Today, I have signed off for the last time.  The 3 forums I have contact with are now history.  It's turned into a study of behavioral patterns of individuals in different forum venues.  Forums can be intriguing but can also be dangerous depending on your psychological stability.  I'm completely convinced there have been many people harmed by their brutality and the fiction of social acceptance.

Information gained from forums is tainted for the most part by control mechanisms and social status.  Groups are key and absolute power.  There is no place for natural concourse.  The most ignorant troll can move the intelligent base by social manipulation.  Worse, the psychological pattern of trolling is learned by the intelligent few though association.  They don't even know they have become trolls.  Therefore the term has become fuzzy and nondescript and really has no basis in value unless it can be properly explained and/or defined.  People use the term for about anything and for any reason.


Trolling is a psychological mechanism that uses social memes to do several things:


1. To affect a response for the sake of a response.

2. To inflame people's emotions for the sake of inflaming people's emotions.

3. To make statements that control the social balance of the clientèle while excluding any individuals who could make a defense of such control.

4. To offend another member by planting innuendo in separate threads avoiding direct contact, direct naming or argument. 

5. To create a forum base that excludes those that don't conform to a certain social behavior or clique, in ways that transcend the management's intent.

6.  To affect, control, make, offend or create dissonance either purposefully or subliminally (learned)


Maybe there should be 3 different definitions of troll.  One that depicts the ass who just has fun generating a response, one that manipulates by social controls on the inside, and the other that has a motivated agenda.  I would suggest:

1. Sociopathic Troll

2. Socially Exclusive Troll

3. The Motivative Troll

One might consider "low troll" and "high troll" and "spy troll" respectively.  The first two definitions take care of themselves by the definition of sociopath and social exclusivity. The Motivative Troll depicts someone who may have an underlying motivation such as to gain money or information.  That motivation could be anything from personal information as would be sought by a private investigator or for fraud, to general information for political reasons or propagation of misinformation such as anti-global warming propaganda, etc.

The use of forums should always be understood as a game.  Never make the mistake of assuming forums represent any reality whatsoever.  People who use forums are anonymous.  They take on any desired persona and speak in a voice not their own.  It is based on digitally typed information, not person to person contact. It doesn't take long to get in a habit of believing a user is a real personality; they most assuredly are not.  


Mistakes of social order or even mistaken interpretation of your writing can immediately put you into a position of being an outsider and victim to scorn.  In effect, you are never allowed to make human errors of judgment.  An error can become part of the interpretation of your character that is passed from person to person by indirect communication outside of your control.  There is no recourse, as confronting the accuser proves the accusers "assumed" accusation.  Since an accusation "really wasn't made" only alluded to, you have no defense base.  In confronting an accuser, you can also be accused of being out of order which is the easiest way to defuse responsibility.


Considering this, I think care should always be taken when considering joining any forum.  Never take any statement for face value, never become personally evolved, never make the mistake of assuming that what you offer will or can be understood by anyone.  Never assume that if only one person takes offense or misinterprets your statement that it's insignificant, and you will remain immune to social expulsion by humiliation or exclusion.


Forums are mob rule in the most primitive form and no FAQ or Administrative Rules can protect you from it.  It's all about the lowest common denominator, the base rule of the social order... and dumbing down is the social order of our day.


End of informal study.

Anyone ever notice the "grooming" that goes on in forums?  I've been doing the rounds of several atheist forums.  I found a couple of them to be a bit over moderated, another not so bad, one of them is a snake pit... man it was like hearing newbies bones breaking before they hit the bottom of the pit... nasty.  All of them have a couple of things in common.  One is that they all profess openness of rhetoric, another, they proclaiming openness to many ideologies.  Each has it's own method of moderation with rule sets that pretty much say the same thing within certain bounds, but none of them seem to have moderators that follow their own guidelines.  My point has little to do with moderators.  What I am getting at is every one of these collectives divides into clans, the ins and the outs.  There are those who belong and those who are not of the elect.  I suppose it's a human trait to seek your "own kind".  With the distance we have come as social beings, I wonder why we haven't quite reached that place where segregation is obsolete.  Forum collectives categorize individuals by their judgment of style, personality, psychological makeup, education, intelligence, coolness... E.G. "He's one of us", "he talks like us, he walks like us", "he is different than they are so he's must be one of us".  Where does creativity fit into the equation?  "Oh, we are so into creativity... we are artistically enlightened..." as long as the creativity fits the clan mold which is usually some form of dumbing down.

