Other than chezlaw, Dueces, DIB, and ikestoys ~ Who are the Bad Politards Posters (v2)? - Page 31 - Politics version 7.0 -- Two Plus Two Poker Forums

Two Plus Two Forums Archived Forums Archived Other Topics Politics version 7.0

Other than chezlaw, Dueces, DIB, and ikestoys ~ Who are the Bad Politards Posters (v2)?

...

Page 31 of 70

First

11 21 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 41 51

Last

Page 31 of 70

First

11 21 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 41 51

Last

02-16-2016 , 02:31 PM

#751

chezlaw

Limey Bastard

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 48,945

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shame Trolly !!!1!

OK VG.

So the odious Bruce Z is solely responsible for flipping out, abusing his mod privileges, and running away with his tail between his legs. Mat Sklansky is solely responsible for demoding the fool. The clowns riding in the SMP clown are solely responsible for their parts in the LOLtastical "Field of Mods" year long whining campaign. Peeps like me are solely responsible for each of our own laughing and pointing at this whole success*. And all of us are responsible for our own parts in (a) not letting it go (b) continuing to laugh & point, (c) stir the pot.

* I think it's about time to rebrand Bruce incident. It wasn't a 'fiasco', it was the exact opposite. Google tells me the antonym of 'fiasco' is 'success'.

You say what you like and but it was what it was and it's gratifying to see those responsible standing up for what they did even a little bit.

Not all the nonsense you repeat endlessly is believed and many know what Bruce really contributed to 2+2. Many also understand why he would chose not to return.

02-16-2016 , 02:38 PM

#752

LetsGambool

banned

Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 26,568

We all understand. He solely isn't returning because of his own actions.

02-16-2016 , 02:47 PM

#753

chezlaw

Limey Bastard

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 48,945

That's not the same thing mate, people who aren't obsessively weird like you make their decisions based on the situation. Different situations result in different actions.

02-16-2016 , 02:50 PM

#754

LetsGambool

banned

Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 26,568

Other people may judge it differently. As long as people take responsibility for whether they choose to post or not then I have no issue with them.

02-16-2016 , 02:51 PM

#755

chezlaw

Limey Bastard

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 48,945

Quote:

Originally Posted by LetsGambool

Other people may judge it differently. As long as people take responsibility for whether they choose to post or not then I have no issue with them.

qft.

02-16-2016 , 02:53 PM

#756

LetsGambool

banned

Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 26,568

Get help with that multiple personality disorder chez. Its making your screen name post very confusing and contradictory things.

02-16-2016 , 02:59 PM

#757

chezlaw

Limey Bastard

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 48,945

Quote:

Originally Posted by LetsGambool

Get help with that multiple personality disorder chez. Its making your screen name post very confusing and contradictory things.

They're different things mate, your confusion is your problem not mine.

Despite your claims no-one has ever said anyone is stopping Bruce posting. That's his decision and one he is fully entitled to make.

02-16-2016 , 03:05 PM

#758

Leo_Trollstoy

journeyman

Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 289

Chez is on track to make 50 posts in one day.

02-16-2016 , 03:08 PM

#759

Oroku$aki

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2012 Posts: 7,063

Quote:

Originally Posted by chezlaw

You say what you like and but it was what it was and it's gratifying to see those responsible standing up for what they did even a little bit.

Not all the nonsense you repeat endlessly is believed and many know what Bruce really contributed to 2+2. Many also understand why he would chose not to return.

I missed that. Do you believe that just happened? Who stood up and claimed responsibility for they did?

02-16-2016 , 07:49 PM

#760

Deuces McKracken

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 9,838

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shame Trolly !!!1!

It wasn't our mess. It wasn't really a mess at all, it was flippin hilarious. We're crying tears of laugher. Except for getting you here full time, the consequences were all good, in fact they were great.

I don't follow the Chez chronicles (the star of whom the quote above was directed). But maybe that puts me in a more objective position to say that the meta data (informal) analysis suggests that you might want to recalculate the grand total again. I've never seen a poster rile up so many people so efficiently (and this is a forum featuring the ikesbot). If Chez isn't winning the words of attrition battle he is coming close. You will have to triangulate him into kerowo's nest or else the consequences could very well favor Chez over time.

02-16-2016 , 08:07 PM

#761

Shame Trolly !!!1!

