Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
There's more than one way to do things
 
PerlMonks  

Re^2: Once again . ..{blah} (Counter proposal: )

by Intrepid (Deacon)
on Mar 24, 2013 at 23:54 UTC ( #1025197=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re: Once again . ..{blah} (Counter proposal: )
in thread Once again ... is it time to get rid of the Anonymous Monk?

Since you're the only one who has a problem with this, the solution is entirely in your hands. If you go away; problem solved.

A couple of minor fallacies to be pointed out:

  • That the OP is "the only Perlmonk who has a problem with 'Anonymous Monk' policy". There is only an absence of evidence up until now, limited to this thread. Thus, this is a fallacy. Negative evidence is vastly inferior to positive evidence. That no other active monks who have a problem with Anonymous Monk posting exist, is plausibly, overwhelmingly unlikely.

    Absence of evidence until now, in this thread, is plausibly attributable to the absence of awareness for other monks that this "discussion" is even happening. Also plausibly attributable to passivity. With regard to that, Someone here keeps adding some text to their postings, that reads:


    Silence betokens consent

    In fact, this is a very harsh truth. The harshness comes in because it is statement that hides a larger truth behind it. That truth is "larger" in the sense that it "takes more words to express." That truth is that people betoken their consent unwillingly when ruled by the kind of passivity that is bred of past disappointments and disillusionments. That's the whole point of the saying. Only if one understands that there is a disillusioned body of persons remaining silent because they do not believe that their voices matter, that their voices will be heard, that speaking up can make any difference; only if one understands this does this short little tagline achieve its intended meaning.

  • The second fallacy has now been made clear. I have a problem with "Anonymous Monk" posting policy. I have had a problem with it for years and have never changed my statements of belief about it. Maybe it was convenient to forget that I've spoken up strongly about it in the past? Or maybe it is a matter of the fact that it is me speaking, and not "what is said"? Is that it? Does who is speaking suddenly matter, rather than what is said?

The OP is hereby urged and encouraged to stay around. All persuasions henceforth expressioned by any others are negated and revoked. All evil spirits currently lurking around the Monastery, urging monks to act like pissy, small-minded little tribesmen with tiny male attributes and serious inadequacy issues motivating them to flock and herd and gang up -- all such spirits are hereby vanquished with my magic spell. POOF.


Comment on Re^2: Once again . ..{blah} (Counter proposal: )
Re^3: Once again . ..{blah} (Counter proposal: )
by BrowserUk (Pope) on Mar 25, 2013 at 00:53 UTC
    I have a problem with "Anonymous Monk" posting policy. I have had a problem with it for years and have never changed my statements of belief about it. Maybe it was convenient to forget that I've spoken up strongly about it in the past?

    And as I recall, your posts on the matter were also roundly rejected.

    As for your magic spell: I hope you feel better.


    With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
    Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
    "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
    In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

      Hello back

      Intrepid I have a problem with "Anonymous Monk" posting policy. I have had a problem with it for years and have never changed my statements of belief about it. Maybe it was convenient to forget that I've spoken up strongly about it in the past?

      BrowserUK And as I recall, your posts on the matter were also roundly rejected.

      As for your magic spell: I hope you feel better.

      I don't think you remember anything of the sort. I think you are answering just to be answering, having been caught in the wrong. I don't think you have the slightest accurate idea who I am or what my history at Perlmonks has been. And I am going to sleep well tonight. Let me offer this to you to lull yourself to sleep: Fine words can be like a pretty dress on a pig. Why don't you quit the crap with the excellent philosophy which you are now demeaning through your attitude, your actions? Don't paste words into your public postings that you are no longer living up to.

      If the foregoing appears a bit vulnerable to the charge that I've made ad hominum statements here, let me fill you in on who I am. I'm the guy that is still here, more than 12 years later, after having been slandered, visciously lied about, ripped into, and pathetically shunned by half the ceebee and a whole host of former monks who are long gone. ad hominum is an epithet to throw like a stone for little Internet egotists. It is a way to cop a stance of a moral high ground when their own actions have been shameful. It is nothing but name-calling. I am not afraid of being accused of anything anyone here comes up with. Especially those who won't directly answer countering arguments, but merely toss in more provocation, like your answer, BrowserUK, does.

      Again, to be clear, BroswerUK: you ought to be ashamed of yourself. Really. Go hang out with a mirror and some polish for a while and then look back on what you were actually representing here today.

      Ciao.

        I'm the guy that is still here, more than 12 years later, after having been slandered, visciously lied about, ripped into, and pathetically shunned by half the ceebee and a whole host of former monks who are long gone. ad hominum is an epithet to throw like a stone for little Internet egotists.

        Yes. The same pathetic loser who has made just 196 posts in the those 12 years; of which 60%+ are pointless, misdirected, assertions that your opinion should for some reason outweight those of everyone else; rather than any attempts to help anyone or learn anything. Just like your vacuous diatribe in this thread.

        Your agenda is writ large all over your home node; so this meaningless, disconnected, out-of-touch wobbling of your gums comes as neither surprise nor interest.

        Ciao.

        Be well.


        With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
        Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
        "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
        In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
        "I'm the guy that is still here, more than 12 years later, after having been slandered, visciously sic lied about, ripped into, and pathetically shunned by half the ceebee and a whole host of former monks who are long gone"

        Zero evidence provided, yet you constantly berate others for omitting this. Also, spelling.
Re^3: Once again . ..{blah} (Counter proposal: )
by Jenda (Abbot) on Mar 25, 2013 at 09:58 UTC

    Sweetbejeesus, what are you? "hereby urged and encouraged"? "minor fallacies"? Paragraphs after paragraphs after paragraphs after paragraphs of pompous drivel.

    If it quacks like a duck and walks like a duck, it is most probably a duck ... you sir do not sound like a programmer. You do sound like someone who loves to listen to himself though.

    Jenda
    Enoch was right!
    Enjoy the last years of Rome.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1025197]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others studying the Monastery: (5)
As of 2014-12-18 04:14 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    Is guessing a good strategy for surviving in the IT business?





    Results (41 votes), past polls