It's grooming!  Forum grooming.  Forums groom those who enter to fit its craziness, it's vast collection of knowledge and information, it's social rules, it's language usage.  If one guy says, "oh goodness gracious" and another says, "god dammit"  these 2 will automatically be herded to their proper line of recognition for membership and to it's exclusive clan.  But if you are inclined to belong to the "IN" group, there are certain qualifications of grooming that must be recognized from first glance.  Each member of the elite knows what that code is; it is either there or it's not.  If not, you can never enter the esoteric glory of the elite center of power.  But they all know through their benevolence that each belongs to it's own small clan and the underlings will find their own way or be wished into the cornfield; it's of no concern.  

But then there are those that show that "certain" promise, whether it's genetic or social dogie eyes; These could possibly be fit for grooming.  If they learn the right lingo, the right way to express themselves, the use of just the right vulgarity for hipness, then they may have what it takes.   Learning by observation how to spurn others toward their dark corners or better yet, "shun" them into subservience is a real plus.  This is the path to the groomed forum elite.  "Don't be too smart, only be as smart as we are, no less no more",  "Never think from the right hemisphere unless it has enough earthiness to show our dumbed down nature; that's the way we do it now."  No sharp corners, no dull corners, just our corners.  The rest of the underlings scramble into their own cliques of necessity so that they can at least have some assembly of discussion with the meager leftovers of civilization and maybe the hope of forum evolution.  

Everyone needs a box.  Everyone needs to be heard and listened to.  Why?  Everyone wants to belong.  Everyone needs to be needed.  Everyone wants to be part of something.  Sometimes in that process the old core nature gets greedy and wants to be best.  When there is a best, then there are class differences, and segregation is not far behind.

I am beginning to see in forums human nature playing out it's way of acceptance and dismissal.  It's a microcosm of the world.  It can be the old world, or it can be a new world.  How can we in all our special ways and styles and minds share with each other in a way that makes us all better?  And happier?  

[Vocabulary list] frequent contributers, newbies, smart asses, one of us, trolls, kids, olds, mods, theists, +reps, -reps, non-theists, poes, admins, mates, buddies, ignores, haters, groups, dicks

Atheists. What a strange bunch.  They are the first to acknowledge reason but the last to be reasonable.  If someone finds a beautiful reality based on the real, the tangible, the logical, you would think they would be the first to be interested in every aspect of their argument.  You would think they would have grown out of the religionists trap of "seek your own and destroy all others" syndrome.  No.  You will not find atheists to be any more open to the needs and ideas of other like minded thinkers outside of socially acceptable boundaries.  The human trait of tribalism is just as rampant among the enlightened as it is the endarkened.  At least the religionists lock their doors so no one who might besmirch their dogma can enter a dissenting word; they just block you.  The atheists... they tout their openness then they ignore... other atheists that is.  If there is a fun fundie to toy with, off they go on a wild goose chase in circles without end like a bunch of laughing hyenas.  Anyone who thinks outside the box is at once labeled and disabled, no right brained thinkers allowed... and no disagreements outside of your little sandbox.

I am a proud atheist.  That does not mean I find any acceptable human behavior that would promote it's beauty.  You would think the rule should be human acceptance and benevolence.  You won't find it there any more than in the Christian world.  Atheists, Christians, Muslims, the rest... all human... and still full of self-righteousness, tribalism, clique mentality.  What dress color is that?  Oh, you don't belong.  Go read a bible or something.

The contradiction of terms of the day:  an open minded fundamentalist
Oxymoron of the day: Thinking Atheist

Or, maybe it's me...

I have made maybe 2 friends who are atheists in the last 5 years.  I guess that is as good as it gets if you don't play the old, old games.  I think I'll start a forum.  I will call it "TheRedundantAtheist" or maybe, TheNonconformistAtheist".  At least there will be one member... maybe.

Theists want to be rid of Atheists, I know.  There are many articles about threats against non-believers as well as arguments of faith to convert us.  It seems Atheists either need to be saved or destroyed.  There is no middle ground.  That's too bad.  It's too bad that we can't exist together, but there is hope for all you fundies out there!  There is a way to eliminate us... completely!  Non existent!   There is a way that we just disapear into a puff non existance.  If the theists really want to eliminate us all together, there is a very simple solution and I don't know why they haven't thought of this before because they could do this in a moment, in a thought, in a simple act of Christian good will.  Sound fun?

Here is the solution: As a collective of believers, all they have to do is eliminate themselves.  If they just stopped believing in their silly myths, Atheists would cease to exist.  If there are no theists, there would be no A-theists.  We would be A- what?  We wouldn't be A-anything.  We would all just.... be.

