ILP rules and the permaban of Lys?

A forum about the forums

Moderator: Carleas

Re: ILP rules and the permaban of Lys?

Postby Mr Reasonable » Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:41 am

Arbiter of Change wrote:
When someone says something to you and it's clear to everyone else what they're saying, and then you say, "that would imply"


Actually, good of you to point out - it wasn't implied, it was explicitly stated that others get to insult Satyr and misconstrue his positions, and yes, it is true, while Lys is the one correcting them by posting, QUOTING Satyr's actual positions


Dude you got here in 2014. Have you ever considered that most of us have been through it with this dude over and over for years before you even showed up? The role you're playing has been done over and over by a dozen or more sad followers like yourself. The fact that you can't see why you should feel humiliated is astounding.
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 26064
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: ILP rules and the permaban of Lys?

Postby AutSider » Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:46 am

You're the one making declarations, I'm merely asking for you to prove them. I'm not interested in any of your opinions until you do so.

X: I claim A
Y: Prove A
X: Stop nipping me in the bud dude. Search for it yourself.
Y: You made the claim, if you want it to be taken seriously, you have to provide the proof. Otherwise others are free to dismiss it.

Who do you think is right, X or Y?

Do you think others are obliged to take your claim seriously, when you don't provide the evidence to back it up?
User avatar
AutSider
BANNED
 
Posts: 3337
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 9:04 pm

Re: ILP rules and the permaban of Lys?

Postby Carleas » Sun Jul 19, 2015 4:50 pm

Arbiter of Change wrote:
Carleas wrote:
Arbiter of Change wrote:We know that you don't mind relentless quoting - members have done that, and some still do it.
We know that you don't mind spamming - there are plenty of spammers here who reply with irrelevant one-liners to serious philosophy threads, some of them even explicitly declare they haven't read the OP and post.

We know that it's not illegal to intend to kill someone, since sticking pins in a voodoo doll with the sincere belief that it will kill someone is not a crime.
We know that killing someone is not illegal, since someone jumped in front of a train the other day and the conductor wasn't charged.

Therefore, it can't be illegal to both intend to kill someone and to actually kill them simultaneously, since neither part is illegal by itself. QED.

[F]eel free to find me making [the fallacy of composition] and quote me.

This smacks of bad faith. I quoted you and replied directly to the quote, and you want me to point out to you where you made the type of argument to which I was replying? You made the argument here, which I quoted and replied to here.

Or are you looking for the QED in your argument? I took it as implied. If it wasn't, then I agree that you have made no argument by making a short list of things which did not independently justify Lys' ban.

Arbiter of Change wrote:...the ONLY thing [Lys] brings here of [Satyr's], are his ideas...

But that's not true. A significant amount of her posting is not just his ideas, but his expressions of them. And he's not allowed to express his ideas on ILP.

Arbiter of Change wrote:[S]he doesn't act as his proxy if by acting as his proxy you include all of his actions here

Right. This is what I was trying to get at when I was probing your position with these questions:

  • [I]s the notion of 'acting as a proxy' all-or-nothing?
  • What about someone who acts as a proxy and also posts their own writings?
  • What about someone who behaves as a limited proxy?
You seem to be leaning towards the all-or-nothing, which I think is a naive position (by which I do not mean to imply it is the position of a generally naive person). This is just the paradox of the heap: Suppose someone is acting like a sock puppet for someone else, except they don't post one post in every hundred, or they add one of their own posts for every ninety-nine of their handler's. Are they still 'acting as a proxy'? I'd say yes, and certainly what they're doing is still accomplishing the end that we're trying to prevent. From there to not acting as a proxy at all is a sliding scale, or "shades of grey" if you will.
User Control Panel > Board preference > Edit display options > Display signatures: No.
Carleas
Magister Ludi
 
Posts: 6105
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 8:10 pm
Location: Washington DC, USA

Re: ILP rules and the permaban of Lys?

Postby phoneutria » Sun Jul 19, 2015 6:58 pm

Arbiter of Change wrote:
phoneutria wrote:You can't deny that lyssa comes here with the main objective of defending satyr against people who speak ill of him


That would imply proves that others are allowed to insult Satyr here and lie about his positions without any repercussions.


Carleas, I have a question.
If someone who isn't allowed to post feels as though they are being slandered on your forums, and emailed you asking for the slanderous posts to be taken down, would you agree to take those posts into analysis?
phoneutria
purveyor of enchantment, advocate of pulchritude AND venomously disarming
 
Posts: 3345
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 5:37 am

Re: ILP rules and the permaban of Lys?

