RoR: Forum

Sam wrote:

As�the recipient of the Unmitigated Gall Award I feel that I have the credentials to observe that the personal characteristics that make�the�inventor/entrepreneur successful are often inimical to those required to manage the mature enterprise.

In case you hadn't noticed, Sam, SOLO has an Exec Dir. His name is Joe Rowlands. He manages the mature enterprise. (He's also written some of the finest articles about applied Objectivism, free of rationalism, you'll find anywhere.)

And that's the daft thing about folk treating SOLO as beginning & ending with Linz. There are so many others involved, & so many wonderful projects going on. Why the hell my blowing my stack should be such an issue, in the context of the totality that is SOLO, is a mystery I'll take to my grave, I'm sure.

Linz

Post 41

Friday, July 29, 2005 - 10:55pm

Mr. Perigo --

You've probably never heard from me or noticed my name on your site before but I would very much like to give you my thoughts.

You have created the best forum Objectivism has for rapid expansion. You've gathered a core group of people together that are committed to a system of thinking and a sense of life that is absolutely critical in combating the anti-life mentality of those who oppose western civilization and human liberty. Our ideology has a difficult road ahead of it. We who understand the basic principles upon which human liberty and human success depend are a very small minority. It is essential that the most talented and honest advocates of these principles find a way to keep this site intact. It is essential that someone or some quality group of individuals maintain a firm leadership committed to the quality of its content and to the advocacy of pro life ideology. It will be a waste of time and resources to try reassembling a similar group of people all over again. SOLO, if headed by the right combination of minds has the opportunity over the next several years to become a very large voice in the realm of ideas and in recruiting new independent minds to our cause. It will move well ahead of groups like the ARI and TOC because it will simply out recruit them for most of the good young minds who are looking for an Objectivist organization. Like any society, or sub group SOLO is held up by its best minds. Without the 10-15 best people here this whole thing will go down in flames. I've been very closely watching this site for about a year and here is my opinion of who some of these people are.

1. Robert Bidinotto - One of the greatest advocates Objectivism has. A brilliant, concise thinker who has the ability to get to the very heart of the important issues. The fact that a quality mind like his has spent so much time posting messages at SOLO is a clear indication of the status this site has reached.

2. Alec Mouhibian - If Objectivism has a leader of the future (and I am not sure it needs ONE leader) he seems to be one of the clear candidates. This is a creative young mind that has the ability to communicate important ideas with clear rationality and incredible wit and charisma.

3. Joseph Rowlands - I wish he would write more articles because whenever I read one of his old ones I gain new insights on whatever subject he is discussing. He also appears to be an excellent administrator and leader.

4. Tibor Machan - You may call him a Saddamite, but this guy is one of the most important foot soldiers fighting the leftist monstrosity that is modern academia. He puts out articles SEVERAL TIMES A WEEK challenging their premises and fighting for the cause of liberty. Luckily he allows his writings to be posted on this site.

5. Barbara Branden - This is one of the key advocates of Objectivism from the very beginning and SOLO is the only important Objectivst group that can grant her the voice she deserves. Barbara Branden was an intimate partner of Ayn Rand and thus can share with us insights that are not available anywhere else. She is a voice of reason and a good leader.

6. Chris Sciabarra - Like Mr. Machan, Chris Sciabarra is a tireless advocate of liberty and truth facing its greatest enemy -- the leftist mob which controls our universities. He is one of Objectivism�s greatest scholars and deserves a great deal of respect.

7. James Kilbourne - A wise and sensitive mind who is one of the greatest advocates of the Objectivist sense of life that this site has.

8. Michael Stewart Kelly - One of the most ridiculously passionate advocates of the Objectivist sense of life on the planet.

9. Andrew Bissell - A clear and concise young thinker who is a model for the type of contributor this site should try to recruit.

And there are several more that I am not listing here -- George Cordero and Adam Reed come immediately to mind. You personally rank very highly on this list and you deserve a great deal of credit for putting this whole thing together. You have a unique and eloquent voice and an unbridled passion that cannot be disputed but you are allowing things to slip. Through your lack of quality participation and your silly tirades you have seriously offended AT LEAST 3 and probably more of those 10-15 key people. Luckily one of them has decided to forgive you one more time. You need to do everything you can to convince the other two to come back because without these types of people these forums will descend into mediocrity (and if you look around they seem to be already) and these people will prove to be extremely hard to replace. Please make amends with these people, get things back on track with this website and make the necessary efforts to ensure that the type of nonsense that you perpetrated earlier today never happens again. What you have created here is too important for you to allow it to be destroyed. It is also of very great value to me and that as why I am appealing with you to take the necessary actions to make sure this thing keeps going in the right direction.

