User Submitted Article
See other User Submitted Article Articles
Title: Comparative Analysis of the Pinguinite Forums
Source:
LF
URL Source: http://www.libertysflame
Published: Jun 20, 2011
Author: buckeroo
Post Date: 2011-06-20 00:56:50 by buckeroo
Keywords: None
Views: 113495
Comments: 130
I was in process of posting to Fred Mertz on a thread here@LF about the styles of the various managers that was deleted by the LF forum manager. Here are MY ratings for "hit/post ratios WRT articles submitted": LP (declining), LF (ascending), 4UM(flat) and TPF (flat) but in that order. Goldi has let her channel go to shit based on her continuous babbling about Israel. Stone is silly and offensive as with Ferret and war, to posters and has a lot to learn to keep his fucking hands off the channel material unless it is obviously out of perspective with the scope of LF. Christine runs the best channel of the lot and is perhaps the best manager I have ever seen. Robin is the best technically. I NEVER even knew about her site until Stone talked about nolu chan over there. He is the absolute best poster on the Internet beyond ANY that I have seen. So, we have different management styles on these channels and the same is true for many others as well. All good managers from the perspective they each want to place the BEST possible within their limited budgets both time and money. But Stone, sometimes has this EVIL streak running down his kick 'em out button. It shall be his own death knell.LP is on decline while LF is on the ascension at the moment even though LF has fewer stalwart posters. I made this point to nolu chan @TPF irrespective of Alexia website ratings that TPF has claimed.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 120.
#2. To: buckeroo (#0)
:)
I told you once before that you are your own worst enemy. There are literally millions of chit-chat forums on the Internet. I know you want to succeed with your ideas but sometimes you just can't get your trigger finger off the "kick 'em button." You have to alter your methods of management style. You are dealing with posters that have been on the Internet for years transcending through time based on technological changes and you treat them as though they are your enemies. They want to express a perspective is all and sometimes that same perspective may not be eloquent or desirable. But they aren't spammers or hackers or idiots.
He's a fucking moron. I've never seen anyone trip over his own stupidity as much as Stone does...excepting Boofer, of course... Please note: Due to your account status (Probationed), you may make 10 comments per day. You have made 1 comment(s) so far today.
Stone's methods for his channel management style are often imbecilic, for sure. Still, I have noted more posters popping in to LF and perhaps Stone is defensive of the forum. His reasons are his alone. Diversity of opinion is the key to success whether anyone agrees with this point of view or not. If these chit-chat channel managers skew the forum impetus into their own way of thinking what shall happen is the inevitable: a hollow, echo chamber that is meaningless of and about personal opinion while some members chit-chat with a cup of tea or coffee because they have otherwise useless lives to begin with. Strength *IS* diversity of opinion. It is not some singular model of thought or thinking guided by anyone or group. How else can we modify ourselves or the world around us but by attempting to learn new ideas?
In an honest intellectual debate, sure. But neither rat-boy nor DwarF are interested in honest intellectual discussions. They're disinformation specialists, which is the antithesis of what a discussion forum is about.
But neither rat-boy nor DwarF are interested in honest intellectual discussions. Since you use high and mighty terms to separate yourself from the rif-raf or chafe, I suppose you regard yourself as an "intellectual" correct? But, have you ever reviewed your own commentary? Do you realize how silly you are with all those pictures in your tag-line? I enjoy some of your articles. But, to be honest, your commentary sucks. You are akin to a mild-version of Mad Dog.