Postby iambiguous » Sun Jul 19, 2015 7:53 pm

Arbiter of Change wrote:Like I said, I have not come here to argue for Satyr's unbanning - that would be pointless. I understand why, from YOUR point of view, he can never be unbanned - because he insults people to the extent that is unacceptable on this forum.

But has Lyssa brought Satyr's insults here, or only his ideas? Point me to one, ONE instance of Lyssa quoting Satyr's insults intended for particular ILP members?


In keeping with the manner in which I construe disputes of this sort, there is no optimal [most rational] argument pro or con for bringing Lyssa back. That will ever and always be embedded in dasein, conflicting goods and [re Carlos and the mods here] political economy.

But it still seems to me that Lyssa was banned for bringing Satyr's ideas here. And not for bringing Satyr the objectivist Stooge. Satyr "himself" as it were. So I suspect that in order to keep his [at times] truly reactionary rants out of here lines are crossed. Lyssa's Satyrean dumps are a technical violation and that's the excuse used to bump her out.

Or so it seems to me.

And I suspect that folks like me are permitted to bring Satyr's ideas to ILP only because I stomp on them every chance I get. He is just one more dangerous and deluded authoritarian to me. And KT is just one more right wing cult. And there can never be too many opportunities in any philosophical venue to expose them.

Or, sure, for those who consture my own frame of mind to be deluded and dangerous. Stomp that too if you will.

Look, there is just too big a chunk of ILP that is devoted to trivial pursuits. We all know that. And I won't pretend that, at times, I don't contribute to it. In fact it is the way that ILP manages to meld the mundane with the [more or less] "serious philosophy" that makes it all that more appealing.

Let's bring Lys back if only to yank ILP a bit closer to the sort of ideas that actually stimulate discussion and debate. Even if it will occasionally get out of hand.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 37190
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: ILP rules and the permaban of Lys?

Postby AutSider » Sun Jul 19, 2015 7:57 pm

Carleas,

This smacks of bad faith. I quoted you and replied directly to the quote, and you want me to point out to you where you made the type of argument to which I was replying? You made the argument here, which I quoted and replied to here.

Or are you looking for the QED in your argument? I took it as implied. If it wasn't, then I agree that you have made no argument by making a short list of things which did not independently justify Lys' ban.


I never made the argument that since you allow both of those separately that it means that both of those together must be allowed, and that is the argument you criticized, so yes - you criticized either an intentionally or accidentally erected strawman of my position.

But that's not true. A significant amount of her posting is not just his ideas, but his expressions of them. And he's not allowed to express his ideas on ILP.


HAH! Got you now, you artisan of deception and evasion. After 6 pages, it is finally there for all to see.

What you just effectively said is, that Satyr's ideas are not allowed on ILP. No, not just expressions, his ideas, period.
Because if Lyssa reworded his ideas in her own words, you would then say that she is just copying Satyr's ideas and adding a few letters here and there to avoid making it obvious, wouldn't you?
As if Satyr OWNS the fucking ideals and opinions he espouses, and none of them are in any way connected to REALITY WE ALL SHARE and the reading of previous philosophers, as if nobody else could possibly ever agree with him and acknowledge his ideas as true, and think that there is no reason to modify them.

It's like if you banned discussing Heraclitus on this forum because you don't like the concept of flux (also one of key concepts in Satyr's philosophy, which is not invented by him), but then I stop calling it flux, but call the same thing xulf, as if you would allow it and would not ban me for something along the lines of 'attempting to circumvent the ban', even though it would be a different expression of the same idea. Or maybe you now hate particular letters too, so I am not allowed to use letters that constitute the word "flux"? Is this the kind of absurdities we are supposed to discuss next?

I remember the story that there was this body of text, and then somebody came along, and just quoted it all and perhaps wrote one more word (I don't remember), and it was then pointed out that, by official standards, this is his own, new work of art.
So if Lys quoted Satyr's text, and added a few more words ("I agree", for example), since it is by official standards a new, her text, you would agree that she can post it as hers as much as she wants, right?

If not, why not?
And what would be the new standards? How much does she have to re-word Satyr's ideas for them to be allowed to be posted here?
What if some words simply don't have proper synonyms in English language? Does she have to invent new words and then explain their meaning?