Let's all eliminate ourselves, OK?

I have never taught but for some strange reason I miss teaching.  

When I was a kid, I was interested in everything, everyone's ideas, ideals, experiences, everything.  I would take time with elderly people who would sit quietly in single chair most of the day and I would listen to them tell stories about their lives and the countries where they lived.  I remember this one elderly woman named Nana who was about 90, I was 8.  Her stories were of growing up in Sweden where she would work in her mothers diner and  she would describe it in great detail, "And we would serve a steak and potato and salad for 25 cents".  Over and over I listened to her words thinking, "what was so important that she would remember this so dearly".  I remember listening to my teachers quite intently, and anyone else for that matter.  These were people who had experiences which I could not possibly know.  On my uncle's farm, I would listen to his stories about work, animals and his form of rural ethics.  I would also watch carefully to see how his words matched what he did in his everyday life.  There was a lofty sense of urgency when he spoke of Christian ideals that he firmly and absolutely believed.  My father was a man of great but simple wisdom.  He was probably the most patient person I have ever known and from him I learned how to relate to difficult people.  I not only had respect, but an interest in the artifacts they stored and wondered why they did so.  Even though I was maybe a bit overboard, it was not uncommon that young people naturally listened at one level or another to those who were more experienced. 

I honestly do not believe that even exists anymore.

We can blame the '60's, the 70's, the 80's, 90's whatever, but that isn't it.  I'm sure you also remember all those phrases about "when I was your age, we had respect" and other exclamations of this type.  But it IS different now.  There is something fundamentally wrong with society and our collective children that is disjointed, even fractured.  It seems to me that from birth it is assumed they have nothing more to learn.  Everything is at their fingertips, the "stuff" the information.  Even with information, they have no idea what to do with it.  It's not connected to humanity, experience, the knowledge of time and living space.  It's purely digital, electrical, physically and socially unconnected.  Suspicion abounds due to a wariness toward adults or those over or between or around or categorized to be a certain age.  "Beware of those who are older because all they want are your young bodies, your freedom and your future".  Human development is being segregated by age groups lest one infect the other.  "Only have contact with your immediate family or your own age group"... Then again, listen to anything you read from your sacred holy IPad... that is, as long as the information is from someone within an age boundary less than your age minus the cube root of your intellect divided by Saturn's distance * pi... jeez.  

Blame...?  Reasons...?  Blame the Catholics for their offenses.... ?  Blame the computer age...?  Blame the system...?  Blame religion...?  Blame politics, business, parents, schools, no one, everyone, solar flares, a flat universe, Satan, satin, cotton, rayon, polystyrene, graphite nano-tubes, 12VDC, saccharin, an apple a day, over protection, undercoating, carbon dioxide, carbon dating, dinosaurs, infrared, redshift, Nemesis, black holes, white shoes, tight underwear.....?????

Maybe all of the above.  Maybe not.

I have lived quite a while.  I wish I had the satisfaction that what I have learned could be shared with the newbies, not necessarily with a response of absolute certitude but with imagination that creates more questions.  Questions that make the possibility of further knowledge and human understanding beyond my measly experience.  But it seems that everyone starts over with every generation, every lifetime starting from scratch or worse, choosing a path of rejection and devolution.  I have learned a lot of things in my years... for what?  Just for me?

I was reading a post the other day on an Atheist forum.  There was a signature of one of it's members that stopped me for a moment.   After thinking about it's implications I decided I needed to take exception to it. 

The statement says:

"what DO you believe? That will define you."

I disagree.

Beliefs are changeable, arbitrary and ambiguous.  Once we have one, we have to decide what we do or don't do with that belief multiplying the ambiguity.  Some people do what they don't believe, some don't do what they do believe.  Doing what we believe is more logical, but it's an arbitrary choice depending on how we wish to proceed.  

Belief is a collection of information and conclusions.  If each of us lived on an island by ourselves, then what we believe is the only belief, nullifying belief; belief becomes "is".  Our "self definition" would be one dimensional and simply "self" or the embodiment of existing; there are no other "selves" for comparison to give rise to a value.  So, neither belief nor our definition of self are valid; it's a null pointer.

If we are living in an interactive world, the definition of ourself becomes valid only by how we compare ourselves to that world.  Therefore, how we offer ourselves to be perceived by others and how we interact with that world will always and exclusively be what defines us.  

Beliefs are ambiguous. It's what you DO... That is what defines you.