- Jason

(Edited by Jason Quintana on 7/29, 11:34pm)

Post 42

Friday, July 29, 2005 - 10:56pm

"...your innocent, well-intentioned query"

Another Tui bill-board is born...

Post 43

Friday, July 29, 2005 - 11:59pm

Jason�you wrote:

What you have created here is too important for you to allow it to be destroyed.� It is also of very great value to me and that as why I am appealing with you to take the necessary actions to make sure this thing keeps going in the right direction.

Unchosen obligations, huh, Jason?? :-)

I don't know what "necessary actions" other than the apology I have proffered, & my deletion of the offending posts, you might have in mind. If folk choose not to accept my apology, there's nothing I can do about that. You must know that I will always apologise if I get it wrong. But I am not going to tone myself down or try to douse the fire within. These are parlous times. Yes, we must change the culture of Objectivism, & yes, we must bring Objectivism to bear on the culture-at-large. I agree with you, Jason, that SOLO is uniquely placed to do that. But the very culture-at-large that gives us the freedom to do it is also under threat. If there's an urgency, impatience & occasional touch of insanity to me, I'd ask you to appreciate that, in the circumstances, that's not going to change fundamentally. I'm driven. Driven, driven, driven. And why should that matter so much to anyone? We all have a huge battle on our hands. My flaws, or anyone's, pale into insignificance in the context of that battle. We should all be mucking in. SOLO provides a unique opportunity for everyone who cares about reason, freedom, & the western civilisation that has allowed them to flourish, to do just that. To leave SOLO just because one is pissed off with Linz is, I repeat, daft.

Linz

Post 44

Saturday, July 30, 2005 - 12:08am

Jason, I was foolish enough, for a moment, to think that Linz might take seriously your very wise words. But instead, he announces that he will not change -- and blames it on the state of the culture rather than on the state of Lindsay. It always is someone else's fault.

Barbara

Post 45

Saturday, July 30, 2005 - 12:17am

You'll notice that I made an appeal to you. My appeal doesn't constitute any kind of obligation. My post was designed to convince you to take these actions -- which I think include apologies and efforts not to go on the types of mindless tirades you did earlier. It is my opinion that your drive is better suited to improving your orginization and that was my main point. You aren't obligated to do any of these things and you certainly aren't obligated to do anything for my sake.

- Jason

(Edited by Jason Quintana on 7/30, 1:16am)

Post 46

Saturday, July 30, 2005 - 12:25am

Now come on, Barbara. I accept that there are faults in the "state of Lindsay." I have said I will always apologise when those come to the fore. I have done so in this instance, & you have not accepted my apology. I am not blaming anyone external to myself for my faults. My fire & urgency, though, are not among my faults. And for heaven's sake, let's keep things in perspective. We all have a much bigger agenda than fixing Linz's flaws. Or anyone's. Believe it or not, The Dreadful Linz isn't the only one with flaws. At least, the last time I checked that was the case.

The Dreadful Linz inspired the forum we're all having this disagreement on. The forum that attracted all the people Jason mentioned & many, many more. The forum on which you, Majesty, hold court. Does that count for nothing? Does context no longer matter? Is SOLO's Credo no longer important? Is what we're demonstrably achieving, together, something to be abandoned so lightly?

I say no!!

Linz

Post 47

Saturday, July 30, 2005 - 12:52am

"Is SOLO's Credo no longer important? Is what we're demonstrably achieving, together, something to be abandoned so lightly?

I say no!!"

(Yawn)...I liked this movie the first time I saw it, when it was called AGUIRRE, THE WRATH OF GOD. Nothing but reruns. Herzog, eat your heart out. Linz, you conquistador, keep on searching for that El Dorado.

Post 48

Saturday, July 30, 2005 - 1:08am

Lindsay, your apology counts for nothing when, in the same breath, you say that you will not change. Of what value is an apology for something you announce you intend to continue doing? I know well that what has happened here will happen again should I disagree with you or, in your mind, cross you as as I did by not reading an issue of Free Radical that I did not receive. I have tried too many times to convince you that your tirades will destroy Solo and that there is something self-destructive in you that you must control. It would be very foolish indeed for me to care more about the future of Solo than you do. I cannot protect it alone, much as I would wish to. Only you, who created and maintain it, can do that, and you have made it clear that you will not. I told you once that you ARE the voice of Solo. That voice is becoming something with which I no longer can sing in chorus.

