Hmm. How about this: “There are lots of pseudo-Objectivist sites built on treachery & passionlessness that should satisfy.”

We know the way that Linz works out his animosity: he selects an abstraction and lets fly. At least one of the “passionlessness” sites he has in mind is surely RoR.

If this stings, the truth hurts. SOLO was on the way to becoming the “third way” of Objectivism. But now its energies are dissipated into the sand. RoR is less than the old SOLO – and the current SOLO is a shadow of itself.

This is a sad outcome. It is also one that could have been prevented. And once again, Ayn Rand’s vision of a radiant future has been postponed.

Brendan

Ethan: “Brendan, Phil…Please follow Jon's wise advice and take it to another thread.”

Jon’s comment was: “Start a new thread”. That may be read as an advice or a command, but the attribution “wise” presupposes a supporting argument. I haven’t seen one.

In fact, it could be argued that the recognition of a potential competitor is a rational consideration that should be taken into account when one is undertaking this type of commercial venture.

So: is there a potential competitor which might eat into the market share of the RoR conference market? I can think of one. But if that potential competitor cannot be mentioned on this site, please provide a direction, so that we can know that the subject is off limits.
 
Brendan

Thanks for the advice Ethan. One of the deficiencies of the SOLOHQ site was the lack of a clear direction – people would pop off at all sorts of tangents, often prompted by the principal himself! I’m reminded of the old saying about keeping the pisser in the tent, especially in view of Linz’ preference for large quantities of the red vino. I guess that piece of advice is redundant now.

But what are you going to do when he comes roaring round with a machete? Who in RoR has that slasher mentality? Cordero, perhaps?

I also take your point about the split-up of SOLOHQ. That was a sad occasion, since it robbed the Objectivist world of one of its great synergies: the lucid arguments of Joe Rowlands coupled with the passionate intensity of Lindsay Perigo. Sadly, such a partnership was not to be – we may never know the full truth of this matter, and much must be left to conjecture.

Yet, in the fullness of time, something may be known of this episode. Otherwise, onward and upward, and many thanks for this space.

Brendan