of 2020; it is why I must publicly address certain ugly things, instead of sending a polite PM as suchmoon usually advises. (I am now reporting those bad-faith “don’t feed the troll” troll-bumping spam posts to the moderators.) I have never sent nutildah any hostile, annoying, or impolite PMs.  |
|
|
|
For some reason, it reminds me of something.  |
|
|
|
I think that Cult of Lauda gang needs their new supreme leader fast [...]
There's already a few wannabe "leaders" trying to create a Cult of Lame and Inane Tripe or perhaps a Cult of Utterly Nauseating Textwalls but I predict failure. suchmoon, your passive-aggressive behaviour is unbecoming. It is also revealing: It shows that you fear me. I do not think that I have ever before seen you so assiduously avoid direct conflict with someone toward whom you seethe with such venom. Just to reassure you a bit, I have no intent of wasting my life on a forum war to unseat you from your DT fiefdom. Unfortunately, I do need to address this hereby. Not so much your calumny against me, as the dangerous suggestion being bandied about.
----- BEGIN MAGICALLY SIGNED MESSAGE ----- I knew Lauda much better than most of the people engaged in various speculations and pronouncements. Moreover, I will take as her public endorsement her choice to draw on things that I made for her as her final, permanent avatar and personal text. Wherefore officially, hereby, I declare myself to be the new Grand Prophet of the Cult of Lauda.And by my authority as Grand Prophet, I hereby declare that insofar as DT is concerned, the Cult of Lauda is dissolved. Lauda is gone. And upon her apotheosis from a mere witch to a deity, the Catbat Goddess Herself decreed her own wishes as to her name and reputation: I have one of the highest name-recognition accounts on the forum. This places on me a responsibility. It is not to feed my strong ego that I say, it is a valuable account with a high reputation - a trust that people place in my unseen body, through the name of "Lauda". If I cease to be "Lauda" then according to my well-known principles, I must affirmatively prevent anybody else from using this name and forum account ever again. Although that was said in the context of money, I knew Lauda well enough to know that she would also not want for anybody to take up leadership of the “Lauda gang” for purposes of trust and reputation. That includes me. And it includes everybody else on this forum. Moreover, if she had wanted somehow to pass the torch of her DT position to me or anybody else, then she would have told me, and provided appropriate instructions for a line of succession. She did not. As such, my authority as Grand Prophet is limited to the ritual maintenance of Laudatory Lore, in memoriam—to keeping the eternal flame alive at the Altar of the Catbat—to the arcane study of crypto- sourcery—and also, to guarding Lauda’s reputation against misappropriation.Signed, nullius Grand Prophet Cult of Lauda ------ END MAGICALLY SIGNED MESSAGE ------
I have been contemplating, and am beginning to prepare something Lauda-related. It may take awhile.
The man of knowledge must be able not only to love his enemies, but also to hate his friends.
One rewards a teacher badly if one remains merely a student. And why will ye not pluck at my wreath?
Ye venerate me; but what if your veneration should some day collapse? Take heed lest a statue crush you! Anyway, switching hats, I have my own “gang”: The Nullian Bitcult, which antedates the Cult of Lauda by over a year! My cult has null members. However, its Divine Law is strictly enforced on everybody who HoDLs Bitcoin. If you violate the Law of my cult, then the god of Bitcoin will smite you. Proof: Delete your private keys, then try to spend your bitcoins. The god of Bitcoin commands, you shall keep safe your private keys. An ye lose your private keys, the god of Bitcoin shall curse ye. An ye let your private keys be stolen, the god of Bitcoin shall bless the thief and curse ye. I am too much of a lone wolf to run a forum “gang”. Furthermore, I lack Lauda’s unlimited devotion. The cat got where she was, because she spent years of her life doing mostly thankless grunt work for the benefit of the community! I am not that altruistic. If you want to worship my cult, HoDL. If you trust me, then trust me. If not, not. I will stand on my own reputation, thank you very much. Although Lauda’s trust of me, and her trust of my judgment, are no doubt a considerable part of my reputation, I am not her. I had many amicable disagreements with her; and we have very different personalities. She was brilliant—and even moreso in private than on the forum! A rare mind, truly unique—and irreplaceable. I am nobody. ← Nobody said this in mid-2018, and “nobody” was not here to say the obvious. ...“trust nobody”, “ask nobody’s permission”, “let no one be the eternal dictator of the world”, etc.
Let nobody enslave you. Nobody is entitled to seize your wealth, your freedom, and your virgin daughter. No one is a god.
Fear nothing.
No man is immortal. No one is invincible. And nobody understands women. * nullius pleases nobody.