No. Quite the opposite- I view myself as a guy who somehow grasps things that others (for whatever reason) do not. I look at economics, the same way I look at electrical and mechanical engineering puzzles, and just seem to know the solution... It's as easy to me as when you look at the lawn in front of your house, and say, "oh, the grass is green." In the same way that such a fact would be self-evident to you, it seems to be that way with me, when it comes to engineering and economics. I don't think of myself as an intellectual, because that would imply that I really need to think about this stuff, to understand the ramifications. Am I working on my doctorate? Yeah. But the reason I'm doing it, is not to become an "intellectual." It's to have the strongest educational safety-net, to assure my family has adequate income for the forseeable future. It's an insurance policy, that's all... Why should I? I wrote it, so what purpose is to be served by reviewing it again? I really don't care about your opinion. Fine. My goals are two-fold: 1. Post information so that people can understand what's coming, and If that bruises your sensibilities, I really don't care. If you have full (or as close to full) information on which to make decisions which could very well affect your livelihood, or the survival of your family in the economic hurricane that we're in the middle of, then I'm good with that. But truly, I don't care if you like me or not... As I told lucysmom the other day, my motives are very simple: get the information out. If we're in a crowded movie theater, and a fire breaks out, would you rather I yell FIRE! or just run out on my own? If you'd prefer and watch the movie, eating your popcorn, until you become "extra crispy," I can't do much about that... But at least I can warn people, and they can make their own choices... But the first thing to do is break the spell of fascination with the ongoing "bread-and-circuses" show, break people away from the distractions, so that they can see what's really going on... Those that choose to ignore the truth, and believe the more-interesting fictions of the nightly news, I can do nothing for... Those that will wake up, will have at least a choice... I don't know what motivates him- and I've never asked. But you know where I'm coming from- for better or worse. And now, knowing this, you can probably understand why- though I'm accused by the forum trolls and disinfo specialists of being a liar, I have absolutely NO reason to lie, and every reason to speak factually. If that makes it hard to read my commentary, than the answer is simple: don't.
Yes you do. That is why you are on these chit-chat forums. Of course, it may not be specifically my opinions but never-the-less you are interested in opinions particularly given the frequency of your own posts.
You overestimate yourself. ((((yawn))))
And you are arrogant.
I get that a lot, from ignorant people.
I'll defend you here, Erica. You're not arrogant. You're not smart or good enough to merit it. Please note: Due to your account status (Probationed), you may make 10 comments per day. You have made 5 comment(s) so far today.
Dummy, you can't defend yourself. If you could make legit arguments, instead of knee-jerking back into "Disinfo Mode," and resorting to your juvenile personal attacks, you wouldn't have "Due to your account status (Probationed), you may make 10 comments per day" on your posts. You think your feeble opinion, will be strengthened by the force of your message. In reality, the opposite is true. You lack the ability to judge what is smart OR good. Hell, your own track-record through FR, LP and now LF, are a testament to your fecklessness. In the battle of wits, you show up with a banana in your hand, and a chip on your shoulder. Which leads us right back to the following- a direct result of your lack of worth, to the forum:
A) The biggest disinformationist here is you. You've been predicting the same doom and gloom for 10 years now. What makes it even more hilarious, is that we've had ups and downs in the economy but not because of any reason you have cited nor anything near the total collapse you've been predicting. B) You ARE an asshole and seeing you IS seeing three. That's what your "chief" was telling you. If you, Erica, see MORE than three go look in the mirror and see the FIRST three. C) Stone has no balls. He's well known to have no balls and it's not surprising, given your penchant for wearing skirts, heels and lipstick, that you'd hide behind someone with no balls and egg him on. And I have no record on FR...if I made 20 posts there I've probably over estimated by 5... D) I still look forward to the day that we may meet, Erica. Posting the Youtube video of you taking those last few puzzled blinks and gasps will be a very happy day on the internet indeed. Love, Please note: Due to your account status (Probationed), you may make 10 comments per day. You have made 6 comment(s) so far today.
Yeah, you're quite the combat expert, aren't you? ESAD.
Geezus...Erica...now you're posting scenes from gay "snuff" films in addition to copyrighted material that you're trying to pass off as your own? Here's a hint...when you're asked for YOUR predictions, it's unethical and, in this case since you published it here, iLLEGAL to try to pass off someone else's material as your own. Anyway, back to your perversion. Why would you even have those pictures of those obviously gay teens on your computer? They don't even look 18...geezus...you are one sick perv. IS Packrat a relative of yours? Given your penchant for posting copyrighted material and trying to pass it off as your own, how much of your alleged dissertation have you cribbed? Please note: Due to your account status (Probationed), you may make 10 comments per day. You have made 0 comment(s) so far today.
I wouldn't know about gay snuff films- I'll leave such subjects to your vast range of experience. As well, I didn't try "to pass off" *anything* as mine. I've been posting from "the economic collapse blog" for a long time, as LP records will easily show. The facts are the same ones I've been posting from their articles for at least the past year. I also never claimed to come up with the Rules of Disinformation. I posted the article, and where YOU are concerned, it seems only natural to keep bringing them up, since it's the playbook you follow faithfully. In this case: Rule of Disinformation #5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary attack the messenger ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Rule of Disinformation #7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could so taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive. Rule of Disinformation #17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can “argue” with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues. Rule of Disinformation #18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can’t do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how “sensitive they are to criticism”. Rule of Disinformation #20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications. As usual, you fail. But thanks for the laughs. Let's list what you've demonstrated in this thread: 1. You watch gay snuff films, Life must really suck- even for a dummy like you. LMAO.
