About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unread


Post 0

Thursday, June 14, 2007 - 4:18pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Kilroy Was Here!


Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 1

Thursday, June 14, 2007 - 4:59pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
You quote Rand and then post a jpeg of graffiti?

This is not content, just vandalism and spam.

Post 2

Monday, June 18, 2007 - 9:22amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I think George was just doing a forum bump.

Post 3

Monday, June 18, 2007 - 10:11amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
(showing my ignorance here)

What's a "forum bump", Ethan?

Erica


Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 4

Monday, June 18, 2007 - 4:15pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
If you don't happen to like something that appears on the main page, you can post new quotes and reviews in order to push the other items to the bottom and then off the live screen. I would not have assumed that Cordero would do such a thing, except that this quote is nothing unknown to anyone on this forum - so why post it? And his comment "Kilroy was Here" is irrelevant in a way that makes it obvious that it was intentionally posted in bad faith. (I'll admit I have made posts myself that I have regretted or retracted, but not anything like this.) If Cordero actually wanted to contribute to the forum, he could have reviewed a book, found an unknown quote, or done whatever of value. To use a Rand quote and then a juvenile scrawl in order to change the subject is the moral equivalent of throwing pie at a conservative speaker on a college campus or hacking Nathaniel Branden's website. It's a denial of service attack. If I am wrong, George can provide some other plausible explanation.

Ted Keer

Post 5

Monday, June 18, 2007 - 4:17pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Actually, there's another meaning for "forum bump". Since things don't stay on the front page for very long, people often add a comment into the forum to bring more attention to it, or to let people see it who might have missed it on the front page. I assume that's what Ethan thinks George did.

Post 6

Monday, June 18, 2007 - 5:50pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

I have never read George to ever post anything in bad faith, Ted.   

Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 7

Monday, June 18, 2007 - 7:12pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I'm sure George can explain for himself what value was being contributed here, and we can let it stand at that. There's already been too much comment on this purposeless thread otherwise.

Ted

Post 8

Monday, June 18, 2007 - 8:37pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Hi Ted,

Joe is correct. the usage I was referring to was when something has disappeared from the front page of the frum, you can post someting to bring the thread/quote/article back to the forefront. Most places the person doing so will just add a post that says "bump." I assumed that was what George was doing.

E.

(Edited by Ethan Dawe on 6/18, 8:38pm)


Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 9

Monday, June 18, 2007 - 10:59pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
The kilroy post was made at 4:18, the quote itself had been up for an entire two minutes since 4:16. The bump explanation makes little sense, unless George is a poorly designed Turing machine trying to trick us into believing he's conscious, and seconds seem like centuries to his artificial intelligence. (I also assume some people here have met him in real life, so I will apply Ockham's razor and put that guess aside for now.) But the speculation, again, does not befit the merit of the posts, which is zero. Unless George has some brilliant point that I've missed and he's willing to explain, I would be forced to assume that the purpose was to push other quotes off the front page.

Ted

Post 10

Tuesday, June 19, 2007 - 9:41amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
George made the original post too, so what is the issue here?  I don't get why it matters.

Sanction: 8, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 8, No Sanction: 0
Post 11

Tuesday, June 19, 2007 - 3:08pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
George was defending Hong's non-arguments on the "Vietnam was cancelled" quote thread.

When he posted this quote, the "Vietnam was cancelled" quote thread was pushed off the front page. I find the motivations for his posting this quote - with which everyone on this site is already familiar - otherwise quite inexplicable. Then, as a comment, he posted a graffito! The lack of seriousness in his posting the quote was further bolstered.

It was suggested that the graffito was posted in order to bump the thread - to bring it back to our attention. (I have sometimes done this by posting jpegs on dying threads just to keep them alive in the last-2000 post list, but this doesn't push other subjects off the main board.) But what would be the purpose of him bumping his own thread a mere two minutes after he posted it: 4:16 & 4:18 June 14?

I see only two explanations. He wanted to push the Vietnam thread off the main board. Or he normally randomly quotes Rand for no reason and then purposefully mars his own threads with graffiti. You know, the same way someone might hang up a painting of a beautiful woman - and then draw a cold-sore on her lip.

Of course, I may be entirely wrong, George has yet to speak. But who here wants to comment on this quote?

Ted

Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 12

Thursday, June 21, 2007 - 12:42amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
A beautiful quote.

Bye George, you bastard. You'll be missed.

Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 13

Thursday, June 21, 2007 - 2:09amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
The quote is analogous to this forum "Rebirth of Reason". Post 0 is analogous to your presence on this forum, Ted. It is meaningful to people of real accomplishment, like Hong and George. I think you know that, which is why you take such umbrage.

Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 14

Thursday, June 21, 2007 - 7:15amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

I confess, I confess it all!

Yes, Mike, all my contributions, at length, from my book reviews, to my movie and CSPAN2 suggestions, to breaking news, to my several part essays, to being willing to take the unpopular side of a debate where my detractors get 3 icons for a five word post of insults in response to my hours of work was always motivated by an invidious hope to...to do what now?

My opinion of this thread was stated in my first post here, and it stands. All further posts by me were merely in response to others' questions or objections. The quote, the graffito and the time stamps speak for themselves. If I was wrong, George could have easily set me straight. This post was a painting with a mustache scribbled on it. I did not shoot George or call him names and refuse to engage him in debate. If I am goring sacred cows, either make hamburger or send me the bill. Your affection for Hong and George is touching. Even I have been able to sanction and enjoy some of their work, and I wonder at their silence now. Have they nothing to say on any other matter? Have I silenced them or banished them to Dissent? (In case you doubt my good faith - look at the note I sent to MSK in dissent.) It is not like I have a vendetta. If they post something of value they will still get my sanction. I belong to no faction here, save perhaps my own. I somehow doubt she and George are such wilting flowers that my challenges could harm such people of real accomplishment. People of real accomplishment add value and take unearned insults as compliments, if anything.

Finally, I am impressed by the subtlety of your powers of analysis, Mike. I would never have figured that it was actually I who is symbolized by the Kilroy graffitist.

Frankly, I see myself rather as a stream of bat's piss.

:)

Ted Keer

(Edited by Ted Keer
on 6/21, 11:03am)


Post 15

Thursday, June 21, 2007 - 9:58amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Cool, num++ is back :-).

Jim


Post to this thread


User ID Password or create a free account.