Gazeta, upon the foregoing, I respectfully request that you amend OP to note that the “Lauda gang” is officially disbanded, upon authority of its Grand Prophet. As Lauda would have wanted. Edit: since October 19th, 2020, the supreme leader of the gang made a step behind, retiring in a better place, away of the hard life of the forum where even the founder is banned! But who will lead the army of the followers now? And who will control the system from now on? Could that be Foxpup, which already controls the merits system? Would that be an overwhelm for this gang leader which is known though for being a strong one? Could Foxpup reunite the two gangs into a single one which would become a legion? Or will this gang be another defunct one and the followers will spread away...? Only time will tell. Answer: Whoever comes to lead various individuals who have been following Lauda will need to succeed without involving Lauda’s reputation.
Edit 2020-10-26: Added anchor tag. (No substantive changes.) |
|
|
|
Unsolicited spam PM asking for information.... no thanks.
Seems like a waste of internet space.. [...] I myself would not issue negative trust feedback for the PM that was sent when I had been inactive and MIA for two months (!), which I politely ignored when I finally found it. [...] Thank you for your feedback. Could you clarify which of the questions might reveal confidential information? My neutral feedback is not about the interview PM. Upon information and belief, you have been asking around about the reason why Lauda left the forum, and/or otherwise seeking information about her beyond what she chose to make public. Is that correct? What else do I need to do to make sure you don't think badly of me?
General note: Anybody who receives any communications from anyone seeking nonpublic information about Lauda is encouraged to contact me. Thanks. |
|
|
|
SPAMMERS!PSA: Please do not support an exchange run by spammers. Thank you.Posted in the Monero thread:Subject: Re: [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrencyCould you imagine that you can easily earn BTC?  Seems improbable? Then we are ready to prove it is true. With our Affiliate Program, there is nothing impossible! Just register, generate your personal link, share it, and start earning. 
|
|
|
|
Lauda has left the forum, some might be happy & many are sad but the life moves on both for the Lauda and rest of the members here, I will also like to request admins to lock this topic now. Ofcourse Lauda can't lock it herself/himself. Whyever would you say such a thing? Lauda is gone for all of four days, and suddenly—you want for the forum admins, who are supporters of free expression, forcibly to shut down discussion in memory of one of the forum’s most famous members? The suggestion is just wrong on so many levels. What’s your problem? |
|
|
|
Do you agree that we do not tag users for trolling?
No. Check my feedback history; I have issued a number of troll tags, going back to February of 2018, plus other tags that you may find disagreeable. If you do not want to see my tags, that is what exclusions are for. Of course, you do not have good understanding of how the feedback system works. To the contrary, I know quite well how the feedback system works. Your peremptory declarations about the One True Way to use the trust system are not a “community standard”; and I do not need your condescending and misguided advice about how to use the trust system.
Because your post #2 seemed a bit more reasonable, I began writing a thoughtful response to some of the points that you raised. I now question if I should bother, except perhaps for this: I have not reviewed nullius's trust history but this feedback obviously is not a feedback I would like/hope/suggest anyone to leave for others considering I have some understanding of trust and flag system. I have seen nullius around with some sensible posts and hopefully this is not something serious he left. Anybody who uses negative trust feedback as a joke should be excluded by anyone sane. Your accusation that it was not serious is much worse than your quibble over the proper use of trust feedback—and yet, you hope that I was not serious? By your standards, should I leave negative trust feedback for the lulz?Have some respect for each others and then progress. Respect is earned. Demanding mine is an excellent way to lose it—permanently. I also do not quite understand why you feel a need to take vague and irrelevant potshots at TMAN, who isn’t even here to defend himself? So you think I have an exceedingly poor judgment because I step up to defend someone in a self moderated thread and then the topic starter deletes your post and keeps mine. He also leaves my arguments against you and give you no chance to respond in his thread because he locked it.
[...]
How would I know all these were going to happen when it did not happen but you are accusing me that I have poor judgment of responding in a self moderated thread where the topic started removed your posts but kept mine. Fair enough. If you agree that your own posts look awfully silly just sitting there, then I will meet you halfway and apologize for accusing you of willingly participating in that sort of idiotic nonsense.
Edit: After reading some other posts I realized that you have the issue with OgNasty and you are using the trust system as a weapon against him, ADMIT IT. Not sure why I bothered. throwing a judgment for the opponent very quickly to prove what you said is correct. Worse is to try to bully somebody into agreeing to a false accusation. You’re just trying to protect OgNasty. ADMIT IT. See how that works? You have never objected to any of my other tags. You are specifically defending him—then turning around and accusing me of “using the trust system as a weapon” against one of the most infamous scoundrels on the forum, who assuredly deserves his negative feedback. You are not acting in good faith. I think I’m done here. |
|
|
|
Copying the off-topic responses from the other topic. For my response please jump to the next post:
You're worrying too much. With multiple archives available you should feel free to delete off topic posts from your self-mod thread without having to create a separate thread to repost them. The pertinent thread is not self-moderated.
