But buying accounts with feedback is ok?

Unfortunately all it takes is for a friend to log in once on your PC using Total Information Awareness book, or using a library computer, etc. In reality it is not always something you agree to.

Oh but you did. I linked a video about a man arguing AGAINST limiting people's speech in order to protect people from offense, and your response:


You clearly disagree with the man's statements. Therefore either you:
A) Agree that speech should be limited to prevent offense.
B) Didn't even bother watching it and are just being contrarian because that is what you do.
C) you don't understand any of this and are just pretending you do.

If I did not clearly state your point, perhaps you should actually declare your position instead of defining your points only by the deconstruction of the arguments of others. This is the kind of things that cowards who can not back up their own beliefs do. If you never declare your position, then how can anyone argue against it? Better to just criticize the standpoints of others, it is much safer that way and your precious believee feelees wont ever be challenged.



But you did after all say this:


So what about your statement about arguments being fruitless applies to me but not you? By making this statement you either mean just me, or everyone (including yourself). Again you seem to pretend as if you are on some higher level of thought that no one else is capable of. Not at all arrogant and bias



First of all, what makes you think I am an American white male libertarian capitalist? Speaking of biases this is a pretty big one. There is no way you could know my race, gender, or nationality, and thinking you can judge this by my words alone makes you - A RACIST & A SEXIST- because you are judging people by your own prejudices about skin color and gender. Additionally I love how when a man judges people for being female it is sexist, but when a woman judges people for being male, it is just evening the balance of power! Not at all sexist. This statement also it makes clear your incredible bias, because any argument that counters your worldview MUST be from an American white male libertarian capitalist now must it? Not bias at all.

I like how almost every single one of your arguments uses emotion as a basis, as if it is equivalent to logic. A sure sign of an intelligent person with the ability for critical thought.

First of all, are you even in the US? Do your lords and masters even let lowly subjects such as yourself you own a firearm where you live? Do you fear the coast guard? Because that was designed in a very similar way to the independent militia system, only the governor of each state controls them.

The militias are NOT dangerous, this perception is 100% comprised of media lies any hype. The vast majority of militias are composed of former military and police officers (ie patriotic law abiding citizens). If you are so terrified of militias, why aren't you afraid of the coast guard, or the army, or police for that matter? Militias in the US have never tried to take control. Their only purpose is to serve as an independent armed force to preserve the constitution of the USA. Never have they tried to subvert the government despite the news media jizz you chug down like koolaid.

"normal people feeling the power to rule"? First of all militias aren't for anything except rule of law. Second, you really believe normal people are more dangerous than the psychopaths currently in charge, and you feel safer with them continuing to run things? You are pretty mental. Have you ever heard of Stockholm syndrome? You are right about one thing, the militia are only there to help some people, and that is the people within their own state. There is nothing wrong with that, because that is their duty to protect the law of the land of the state they are based in. Further more, the USA, is SUPPOSED to be run by "normal people", not queens and lords like I am sure are in charge where you live.

You "know all the shit of mankind would go to it". How exactly have you come to this conclusion? Was it from talking with actual militia members or hearing their arguments, or was it because the glowing idiot box told you so? What evidence do you actually have that militias are racist?

"I guess it doesnt need explaination why such people shouldnt be allowed to legally build a military power."
It does not need explaining why? Because you declare it so? If you are going to make an argument usually that requires you back up your points, not just declare them obvious fact for everyone (because it is not).

As far as your Stanford prison experiment example, please explain to me what effect exactly that has on militias that it doesn't have on police, military, coast guard, TSA, DHS, FBI, ATF, etc, or any other government controlled use of force that you are so willing to put your faith in? This argument is moot because it equally applies to any other use of force you feel may be more appropriate.

It is very clear to me that you either:
A. Don't reside in the US (probably in some western European slum that likes to pretend they are better than the rest of the world)
B. A fervent antigun nut (because if you decide to be defenseless, everyone else should be too)
C. Or both

Here is an interview with some actual militia leaders so you can see what bloodthirsty dictatorial racists they are for yourself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ky49ltgeXRU

We have this in the USA, it is called the militia. Unfortunately the government does not like competition in their monopoly on the use of force, so it has been systematically attacked, dismantled, and cast as being made up of batshit rightwing terrorists.

As usual the socialists run away when confronted with the faults in their logic, because they have no actual substance behind their arguments, just platitudes that play on your emotions.

Nazis = National Socialist German Workers' Party

Socialism = leftist

Check & mate.

You can't even form a complete sentence and I am a kid?

Quote from Abyrness81 from a pm in an escrow I provided: "I'm not acting like a children , I only changed my thought. "
stop following me around.

More proof that the rules are for everyone... except staff, mods, and their pals.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=915823.0;all

Why would we need due process or courts in a Theymostatorship?

You forgot this one too: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=915823.0
In this case he left negative trust... for pointing out he abuses the trust...