Republicanism As Religion

Excellent article!

... Even better answer!

I Don't Know...

Some loving Christians respond...

"What harm would it do, if a man told a good strong lie for the sake of the good and for the Christian church … a lie out of necessity, a useful lie, a helpful lie, such lies would not be against God, he would accept them." 

Martin Luther

-----`----,---`-{@

The words of Eusebius Pamphili, a Roman historian (c. AD 263–339) states in his Book Evangelical Preparation:

"It may be lawful and fitting to use fictions [falsehood] as a medicine, and for the benefit of those [Christians] who want to be deceived." 

He was the first to "notice" the infamous Testimonium Flavianum of Josephus the historian whose account apologetics claim "proves" the existence of Jesus Christ 300 years earlier... and, of course, was probably treated with Eusebius's "medicinal fictions".

Religions are an organized expression of inward altruism in conjunction with outward animosity. 

Der Mensch kann was er will; er kann aber nicht wollen was er will.
--Man can do what he will but he cannot will what he wills. Max Planck

I heard an interesting idea this evening derived from some writings of Joseph Campbell.  I went to a Jung Society meeting tonight and although the audience at the event was almost intolerable, I did hear a couple of snippets that I thought were thought provoking.

A myth is the story of the unexplainable; it's a way of explaining the unexplainable.  The moment one tries to prove a myth, it ceases to be a myth; it becomes dogma.

I would say that means that religion is not a myth.  It is dogma.  I have always thought of religion as both.  But using this definition, and I think it is worth exploring, religion is not myth at all.

Interesting...  I'll give it a think.

I have to add my little comment about the attacks on Sony Pictures since there are definitely 2 sides to understand here that are not being defined on the Internet properly.  The attacks that Sony is experiencing are very simple old world SQL injection attacks.  How can a company with such a huge perceived reputation be legally allowed to handle the personal data of so many millions of people around the world?  Does anyone understand the economic, political let alone personal consequences of this data getting into the hands of real terrorists or being used for nefarious military purposes?  I have a few small servers just for the fun of it and I get SQL injection attacks from mostly China and Russia almost every day.  I have had not even a slow down keeping them at bay.  It's the best computer game on the net... keeping out the bad guys and it is rather simple to do.  I cannot understand the reprehensible lack of responsibility Sony as well as other major companies have allowed.

 These hackers are doing us all a great favor in showing us the irresponsible behavior companies around the world are exhibiting.  They deserve a Nobel prize.

About 6 months ago, I decided to completely rebuild a 1937 General Electric AM/Shortwave radio that I inherited some years ago.  It stands about 4 feet tall and is beautifully ornate with inlays and nicely shaped birds eye woods from top to bottom.  The electronics have never been touched.  All original wiring, tubes, capacitors, dog bone resistors and covered with poisonous cadmium coating, I began carefully cleaning and replacing all necessary parts.  To my surprise, most of the tubes were in excellent shape.  I did need to replace all electrolytic capacitors but all of the smaller m caps were just fine.  I finished the case with much hand sandpapering and finalized it with a coat of shellac to give it a look that was as original as possible.  It looked (looks) absolutely stately and is probably the finest piece of furniture in the entire house.   Turning it on for the first time was a delight seeing all those ancient tubes warm and the lights behind the crystal dial beam.  With a tweak here and there to the oscillators, off to radio land I went.

 One problem though... There is absolutely nothing on AM worth listening to.  It remains the most beautiful piece of furniture in the house now.  But unfortunately, that is about all.......

I think we should give our good pastor Camping a break.  His rapturous insights have done more for the cause of reason than I could have hoped for.  He's an evangelist for atheism!

Study: Changes Of 1960s Behind Church's Abuse Crisis

I wrote this comment on the NPR web site...

So, it's not the priests or the Bishops or the Cardinals or the Pope that
is to blame... it's society!   it's everyone but them!   Come on... when
will people grow up and get rid of this sub-human, antiquated behavior
called Catholicism? or religion in general for that matter. It is truly
a sort of sociological psychopathy... You must believe the lies till they finally
come true... (at least in the sociopathic world you have created) ...then seek and destroy all who don't agree... (that's historic)

It is
all lies!

Reason! That is the only sane way to live.

 Message to American Atheists

The longer I live, the more it seems that the younger of our species reject our experience.  Is it that I am really not as smart as I think I am and just lose the ability to comprehend the deterioration, or do the younger just increase in their rejection of age?  Maybe it's that the younger generations are not as smart as they used to be or maybe their patience has globally warn so thin that they are not as susceptible to learning. Now that would be scary. 