Solo's credo counts for a great deal. And adherence to reason is crucial to it. Injustice, the venting of irrational emotions, drunken tirades, which you term "calling a spade a spade" -- and attempts to justify such actions -- do not constitute adherence to reason. Just who is it that is dropping context?

I will not be your whipping boy. This is not the first time it has happened, but it is the last.

Barbara

Post 49

Saturday, July 30, 2005 - 1:18am

Man! What is goin' on around here?

I very much like James K, Barbara and Linz and am sorry to see you at odds.

Linz, you are a hot-head. A furry, lovable hot-head but a hot-head nonetheless. 5% of what you say I discount as emotional, over-the-top, bad-day froth. For whatever reason I am perfectly able to let that go. You've directed a little of it at me and though I didn't much like it I wasn't put off by it or take it personally at all. You told Matthew Humphries (a leading candidate for nicest guy ever) to "Fuck off!" and that was just hot-headed froth. I laughed at that because it just made no sense and that passed pretty quickly. Though I'd be interested to know what Matthew think.

My personal experience with you Linz is that you're doing a marvellous job helping to build SOLO and I share much of your outlook. I like ya. Hot-headed and all I like ya. I see the good in you.

James K is a saint in my eyes. He exhales SOLO for me.

I love Barbara's level-headed-ness and kindness (and intelligence and grace and so on and so on).

Hell, I think everyone is well aware of the respect most people here have for all 3 of you. My guess is that there are some personal issues that you 3 ought to resolve so you can learn to do this SOLO thing together (or at least co-exist).

The one thing I don't like about James K and Barbara's behavior is that they are holding their departure over Linz as a Sword of Damocles. It is well-established by now that we who like spending time at SOLO are going to piss each other off now and then. We shouldn't threaten each other with "see you in hell!" send-offs.

Linz, if this can be patched up I hope you'll do all you can to patch away any unresolved issues with James K and Barbara. You appear to be the center of their fury. I'm not judgin'. I'm just tellin' ya what I'm seein'.

To James and Barbara: your participation at SOLO makes my life better. I hope you'll patch things up with Linz if you can. No band-aids either. Get it all out in the open (with each other) and get it settled. If not, it's detention for the 3 of you!

Post 50

Saturday, July 30, 2005 - 1:34am

Linz, I've debated the issues involved here so many times with you privately that I don't have any energy left to repeat myself here. In any case, Jason summarizes it perfectly. So I want to put this specific matter completely aside and make a more essential appeal to you.

You obviously believe that you would be betraying yourself, deep-down, if you *didn't* launch your terrible tirades every time you felt angry. You seem to feel that if you were to squelch the lack of perspective that leads to those tirades, you would be squelching the "fire and urgency" that is essential to the true Linz who has achieved so much.

Linz, most everyone here understands why you get angry. Most everyone here gets extremely angry themselves! But it's a quantum leap from feeling anger (let alone fire, urgency, drive) to expressing it in such dramatically unjust and hurtful ways as to demand masochism of your friends and closest allies.

There are a thousand ways to express anger! That's what breakable objects and body-pillows are for. That is, no doubt, why Barbie dolls are manufactured with not-so-resistant heads. By all means, scream to the mirror. All these ways are so much more efficient than typing up and submitting a post on an online forum. Why do you insist that it would be untrue to yourself to *not* express your anger through the one means by which it harms all your goals?

Think of all the great men who've shouldered much larger burdens than you, who needed at least as much fire and urgency to get where they got. Think of Ronald Reagan, who actually had the future of Western Civilization resting on his every move. What do you think would've happened if he treated Thatcher as you treated, say, Barbara, whenever they had contextually minor squabbles (which they did)?

Again, there is no reason for you not to make a conscious effort to squelch your online tirades. Nothing about doing that would be antithetical to or defiant of your true self. Why do you think it would? Everything about doing that would allow you to achieve much more.

Alec

(Edited by Alec Mouhibian on 7/30, 1:38am)

Post 51

Saturday, July 30, 2005 - 1:53am

Barbara:

Lindsay, your apology counts for nothing when, in the same breath, you say that you will not change. Of what value is an apology for something you announce you intend to continue doing?

I will not become the eunuch you wish to turn me into, who daren't even use the term "Saddamite." I will apologise when I'm guilty of injustice.

I know well that what has happened here will happen again should I disagree with you or, in your mind, cross you as as I did by not reading an issue of Free Radical that I did not receive.

Well that's very strange. In the current issue of FreeRad, there's a photo of you reading that very issue.