Let's be sincere for a moment (or is this too much to ask for), this is only another word-game for you to avoid admitting that you are intolerant of certain kinds of ideas here, despite them being expressed with no included insults to any particular forum member.


And phon is on to something as well, that I did not have time to explain when I initially wrote the post she responded to.
You claim that Satyr is the one insulting other forum members, but I see others calling Satyr equally insulting names here, and nothing happens to them.
So, few years back, when Satyr was banned the first time, is it possible that the insults were flying all over the place from BOTH sides, and then you decided to ban Satyr because you dislike him/his ideas?
Banning a member and then allowing others to constantly rip on that member, is pathetic. What would be even more pathetic is to justify it by saying that he is not a member of this forum anyway anymore.

Just a question for all older members, if they remember - why was Satyr banned for the first time? Know any specific thread in which he started with the insults or in which the ban was discussed?
User avatar
AutSider
BANNED
 
Posts: 3337
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 9:04 pm

Re: ILP rules and the permaban of Lys?

Postby perpetualburn » Sun Jul 19, 2015 8:12 pm

Sauwelios wrote:I discern four relevant parties to this issue. The first consists of promising young men like Arbitrary Change; I shall call them "the goats". The goats are charmed by the bleak piper's death song, whose theme is the ideal of the "free-spirit". That goatman, in turn, constitutes the second relevant party. Now the third consists of those who are not so charmed by his song. They are those who are sufficiently free of youthful male passion to be able to see the former's abductive reasoning for what it is. And then there are the actual philosophers, or their representatives....

My last direct confrontation with Satyr was when he barged into my "How the French Became So Gay" thread and hurled himself at me as if to tear me to pieces. I was alarmed by his extremely angry manner, but now I understand that he was just play-acting. This does not mean that I needn't be alarmed, however, since he plays at anger to create anger, to anger others against the object of his own feigned anger...

Unlike Satyr, however, even apaosha did not ab-duct "liberal" into "liberal democrat". And indeed, if anything I'm a liberal aristocrat. In fact, Satyr actually got his idea of a hierarchical forum--where he appeals to the goats' pride by giving them an above-average rank--from my erstwhile forum, The Nietzsche Pyramid. And did you know that he was not originally banned from ILP, but only restricted to The Rant House? Just as he himself now does not usually ban people, but only restricts them to The Dungeon? I should still have the email in which he told me that, and asked me if I knew another forum for him to post at. He then followed me to The Nietzsche Forum, where he suddenly and immediately turned on me. The rest is history.


This is interesting and I always wondered why Satyr was so hard on you (and I agree with your assessment of Satyr in the "How the French Became So Gay" thread), but I fail to see how this has any bearing on the banning of Lys. How does this clarification (of the history between you and Satyr (not even you and Lys), help clarify the reasons given by Carleas for Lys's banning? Unless it's only meant to serve as an interesting anecdote? In which case, wouldn't it be off-topic?

Additionally, If Satyr was merely restricted to the Rant House for what I'm sure are far greater "offenses" than Lys, then why would you "absolutely" agree with the decision to permanently ban Lys?


Carleas wrote:The internet is a market, and we have every reason to keep any user here who is doing good by the philosophical endeavor, because that's the market we're going for.


Isn't this thread started by Lys a strong example of someone "doing good by the philosophical endeavor"? viewtopic.php?f=3&t=187106

Carleas wrote:Not crossing a bright line is not equivalent to not banworthy. I can and have referred to several posts that meet the criteria of banworthy: look at Lys' past 15 posts (for an example)


I'm not quite sure how anyone could possibly construe these 15 posts as "banworthy"...Especially when Carleas said it was acceptable to post Satyr''s ideas. How are these posts not relevant to the topic?

Suppose someone is acting like a sock puppet for someone else, except they don't post one post in every hundred, or they add one of their own posts for every ninety-nine of their handler's. Are they still 'acting as a proxy'? I'd say yes, and certainly what they're doing is still accomplishing the end that we're trying to prevent. From there to not acting as a proxy at all is a sliding scale, or "shades of grey" if you will.


This smacks of giving moderators carte blache to ban anyone that posts using quotes... Like there is some sort of golden balance of quoting and original content that a poster can only hope to affect lest he or she fall into the dreaded grey area.... But Mr reasonable can rack up 20 thousands posts, many of which are very crude, and never suffer a ban... How does someone like him not fall into a ban?