 I just had an email conversation with a young man who has put together a very nice new rendition of a Linux operating system.  He seems to have a nice concept of technical construction and an exceptional bent toward peaceful argumentation.  But there is nothing there.  Predetermined opinions even in such a well rounded person takes hold and logic is dismissed in a flippant, "I can't hear you" kind of argument.  Even in this situation, there is no reasonable weighing of facts or information; it's just to dismiss the argument and run.  In my experience, there is absolutely no reason to continue the conversation as it just turns into useless banter with no exchange whatsoever.  What a dangerous way to live, no thinking is involved, no comparison, no questions other than the trite ones that defend and have no answer.  It's so much easier to not have to reason or think.  That way you don't have to learn anything.  Heaven forbid we should have to increase our knowledge.

Simple is good.  To simplify is good... Occam's razor, technical fluidity... etc.  To be simplistic..., to be simple minded... not good at all.

I don't claim to know everything, nor do I think my opinion is more sound than anyone else's.  I would just like to know that what I say has been listened to with a certain amount of respect and evaluation.  Then go ahead and tear it apart, I don't care.  That way maybe both sides could learn a little something.

On the lighter side.....

Did you ever know a pheasant that really wasn't pleasant?
For phesantry is pleasantry and rarely's plucking done.
An effervescent pheasant is so pleasant, don't you see,
So a pheasant plucking peasant like myself confess to thee,
That I'm not a pheasant plucker, I'm the pheasant plucker's son
And I'm only plucking pheasants till the pheasant plucking's done!

I am probably the most naive person I have ever known.  Not because I lack basic knowledge or insight, but because I refuse to yield to the diseases of a sociopathic society.   It seems there is no more use for truth.  Truth is a wide brush in this context, I know.  But the truth I am talking about is the truth that is in the heart of every individual; it's the truth that is second nature to every two year old but mysteriously disintegrates with the injection of dogma.  It's not the truth that is so easily manufactured by political forces, nor the truth that is manipulated by the ignorant usury within a corrupt legal system and skewed by those who would maim and destroy the innocent to gain power or eke a quota.  It's not the truth whose dogma is so deeply entrenched in fear and meme, encapsulating that "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" believer in a cage of blithering stupidity.  Truth is the enemy of dogma, the traitor, the pestering gnat that buzzes in the ear of blind faith. Reason is the only judge of truth and we are in anarchy.

The lie: our savior, our Satan, our lover, our antidote, our nation, our narcotic, our creation, our progeny. This is the means by which monarchs and priests, pastor and politician sear in the minds of man those delectable diseases that deny the mind's freedom, filling the soul with sclerotic ignorance. It's the sustenance of the sadist and the addiction of our time.  If god be for us, who can be against us?  Well, we are.

I refuse to participate in the ritual of unreason, therefore I am shunned.  I am set in a crystal can, held for all perfect believers to pity and finally dispose of in whatever fashion is entertaining and righteous. In the beginning of the first thing lay our inestimable future.  In the beginning of the end we have become the virus.   I am sentenced to pure naive reason, for the cat's out of the bag.  It's the unpardonable sin, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.  I choose to camp beneath those branches and wish for the rest of humanity to come to their senses.  For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world and loose his own soul?  Not a damned thing.

How many people realize how much the world has been changed by the Internet and it's phenomena of social networking?  It's hard to believe that some stupid little Internet communication systems like Facebook or Twitter have toppled governments, deposed dictators, broken the iron hand of politics and changed the publics understanding of science just to name a few. 

On the other darker side, it has allowed the ignorant the lying voice of religious fanaticism.  it has allowed the intelligent to control the ignorant masses is a more subtle way.  It has propagated false ideas, beliefs and myths.  It has made a way for the filtering of the real and is posed to filter the very thing that makes us human: free thought and the expansion of knowledge.  It has also allowed business to have more control over politics and the environment and allowed it to actually stifle and kill what could be the best business future by promoting it's dogma.

 Be careful.  Seek the truth. Listen and learn.

There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation.

I found this on the net today...

Religion is the ultimate slavery: it is the slavery of the mind, slavery to the fear of divine judgment and damnation. The devilish irony consists in the fact that 'divine judgment' and 'damnation' are themselves the inventions of religion: religion creates and exquisitely perfects the fear, then cynically declares itself the sole and indispensable liberator from it.

ditto!

Religion, politics, the American legal system... all intertwined.