Neo-Gorean

Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 4,847

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deuces McKracken

I don't follow the Chez chronicles (the star of whom the quote above was directed)...

chezlaw is an interesting cat. He's way too smart to get 'triangulated'. He can do the pure troll thing where he's leveling several of the people he is trolling to keep them arguing against each other. He can just plain troll, like his Bruce Z fetish. He can come up with spot on relevant insightful content. He never sounds stupid. And he's almost universally personable and nice.

He'll leave when he feels like it, if he leaves at all.

02-16-2016 , 09:46 PM

#762

Jbrochu

banned

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 16,052

Quote:

Originally Posted by The REAL Trolly

popcorn.jpg

It's a wasteland of banned nerds over in SMP today.

02-16-2016 , 09:50 PM

#763

Shame Trolly !!!1!

Neo-Gorean

Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 4,847

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jbrochu

It's a wasteland of banned nerds over in SMP today.

ZOMG. Does anyone know what prompted the Nerdpocalypse, and are those all permas ?

02-16-2016 , 10:04 PM

#764

The REAL Trolly

old hand

Join Date: Mar 2014 Posts: 1,603

I'm quite sure those are all just day bans. Masque likes to act the role of a misanthrope, but he's really a softie.

I was really hoping today would be the day chez cracks the 50-posts-in-a-day barrier. He's about a dozen short and I think it's his bedtime.

02-16-2016 , 10:11 PM

#765

FoldnDark

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,930

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shame Trolly !!!1!

He never sounds stupid

Kidding? Chez talks like a wanker.

02-16-2016 , 10:23 PM

#766

JohnyCrash

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 3,537

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shame Trolly !!!1!

ZOMG. Does anyone know what prompted the Nerdpocalypse, and are those all permas ?

They were too riled up debating about AI. Read the end of the locked super computer thread.

02-21-2016 , 03:21 PM

#767

Loki

binary duo

Join Date: Nov 2015 Posts: 12,772

Is it really 17 months later and resident alcoholic cheezelawg is still whining about beloved racism mentor extraordinaire Bruce being baned?

02-21-2016 , 03:25 PM

#768

chezlaw

Limey Bastard

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 48,945

Quote:

Originally Posted by Noodle Wazlib

Is it really 17 months later and resident alcoholic cheezelawg is still whining about beloved racism mentor extraordinaire Bruce being baned?

So many errors in one post. Well done are you angling for a place in the title after LG and Kerowo

Plus extra points for zigzag #2

02-21-2016 , 08:41 PM

#769

pvn

Guest

Posts: n/a

Sup

Cliffs on masque fiasco?

02-21-2016 , 08:42 PM

#770

Loki

binary duo

Join Date: Nov 2015 Posts: 12,772

Did wall de text self ban os?

02-22-2016 , 12:57 AM

#771

Trolly McTrollson

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 38,351

Quote:

Originally Posted by pvn

Sup

Cliffs on masque fiasco?

Someone contradicted him in an SMP thread and he lost his ****. Excerpt:

Quote:

Originally Posted by masque de Z

If Zeno doesnt own control of the forum and terminate the trolling and random insults in posts with mini 1 day or 1 week bans i promise to stop posting in 2+2 instantly. I have no problem if i am a recipient too although i never start things.

02-23-2016 , 06:39 AM

#772

JayTeeMe

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 29,419

Toothsayer gave Masque a quite accurate critique of his posting and thinking but it also pulled no punches. It was way more tough love than personal attack. Bans ensued so everyone could calm down.

02-23-2016 , 06:46 AM

#773

JayTeeMe

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 29,419

Quote:

Originally Posted by ToothSayer

Masque is conflating about 10 different concepts (desire, interest, acquisition, protection, regard, etc) together in the world "love". He then tries to show that "love" (as conflated by masque) seems to be present/necessary for intelligence, and then using the fact that it will "love" to show that the natural end point of higher and higher intelligence is love and therefore won't harm us.

It's horribad reasoning. In fact it doesn't rise to level of reasoning. There's insufficient precision in the language. I could use the same logic to show that an AI will kill us.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ToothSayer

At this point you must just be trolling. Lots of flaws have been pointed out in masque's posts. And if you can't see the manifest horrible flaws of ignorance and logic in masque's posts, I don't know what to say. Go back to politics? 9/10 here would agree with me.

Masque and spank are obviously deeply ignorant about what brain research tells us about love and empathy. They have pop culture views of these things. Completely and utterly out of their depth for this discussion (especially in the science forum) and just tarding up the thread.