Solo's credo counts for a great deal. And adherence to reason is crucial to it. Injustice, the venting of irrational emotions, drunken tirades, which you term "calling a spade a spade" -- and attempts to justify such actions -- do not constitute adherence to reason. Just who is it that is dropping context?

Drunken??!! Now that's an arbitrary assumption. Yes, I'd had a few. Friday night. Unwind time after a hard-working week in the office, presenting the Dreadful Face of Linz to unsuspecting television viewers. How terrible. But I knew exactly what I was saying. What I was saying was wrong, on reflection, as I've acknowledged (to no avail), but it wasn't alcohol making me say it.

Context? Try taking into account Chris Lewis's testimony as to what I'd built up from nothing in NZ ... how I've fought the "drooling beast" all this time. Try taking into account the totality that is SOLO. Try taking into account that an occasional explosion, for which the exploder apologises, is much less serious than defending a promoter of pedophilia. Try taking into account that your unconscionable questioning of my candour over the Elmore nonsense was something I found less than amusing.

Majesty, if you're intent on going, go. I don't want you to, but you clearly do want to. Equally, if you want to reconsider, please feel free. Just know that you can't do a neutering makeover of me in my own house.

Linz

Post 52

Saturday, July 30, 2005 - 1:59am

I totally agree with Lindsay on this.

Post 53

Saturday, July 30, 2005 - 2:03am

Linz: If SOLO is to big to be traduced by personalities you must give up all your powers of ownership to Joe R., including the power to place anyone under moderation. You are not suited to the job even though you made this place. If I were to insult Barbara you'd place me under moderation, but you have the power to insult her with impunity--save her complaining and leaving.

Barbara, Linz has the big picture right, but your asking him to change is like asking the wind not to blow. The problem is not what Linz says but that Linz, the "founder and principal" said it.

Linz: Is this about power? I think it is. Give it up or give up SOLO (for it will evaporate out of your hands). If you don't then this is just your grandstanding arena. Let your brain shine here, nothing else.

--Brant

Post 54

Saturday, July 30, 2005 - 2:09am

Lance:

The one thing I don't like about James K and Barbara's behavior is that they are holding their departure over Linz as a Sword of Damocles. It is well-established by now that we who like spending time at SOLO are going to piss each other off now and then. We shouldn't threaten each other with "see you in hell!" send-offs.

This is the most important thing that's yet been said in this argument. This is exactly what BB & James are doing. I'm not threatening them with banishment; they are threatening me with a walk-out. Such is not the currency of trying to resolve disputes with rational benevolence.

Linz

Post 55

Saturday, July 30, 2005 - 2:10am

Yes, Linz, you've certainly understood my meaning. "Neutering you" was precisely what I had in mind when I urged you to treat people with justice.

As for the issue of Free Radical in contest, you know perfectly well that the picture of me holding it was taken at the Solo conference in Newport Beach, where someone handed me the magazine to pose with.

Barbara

Post 56

Saturday, July 30, 2005 - 2:20am

I have threatened you with nothing, Linz, nor has James. We have simply announced that we will not accept your name-calling, and that we are leaving Solo. That is not a threat; it is a fact.

Barbara

Post 57

Saturday, July 30, 2005 - 2:38am

Barbara and James. I will miss your posts and articles very much. In this I am sure I am not alone. Linz has deleted the posts so I cannot read what he said to cause this but I am sure he will regret it.

I cannot criticise what I cannot read so I will just say to you both thank you for your input. It has enriched my life.

Post 58

Saturday, July 30, 2005 - 2:39am

Yes, Linz, you've certainly understood my meaning. "Neutering you" was precisely what I had in mind when I urged you to treat people with justice.

I *do* try to treat people with justice�& try to make amends if I fail. See this whole thread!

As for the issue of Free Radical in contest, you know perfectly well that the picture of me holding it was taken at the Solo conference in Newport Beach, where someone handed me the magazine to pose with.

And you didn't hang on to it? It was yours, as was the copy you should have received in the mail.

I have threatened you with nothing, Linz, nor has James. We have simply announced that we will not accept your name-calling, and that we are leaving Solo. That is not a threat; it is a fact.

You have been threatening to leave for weeks. I've had to hear that through other people. Whatever�I note the over-riding spirit of "Let's see if we can work this out" here. Not. "That is not a threat; it is a fact" is precisely the sort of Randroid pronouncement you would fault Peikoff for. OK. Is this now final?

Linz

Post 59

Saturday, July 30, 2005 - 3:08am