Nominate a post for best/worst of the season

[Undeadinator]

I nominate skepticalscientist's "I support kidnapping and stealing" post for worst:

http://www.graveyardofthegods.com/forum ... 725#103725

Counter-nominating for best.

[MustangGT]

Undeadinator just nominated for "best post" a post that defends ' the ends justify the means'

[Hierophant]

Actually, I have him on ignore, so...

[Undeadinator]

Undeadinator just nominated for "best post" a post that defends ' the ends justify the means'

I just nominated a post that made a rational claim, backed up that claim with thorough argumentation, and asserts both the poster's fallibility and his interest in having a cogent discussion. If you have any objections, perhaps someone should retitle this thread "Posts That Do Not Agree With My Ideology."

Actually, I have him on ignore, so...

Just out of curiousity, Tmaq, what was that bet you had going again?

[Tmaq]

Undeadinator just nominated for "best post" a post that defends ' the ends justify the means' :crosseyed:

I just nominated a post that made a rational claim, backed up that claim with thorough argumentation, and asserts both the poster's fallibility and his interest in having a cogent discussion. If you have any objections, perhaps someone should retitle this thread "Posts That Do Not Agree With My Ideology."

Actually, I have him on ignore, so...

Just out of curiousity, Tmaq, what was that bet you had going again?

I'd offered 2-1 odds in FT's favor that he would either start ignoring my criticisms of his ideological (evidence-filtering, axiom-protecting, feedback-avoiding) mistakes, or have me outright banned, before he stopped demonstrating it, or before he admitted that he had made that mistake. Had he admitted the mistake, or simply stopped repeating it, I would have lost.

No one ever expressed any interest in taking my wager, which is ample demonstration that the existence of his mistake is quite well-known (by everyone but him, it seems). That was ~2 weeks ago. Since he just recently admitted that he's been consistently ignoring me, I would have won, had anyone taken my offer.

I guess I should up the ante. I'll double it; 4-1 odds in FT's favor: I offer $4 against for every $1 that someone will bet on FT deciding to test his axiomatic beliefs instead of ignoring anyone who points out his evidence-filtering, feedback-ignoring strategies.

Anyone interested can PM me.

If anyone thinks there are more appropriate odds, then they should make a counter-offer, if they like making book on people's behaviors as a way to expose their intellectual failings. (The beauty of the odds is that it shows just how confident everyone is in FT's ability to update in response to reality. For someone who crows about his concern with reality, the REAL repsonse I've received to my offer says volumes.)

-Tom

[MustangGT]

I nominate this one from Platypus. Specifically, the part where he mentions Stockholm Syndrome:

http://www.graveyardofthegods.com/forum ... 818#103818

[Thank You]

Could Franc take your wager and essentially put himself in position to make some free money? Or do we not allow participants in the game to gamble on it?

[Tmaq]

Could Franc take your wager and essentially put himself in position to make some free money? Or do we not allow participants in the game to gamble on it?

He could, but then he'd have to, you know, start admitting that he might have made some mistakes with me, as well as recognizing them, and also rectifying them. As he is obviously quite motivated by pride and vanity, I'd be very surprised if he did, but one never knows. People do change.

Since feedback-avoidance is the fundamental error which makes government power so dangerous, then were Franc to get wise, he would finally stop committing the error in his personal interactions which produces the results he finds so objectionable in government interactions.

His complete lack of integrity is probably the source of the frustration Franc so often expresses in such futile and juvenille ways. He talks about personal responsibility a lot. I've seen scant evidence that he's willing to assume any for the responses he gets (or fails to get) from others. He wants the rules to be different for him, and reality has a frustrating way of not conforming to his desires.

As Franc is such a vociferous defender of the individual decision-making ethic, I'd consider it money well spent if my wager finally convinced him to grow the integrity he must display to be truly effective at promulgating that ethic. I consider it a very important ethic, but since actions speak louder than words....

Time, as always, Will Tell.

-Tom

[Tmaq]

I nominate this one from Platypus. Specifically, the part where he mentions Stockholm Syndrome:

http://www.graveyardofthegods.com/forum ... 818#103818

Thats good. Short, sweet, plausible, quotable...

-Tom

[Hierophant]

What wager are you talking about, Charles?

[Undeadinator]

Oh man, awesome. Tmaq, he ignored you too.

[Hierophant]

Yes you blithering idiot, I have ignored him too. Your combined IQ might be able to rival one of the first prime numbers.

[Undeadinator]

Six?

Also, I preferred it when you had me on ignore. It made me feel all warm and fuzzy inside, like I was the internet Keyser Soze and you were Chazz Palminteri. I was going to start affecting a limp, but I can't figure out how to transmit that to the digital medium.

Update: I've decided that I'm going to
write on the left side of the screen, to
simulate what it would be like if I actually
had an actual limp in actual, real actual
life.

[Tmaq]

Yes you blithering idiot, I have ignored him too. Your combined IQ might be able to rival one of the first prime numbers.

I love inside jokes.

-Tom

[skeptical_scientist]

Yes you blithering idiot, I have ignored him too. Your combined IQ might be able to rival one of the first prime numbers.

I love inside jokes.

-Tom

I fail to see how this one qualifies...