Empathy is simply a brain region, and probably a very small one, which has been specifically evolved as it helped familial and small group cooperation in entities lacking in individual power. Prominent people in the field believe there is no correlation between empathy and intelligence
(seriously, read his book), and we have psychopaths as working models of very highly intelligent and functional goal seeking entities completely lacking in empathy. At the very least they prove that the set of intelligent, functional, self aware, goal attaining entities is larger than the set of intelligent, functional, self aware, goal attaining entities with concern for others. I'd argue (with anyone other than the very uninformed and intellectually narcissistic) that the set of the second is a tiny fraction of the first.

What's more, we know that power and empathy tend to be inversely correlated, which backs my assertion that empathy is a game theory solution for the weak, and there is no reason to think it will exist in the powerful. In fact, the history of people in power (or who gain power or wealth) shows decreasing levels of empathy.

Finally, we have that the probability that in competing simulations vying for initially finite processing power, the most devious/unempathetic/pure survival oriented are likely to survive and prosper, since "love" and preservation puts a bound on possible actions.

In fact widespread cooperative behavior will only prosper in a world where cooperation is game theory positive. This is true in a world where computing and destructive power (linked to physical dexterity/robotic systems) is widely dispersed in discrete, extremely slowly grown units and unhackable (i.e. the modern world with gunpowder and humans). It's certainly not true in an AI scenario, where the first intelligence will enter a networked world that an intelligence can control centrally.

Finally, there's the point that OP's theory only requires a single instance for an entity to gain control of sufficient resources to wipe out all competitors and maintain this state forever; this has never been true in human history; individuals humans are dispersed and limited in individual power, and have very limited intelligence and talent and cloning power and bandwidth and data holding capacity and data gathering capacity and precision.

Quote:

Originally Posted by masque de Z

Toothsayer are your teeth insured in real life from the consequences of the bs you are spreading about what you think others are saying?

Would you operate the same way if we were in the same room? Or are you a convenient coward?

Because your style here is that of a coward that plays for sport a permanent game of misrepresenting and ridiculing what i say in order to appear as someone knowledgeable that can strike from a position of superior intellect and education. And if you had either you would approach all this entirely differently. You instead approach it as if completely insecure in both. If your positions had sufficient merit they would not require to insult the other side but only debate with care their ideas and offer your examples and arguments without aggression because they alone would have all that is needed for the other side to be convinced.

Your approach is treating me in an insulting manner and undermines any merit your arguments may have. It is left to me to only pick what is worthy from what you say and ignore the rest but if you think this actually helps produce in an efficient manner a good interacting environment that ideas can flourish and result in something original we didnt have as positions coming into this, then you are wrong.

This is not how people that respect the spirit of honest discussion in scientific cycles treat each other to promote their ideas. You are childish.

Lashing out when someone points out that your posts are, um, not very good.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ToothSayer

Dude, nearly everyone here is thinking this about your posts. You would have a fine mind if you realize that in many ways, it's far less intelligent than others. While you live in your bubble, you'll write ridiculous things like this in a thread on the threat of artificial intelligence:

Cue you giving me rationalizations about why you wrote that and how it's relevant. With you it's all rationalizations of what you want to believe is true/your model of the world. That's how all of your posts come across. There's not the tiniest gap where you consider your model of the world might be flawed, let alone deeply flawed.

I have neither superior intellect nor education to at least half of the posters in this thread. I do have far superior intellectual constructs, and am far more broadly read/knowledgeable, than you. Everyone in this thread is. You come across as a total fool. Not because of your view that AI will be harmless (that's possibly supportable by good arguments, that I'd love to hear), but the quality and relevance and reality-basis of your arguments. I say that as someone who's a friend.

You are as impenetrably dense as your prose when it comes to seeing that what you write is trash. What you offer doesn't even rise to the level of an idea - it's a masturbatory shoehorning of what you want to be true. A celebration of your own models. You are so poorly read you don't even know where the starting point is in this discussion. And you're poorly read because you believe you're intelligent and a better thinker than most. And thus you heavily prefer your own data-poor theoretical models over what other people put forward.

I say this not to insult you. I like insulting some people but have zero desire to insult you (your heart at least is in the right place). I'm saying what I'm saying because you are an utter fool and someone needs to tell you. I wouldn't say this if I thought that was an unfixable condition; I'd simply ignore you or mock you.

You are singlehandedly destroying this thread with intellectual narcissism. There is no discussion. There is masque presenting his (ill read) models of what he wants to be true and reiterating them ad naseum.

Anyway, I tried to help. I'll just put you on ignore from now on.

That's what is known as "hot fire"