The staff here protect him for some reason, because the rules seem to mater for everyone else - except Vod

Every time he breaks the rules some brown noser says something like "he learned his lesson" or "give him another chance" even though he has done this over and over and over again, demonstrating his complete disregard for the rules he so willfully runs around destroying other people's work and reputations over.

THE RULES ARE IMPORTANT (unless of course it is me then they don't apply at all)! -Forum staff mantra

First of all the MSDN keys have nothing to do with me other than the fact I spoke in related threads. How he handled that situation has nothing to do with his negative rating for me, where he also abused his position in the default trust list. However, in the course of me discussing the MSDN key situation, he did not like the fact that I was critical of him so he suddenly declared in the middle of a related thread he was giving me a negative. He didn't neg rate me for "lying" about some long past event which he can't even seem to name, he clearly did it to use his authority to retaliate for calling out his abusive behavior.


I DID already drop this subject once, after he changed his negative rating to a neutral previously. Clearly he did not "learn his lesson" the first time when he was given a "second" chance, because here we are AGAIN:




And don't forget the other people he did this too, documented earlier in this thread alone:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=915823.msg10058903#msg10058903
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=915823.msg10069566#msg10069566


Technically this would be his 4th or 5th chance at least, yet he still keeps exhibiting the same behavior, and people like you still make excuses for him.

In that case I am sure Theymos will remove him from his default trust list as well as ask SaltySpitoon to remove him as he did in my case.
Clearly this is grounds for removal as demonstrated by this thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=846683.0;all

Since the staff/admins/mods claim there is no selective enforcement of the rules here, this should be an open and shut case resulting in the removal of BayAreaCoins from the default trust.

I was removed from the default trust list by SaltySpitoon for almost exactly this same scenario. I am sure Saltyspitoon will be rushing to remove BayAreaCoins from his trust list right away!

Tell me please, what do those other threads about Vod have to do with me? I didn't start them, why are they my responsibility? Why is it because a lot of other people make threads accusing him some how my complaint has less value? That doesn't sound at all like you are reviewing the facts but simply letting your confirmation bias take its course. Don't you think the continual stack of complaints against Vod might be a symptom of his behavior instead of just being a petty nuisance for you to read so many thread titles with his name in it?

Vod clearly abused his position on the default trust to silence me from speaking out about his abuse. He can't even explain his rating without contradicting himself. Him abusing my reputation costs you nothing, so frankly your opinion is meaningless to me because in reality it doesn't effect you to just pretend he isn't abusing his position on the default trust list. I have a right to bring his abuse to public light regardless of your opinions on the matter. If you don't like all the threads about Vod, perhaps Vod's behavior has something to do with it and you should address him.


It is quite convenient that Vod declares the debate over right as I prove his claims have no substance by demonstrating the inconsistencies in his own statements. You still have not responded as to why this is a lie about you. You have not provided even a single justification for your rating for me that you conveniently decided to make a negative in the middle of a discussion about your abusive behavior that I was a party to. Of course it is because I "lied" about you, not because you are annoyed that I am exposing your abusive actions and you want me to stop talking about it.

With the phasing out of the quota system and in some states the drug war, police now have to get even more creative to find a way to keep those paychecks coming in so they don't get laid off from lack of collecting fines. This kind of baiting and aggressive police behavior will only become more common as they start losing their jobs. Instances like the police protests in New York demonstrate that they are little more than revenue collection agents. We don't need them, and every one knows it, now they are getting scared they might lose their jobs so they have to invent ways for themselves to be in demand by creating chaos (kind of like politicians). Just google "civil asset forfeiture" to see how sick and twisted "justice" is currently in the USA.

Actually Facebook collects data in the background processes of your computer even when you aren't signed in. You agree to this in the TOS.

Why did anyone sign up for Total Information Awareness book anyway?

So you believe that speech should be controlled in order to protect people from offense? How does this effect the free exchange of ideas and discussion of how to improve the world by doing so? Please explain to me exactly what about his argument is incorrect and why. Just because he used reductive examples does not automatically make his arguments incorrect or fallacious.

As far as your video, if your opinion is all humans are incapable of debate and reason, then what are you doing here wasting your time pushing your worldview?

sold

Oh I see, so your story has changed now. Amazing how that works after I demonstrate your inconsistencies. I don't need dozens of examples, I need one comment that you can verify as a lie (not that that is an excuse for neg rating me but the fact that you can't provide this demonstrates your disingenuous reasons for leaving the rating).

Please tell me how this is a lie about you, and how you can demonstrate it is false, otherwise you are just trying to fluff up your personal revenge with empty window dressing.

Proof Vod changed the rating to a negative as a direct result of my criticism of his behavior when mass negging key sellers in a related thread. Some one takes notice of his neutral rating for me, suddenly he feels it should be changed back to negative as he is enraged because I dare to challenge him:


He is using the trust system to attempt to silence anyone critical of his actions.