Chuckles...riiight...you just happened to have "another window" on your computer open at the time that had somehow been directed to a site with scantily clad teen boys firing weapons. Pervert. [snicker] ***PING*** to calcon to watch Erica squirm over outting himself as a lover of scantily clad teeanged boys. I also never claimed to come up with the Rules of Disinformation. No one accused you of that, Pervert. You're guilty of your own accusation of "disinformation". The issue is over from where you copied and pasted your alleged predictions, pervie. Please note: Due to your account status (Probationed), you may make 10 comments per day. You have made 5 comment(s) so far today.
A couple of months ago CE said he didn't need to cut and paste because he had "internalized" economic information.
Link??? With EXACT quote, in complete context.
Taking a page from your book - do your own homework. (at least I gave you credit)
As you and the rest of the socialist misfits fail to understand, just because you say something does NOT make it so. You post unsubstantiated opinion, believing that you have now established a "fact" by virtue of you posting it. Of course, it doesn't begin to pass the sniff-test, but you hope nobody will notice. I don't need to defend myself from the likes of you. You're nothing but an old, bitter and stupid woman, who has nothing left in life, but to demand that someone care about her wasted life. It would be pitiful, were it not for the fact that you suffer the consequences of the choices YOU made. You will never admit that, of course- you people NEVER take responsibility for your actions. And that is the *real* pity- that you never learn. Either way, though, it's NOT my problem.
Get off of the fucking cross, Erica. What you are accusing LM of doing here is what EVERYONE here sees YOU doing. You post the crap of someone else, most of which, over time, I have either refuted or questioned you over - questions you have refused to answer - and the resultant snit fit by you leads to you posting hilariously angry crap in response. Your vindictiveness stands in stark cotrast to the polite, levelheaded responses and questions that you get from LM. IN other words, pervert, you really SUCK as a person. Please note: Due to your account status (Probationed), you may make 10 comments per day. You have made 6 comment(s) so far today.
Straight out of Alinsky's playbook. Knowing your script, it's funny to watch how you attempt to use it.
Straight out of Alinsky's playbook. Fuck off Pervert...this is tthe EXACT bullshit I'm "talking" about. You do the same bullshit 100 times more often then I may or anyone else may do. Nowhere, btw, has there been a denial that you a) have gay, borderline, pedopheliac porn at your fingertips, b) that you pass off other peoples' work as your own and c) that you're simply an angry little gnat who finds empowerment in acting like an asshole to anonymos people on the internet. And it's now too late to deny any of that you pentulant pissant of a plagerizing perv. Please note: Due to your account status (Probationed), you may make 10 comments per day. You have made 7 comment(s) so far today.
You know what they say about "men" who feel the need to use big graphics, pervert... Nowhere, btw, has there been a denial that you a) have gay, borderline, pedopheliac porn at your fingertips, b) that you pass off other peoples' work as your own and c) that you're simply an angry little gnat who finds empowerment in acting like an asshole to anonymous people on the internet. And it's now too late to deny any of that you pentulant pissant of a plagerizing perv. Please note: Due to your account status (Probationed), you may make 10 comments per day. You have made 8 comment(s) so far today.
No, I wouldn't. More of the same of Rules of Disinformation, eh? #9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues with denial they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect. #17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can “argue” with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues. #18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can’t do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how “sensitive they are to criticism”. So let's review your transparent tactics, using the rules of disinfo: #5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule...? CHECK. #9. Play Dumb...? CHECK, though I often get the feeling you're not the brightest star in the sky. #17. Change the subject.... works especially well with companions who can “argue” with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues? CHECK. This, of course, is why you call in your butt-buddies... because the thread is getting away from you, and you need help to keep you from looking even MORE stupid than usual. Awww, (((sniff))) Are you gonna' cry now? Before or after you spell-check? LMAO.