I will be editing a reply to Royse’s post #2 into my post #3. |
|
|
|
Copying the off-topic responses from the other topic.
[...]
Sorry Timelord2067, hacker1001101001 and logfiles. I did not mean any harm. I wanted to move all the discussion in this new topic since everything responding the first post made by nullius is kinda off-topic for that thread. I hope you understand.After you defended a troll and well-known scammer from me in a thread that he then locked after he deleted my reply, you have the perversity to accuse me of off-topic discussion for discussing you on a thread about you? I think that it is to me that you owe an apology, on more than one count. Javascript required. I will not bother even trying to figure out what that is supposed to be. Moreover, the topic is not my tag for trolling. I am not answerable to you; and any potential for my reply to you was cut off when Mr Nasty deleted my post and locked the thread. On principle, I will not play that game and continue discussing elsewhere with you what Mr Nasty permitted you to say there; and of course, I will not respond in Mr Nasty’s thread anymore, even if it is unlocked. That discussion is concluded. The topic, rather, is your exceedingly poor judgment, Royse. The utter ridiculousness of what you are defending is best illustrated with the power of parody:
For the record, the foregoing is written at a point when Post #2 says this: Reserved to update.
|
|
|
|
I share your sentiment, Vod. I’ve been working on letting go, to avoid false hopes. Her secure deletion of her identity was so total and so thorough, she even requested that on my end, I destroy certain cryptographic thingies that I used exclusively for our communications. (I heeded her wishes.) I doubt that she even has access to your club anymore. A cypherpunk goodbye, and goodbye for real. I have no idea if she is watching this or not. I hope so. :-/ Boldface is in the original:Hereby I want to emphasize that it will never again be possible to contact "Lauda", just as it is impossible to contact the dead. |
|
|
|
[— —] Mr Nasty, I think it’s outrageous that Vod has prevented you from answering the accusation in his self-moderated locked thread. How cowardly and despicable! Even Vod's complaint thread about me is full of lies. Protip: You should create a new “Reeeeeeeee” thread! For nobody will see your Very Important opinion, buried here on page 47 of your I-hate-Vod spam megathread.
Dawg, I ain’t stupid, yo. My own general policy is not to waste my time posting in self-moderated threads run by idiots who have a prior history of deleting my posts. Why should I waste my time? Anyway, others will see what is really going on there; and anybody who is at least minimally intelligent, or even sane will ipso facto distrust utter cretins who hurl about accusations, then permit the accused no reply whatsoever. Indeed, the best possible answer to OgNasty’s accusations against me is the plain fact that he deleted my one and only reply, and locked the thread. Nothing more needs to be said. |
|
|
|
Edit 2020-10-28: Added anchor tags. No substantive changes.
So what you are saying is that the advice is to soldier up is enough to lift the spirits of the depressed ones. No, my advice is that “depression” falls into the category of “First World Problems”, for people with at least a bit too much comfort. Being “depressed” is a self-indulgence and luxury that is unaffordable to people in poor countries, and to poor people in rich countries. If you are clinically depressed no amount of cheering will lift your spirits up. Who suggested “cheering”? I say, to the contrary, a sure means of curing “depression” is starvation. If you are desperate for food, then either your survival instincts will kick in, and you will fight to the death to obtain food—or you will soon be dead. Either way, you will not be depressed! The statement was offensive for me because it sounded inconsiderate, My statement was inconsiderate. I do not care if anybody was offended. Reality is harsh. Or if you really want to play the offence game: I am offended by whiny brats. Because, if you want to consider suffering a badge of honour like a good Christian lamb, I am a saint: I have suffered more than anybody who gets “depressed”. Hunger ( real hunger), homelessness, severe and painful illness... Been there, done that. Never begged, never scammed, never stole—even though I did really need it. And I only survived because I have a hardened, “do or die” attitude. If, in my darkest hours, I had indulged in self-pity, then I would have died—and I would deserve it! So, fuck you to anyone who takes their minor life problems as a pity-party excuse. I’ve had it worse. And others have had it much worse than I have, without the pity-party. Reality is harsh.* nullius pleases nobody.
The following is funny to me. It seems relevant. I will just stick it here. Idiots suffering the Dunning-Kruger effect, especially those who claim that dropping acid is mentally healthy, shall direct their laughable allegations of my ignorance >/dev/null. Thus, to give one case example in ten thousand that spring to mind, no psychiatrist in his right mind would pay credence or even attention to the findings, as uncovered by Hans Eysenck some years ago, that patients undergoing psychoanalysis have an improvement of 44 per cent, those subject to the effects of other psychotherapy recover at the rate of 64 per cent, and those to whom nothing whatsoever is done, who receive no treatment at all, are cured at a rate of 72 per cent.
