A
A Holistic Approach to the Verbal Diarrhea of Alan
Guest
I’m sorry, Alan. Let me save you the trouble: I largely misunderstood your post last night.
http://www.morrissey-solo.com/discuss/index.cgi?noframes;read=287274
The strange way in which you write—around and around the subject, but never toward it; and always under the mistaken impression that I share all of the views of everyone else who dislikes your abuse of special privilege—simply blunted me. This site is a “business venture,” you say? Would you then say that your spamming was—good for business? Matters of economy-type affect whether or not you and Paul should be punished equally for identical misconduct? It’s all difficult, challenging stuff, made no easier by the torrent of condescension-from-below that you can always be relied upon to provide. Add to that the fact that my bullshit detector exploded at one point and what you’ve got, Alan—what you’ve got—is a very hectic read.
The bulk of your post—about the rights of site administrators, and uh, capitalism vs. anarchy—still has nothing to do with me or with the points I’ve made. Hence I hadn't read your whole post carefully. I’ve only now realized, for example, that your babble about having the Tseng-given right [crosses chest, fingers rosary] to post as often as you like (which I took last night to be a weird, hypothetical example of what Good site users can do, no matter how idiotic) was actually a reference to the thousands of posts made by your robots! I didn’t realize that, Alan! Bravo! You did admit to introducing the robots into the chat! Sort of! Well done! I’m proud of you.
A problem, though: you try to defend the spamming by contending that you “made” each and every one of the thousands of posts that your robots made, and that my disliking those posts is not different from my hypothetically disliking a flurry of uninteresting posts from an actual Homo sapiens, on speed and going sleepless for three days in a row. While the cruel, poetic tactic of replacing Jennifer Swegan with a DOS program even more tedious—ah ha, I see your good side now!—appeals to me, I have to point out that although you may have written the programs that made the posts, you certainly did not make the posts themselves! While you can and should claim responsibility for the spamming of the chat, you cannot obfuscate, yet again, by claiming each of those thousands of posts as your “speech.” The right to free speech, under the U.S. Constitution or even, we can reasonably expect, here in Tseng Tseng Prison, does not apply to computer programs, my desperate, dippy sophist in Arizona.
Want to go back to arguing about what “delete” means, now?
http://www.morrissey-solo.com/discuss/index.cgi?noframes;read=287274
The strange way in which you write—around and around the subject, but never toward it; and always under the mistaken impression that I share all of the views of everyone else who dislikes your abuse of special privilege—simply blunted me. This site is a “business venture,” you say? Would you then say that your spamming was—good for business? Matters of economy-type affect whether or not you and Paul should be punished equally for identical misconduct? It’s all difficult, challenging stuff, made no easier by the torrent of condescension-from-below that you can always be relied upon to provide. Add to that the fact that my bullshit detector exploded at one point and what you’ve got, Alan—what you’ve got—is a very hectic read.
The bulk of your post—about the rights of site administrators, and uh, capitalism vs. anarchy—still has nothing to do with me or with the points I’ve made. Hence I hadn't read your whole post carefully. I’ve only now realized, for example, that your babble about having the Tseng-given right [crosses chest, fingers rosary] to post as often as you like (which I took last night to be a weird, hypothetical example of what Good site users can do, no matter how idiotic) was actually a reference to the thousands of posts made by your robots! I didn’t realize that, Alan! Bravo! You did admit to introducing the robots into the chat! Sort of! Well done! I’m proud of you.
A problem, though: you try to defend the spamming by contending that you “made” each and every one of the thousands of posts that your robots made, and that my disliking those posts is not different from my hypothetically disliking a flurry of uninteresting posts from an actual Homo sapiens, on speed and going sleepless for three days in a row. While the cruel, poetic tactic of replacing Jennifer Swegan with a DOS program even more tedious—ah ha, I see your good side now!—appeals to me, I have to point out that although you may have written the programs that made the posts, you certainly did not make the posts themselves! While you can and should claim responsibility for the spamming of the chat, you cannot obfuscate, yet again, by claiming each of those thousands of posts as your “speech.” The right to free speech, under the U.S. Constitution or even, we can reasonably expect, here in Tseng Tseng Prison, does not apply to computer programs, my desperate, dippy sophist in Arizona.
Want to go back to arguing about what “delete” means, now?