#129. To: Capitalist Eric (#120)
Those overcompensating rarely do. Awww, (((sniff))) Are you gonna' cry now? Before or after you spell-check? LMAO. I can always blame the spell check. You can only blame genetics. Please note: Due to the whims of A K A Balless your account status (Probationed), you may make 10 comments per day. You have made 1 comment(s) so far today.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestBut Stone, sometimes has this EVIL streak running down his kick 'em out button. It shall be his own death knell.
#3. To: A K A Stone (#2)
(Edited)
#8. To: buckeroo (#3)
#20. To: war (#8)
He's a fucking moron. I've never seen anyone trip over his own stupidity as much as Stone does
#22. To: buckeroo (#20)
Strength *IS* diversity of opinion.
#40. To: Capitalist Eric, ferret mike, war (#22)
In an honest intellectual debate, sure.
#41. To: buckeroo (#40)
I suppose you regard yourself as an "intellectual" correct?
But, have you ever reviewed your own commentary?
Do you realize how silly you are with all those pictures in your tag-line?
I enjoy some of your articles.
But, to be honest, your commentary sucks.
2. Shut down the disinformation/statist freaks, who would lead us all to the slaughter, if they could. You are akin to a mild-version of Mad Dog.
#42. To: Capitalist Eric (#41)
I really don't care about your opinion.
#43. To: buckeroo (#42)
#45. To: Capitalist Eric (#43)
((((yawn))))
#62. To: buckeroo (#45)
And you are arrogant.
#63. To: Capitalist Eric, buckeroo (#62)
#68. To: war, buckeroo, A K A Stone (#63)
dummy DwarF: I'll defend you here, Erica.
You're not arrogant. You're not smart or good enough to merit it.
Please note: Due to your account status (Probationed), you may make 10 comments per day.
I hope Stone gives you the boot.
#72. To: Capitalist Eric (#68)
(Edited)
Which leads us right back to the following- a direct result of your lack of worth, to the forum:
The DwarF
#89. To: war (#72)
D) I still look forward to the day that we may meet, Erica. Posting the Youtube video of you taking those last few puzzled blinks and gasps will be a very happy day on the internet indeed.
#94. To: Capitalist Eric (#89)
(Edited)
#100. To: war (#94)
...now you're posting scenes from gay "snuff" films...
Rule of Disinformation #4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad.
2. were rejected by your wife, and
3. are so emotionally damaged, that you create enemies to lash out against, threaten and goad, because you're such an empty shell of a human being.
#102. To: Capitalist Eric, calcon (#100)
(Edited)
I wouldn't know about gay snuff films
#104. To: war, Capitalist Eric (#102)
The issue is over from where you copied and pasted your alleged predictions, pervie.
#106. To: lucysmom (#104)
(Edited)
A couple of months ago CE said he didn't need to cut and paste because he had "internalized" economic information.
#107. To: Capitalist Eric (#106)
Link??? With EXACT quote, I>in complete context.
#108. To: lucysmom (#107)
#110. To: Capitalist Eric, lucysmom, mininggold (#108)
(Edited)
#111. To: war (#110)
(Edited)
What you are accusing LM of doing here is what EVERYONE here sees YOU doing.
RULE #3: "Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy." Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. ... One way of doing this is to accuse your enemy of what you are doing or going to do)
LMAO.
#113. To: Capitalist Eric (#111)
(Edited)
#115. To: war (#113)
Fuck off Pervert...
Check-mate.
#116. To: Capitalist Eric (#115)
(Edited)
#120. To: war (#116)
You know what they say about "men" who feel the need to use big graphics, pervert...
Nowhere, btw, has there been a denial that you a) have gay, borderline, pedopheliac porn at your fingertips, b) that you pass off other peoples' work as your own and c) that you're simply an angry little gnat who finds empowerment in acting like an asshole to anonymous people on the internet.
#5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary attack the messenger ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as “kooks”, “right-wing”, “liberal”, “left- wing”, “terrorists”, “conspiracy buffs”, “radicals”, “militia”, “racists”, “religious fanatics”, “sexual deviates”, and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
And it's now too late to deny any of that you pentulant
[SIC] pissant of a plagerizing [SIC] perv. Please note: Due to your account status (Probationed), you may make 10 comments per day. You have made 8 comment(s) so far today.
As to being an asshole and a perv, that certainly explains why YOU are on probationary status, and I am not. It explains why people PISS on you, in any forum you're stupid enough to post on... And, inexplicably, you keep coming back for more... "Please sir, may I have another? LMAO.
Replies to Comment # 120. No, I wouldn't.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 120.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]