Aghast when the news first struck with its initial shattering impact, psychiatrists quickly rallied, closed ranks, adapted very well, and conducted their own surveys, which unfortunately only confirmed Eysenck’s mordant findings. At this point and with a sigh of profound relief, there being nothing else a true scientist could do under the circumstances, psychiatrists the world over dismissed Eysenck and his findings on the grounds that Eysenck is a racist sonuvabitch. Although psychoanalysis has fallen in popularity (and I do mean popularity), I would suggest that not much has really changed in the past 38 years. Otherwise, we would not be seeing the awful findings of such meta-analysis as, for example, that done by the Reproducibility Project. ( N.b. that the Reproducibility Project consists of peer-reviewed studies by credentialed mainstream researchers; they have been trying to cure their field of a plague of irreproducible results!) Evidence-based medicine is a promising trend in recent times, but it seems to be applied the least in psychiatry. IMO.
spoiled brats who have it relatively easier, so they whine about “depression” and/or kill themselves over trivialities.
To hell with self-pity.
 In the course of my life, I have had a few people announce to me their intentions to kill themselves. I didn’t taunt them. I just coolly gave my stock answer to all suicide threats: “Go ahead. It is your right. I will not stop you. Your such decisions are none of my business, though I do suggest that you should first execute a last will and testament.” None of them went through with it—at least, not so far. It’s amazing how the ardour to embrace death can cease, when it is found to be not a way to get my attention, much less my sympathy. If any of them were actually to kill themselves, I would be unmoved. If a weak-minded fool kills himself over some triviality, then I do not care—whereas if somebody’s life is genuinely so horrid as to be unendurable, then I have no right to condemn that from my position of relative comfort! Anyway, it’s not my body—not my life—not my decision. That is a matter of principle.“Nihil melius aeterna lex fecit quam quod unum introitum nobis ad vitam dedit, exitus multos.” — Seneca, Epist. mor.“Qui mori didicit, servire dedidicit.” — Ibid. That was the big, bold quote in my signature until three days ago: ‘Who learns to die, unlearns to serve [in the sense of slavery].’ Prevention of suicide is immoral.
|
|
|
|
Defamation. And a pitiably weak job of it, I might add. This attempt at constructing a bizarre conspiracy theory is peculiarly absurd, now more than ever.“The only thing that matters here is profit.” Um, so why did Lauda herself request for her own account to be banned by theymos, to protect it from being abused— instead of selling it for profit, or exit-scamming? /logic The rest of the following is also malicious nonsense, considered as a whole: I never participated in a bounty campaign, so I dont know how it works. I'm posting here because the OP contacted me, about the Lauda gang.
Lauda gang is a fraud. They pose as bulls, but defend paper speculation over crypto, which never brings bullish results.
I dont think there is a solution to the problem of "reputation" in this forum. Every forum have its cliques, and when you top it with a reputation system, the dominating clique entrenches in its structure, and starts to bully people. It is the case we see here.
But we can fight it back: every time they give a -1 trust, you give a -1 to them as well. Dont be afraid of these bullies. The only thing that matters here is profit.
Bitcoin is finally going up, the way I described it earlier: it needs to breach the 12k to start the bull run, and its finally happening. And now I'm also stacked with altcoins, so the gains might be even higher. I'm invested in Ethereum, Link, Monero and Cardano. All great projects.
|
|
|
|
Fun speculation about Lauda’s famously secretive personality is one thing. Digging for presumably confidential information is quite another. p.s. If you really want to know why Lauda left, write to minerjones in PM, and he will gladly tell you this secret, leaving the tag "Unsolicited PM spam". Oh, so is that what really happened? And here I just naturally assumed that it was annoyance at a request for interrogation. (I observe that Lauda never did that interview, either...) On the reasonable inference that zasad@ told you something I don’t know, I am using this post as a reference for positive trust feedback for minerjones. He seems to know his privacy stuff. I respect people who don’t pry into others’ business, who don’t gossip... You seem to know your privacy stuff. I respect people who work on their opsec. ...and who are so highly protective of confidences that they will reply with wrath at even being asked to violate them! It reminds me of someone grumpy, whom I declared “superlatively trustworthy”. 😿
Lauda was always lolz. 😺 ...but there are a few things that she never joked about, such as: Confidences, and money. Deadly serious grumpy kitty, on those particular points.
By the way, a salutary PSA: I am sure that Lauda did not tell anybody why she left. If she didn’t tell me, it means that she didn’t tell minerjones or anybody else. I knew her at least well enough to know that. So, don’t bug people who were known to be somehow connected to Lauda for information that they do not have! And yes, if you ask me for “secret” information that I do not have anyway, then I will issue negative trust feedback to you just on principle. It seems counterproductive and inadvisable, so don’t try it. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