Carleas says moderating is "nuanced" but it seems that he only takes into account a narrow view of "spamming" when deciding to drop the ban hammer (without ever explaining how specific posts can be considered spamming)? He simply says, "Look here at such and such posts and be content that my judgement is clear and fair". He doesn't take into account the posts where Lys contributed a great deal of original content. He can just refer back to his "sliding scale" and say, "Well, she posted a lot of original material here and inspired actual philosophical discussion, but if you look over there she's "borderlining"" (posting quotes of Satyr that "could" be considered acting as a proxy...and at this point one is just supposed to accept that the guilty party has hopelessly fallen into the "grey area")...
As a pillar of rising smoke did my angel condescend and appear, standing without reserve on the exhausted banks of infinite sorrow.

http://knowthyself.forumotion.net/f6-agora
perpetualburn
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2014 3:57 am

Re: ILP rules and the permaban of Lys?

Postby Carleas » Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:02 pm

phoneutria wrote:If someone who isn't allowed to post feels as though they are being slandered on your forums, and emailed you asking for the slanderous posts to be taken down, would you agree to take those posts into analysis?

Into what analysis? Are they actually slanderous, or are they just unflattering opinions and hyperbole?

Arbiter of Change wrote:What you just effectively said is, that Satyr's ideas are not allowed on ILP.

It most certainly is not. I said "he's not allowed to express his ideas on ILP". You took the keyword in this sentence to be "ideas", because you've wanted to 'get' me by appeal to the law of verbal traps. But the keyword is actually "express". He's not allowed to express anything on ILP, including his ideas. As I said in the preceding sentence, the problem explicitly isn't his ideas, it's his expression of them that Lys' is posting. He isn't allowed to express them on ILP, because he isn't allowed to express anything on ILP.

Arbiter of Change wrote:I remember the story that there was this body of text, and then somebody came along, and just quoted it all and perhaps wrote one more word (I don't remember), and it was then pointed out that, by official standards, this is his own, new work of art.
So if Lys quoted Satyr's text, and added a few more words ("I agree", for example), since it is by official standards a new, her text, you would agree that she can post it as hers as much as she wants, right?

No. There is no such "official standard".

Arbiter of Change wrote:You claim that Satyr is the one insulting other forum members, but I see others calling Satyr equally insulting names here, and nothing happens to them.

Satyr isn't here. As such, insulting him isn't as disruptive as, say, insulting the person one is talking to. I do think there's a limit (grey!), especially since Satyr has friends here and insulting someone's friend can be quite disruptive. In any case, it's always bad philosophy. I'll express the limit this way: one cannot 'heap' insults on an absent individual (the definition of 'heap' is left as an exercise to the reader).

iambiguous wrote:Lyssa's Satyrean dumps are a technical violation and that's the excuse used to bump her out.

Or so it seems to me.


What would convince you that the way it seems to you is not the way it is? You seem thoroughly convinced that Satyr's ideas aren't scary. Are his ideas quasi-scary, such that the average reader might mistakenly be scared by them? Is Satyr the only person professing those ideas online today? On ILP?

perpetualburn wrote:This smacks of giving moderators carte blache to ban anyone that posts using quotes... Like there is some sort of golden balance of quoting and original content that a poster can only hope to affect lest he or she fall into the dreaded grey area.

This is not what is intended by "grey area". The grey area isn't equivalent to an area in which all moderator action is justified. It's just the area in which no bright line rule marks the conduct definitely protected or definitely proscribed. The use of discretion can be abuse of discretion.
User Control Panel > Board preference > Edit display options > Display signatures: No.
Carleas
Magister Ludi
 
Posts: 6105
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 8:10 pm
Location: Washington DC, USA

Re: ILP rules and the permaban of Lys?

Postby perpetualburn » Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:28 pm

This is not what is intended by "grey area". The grey area isn't equivalent to an area in which all moderator action is justified. It's just the area in which no bright line rule marks the conduct definitely protected or definitely proscribed. The use of discretion can be abuse of discretion.


And how would one determine if the use discretion has become an abuse of discretion if not through analyzing a moderator's decision as logically as possible? You said Lys's last 15 posts could be considered banworthy? So to put an end to a lot of unnecessary confusion, could you simply describe how the following post is banworthy, disruptive, spamming, or acting as a sockpuppet? Posting Satyr's ideas are allowed if they're relevant to the topic, no?

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=187161&p=2551078#p2551078
As a pillar of rising smoke did my angel condescend and appear, standing without reserve on the exhausted banks of infinite sorrow.

http://knowthyself.forumotion.net/f6-agora
perpetualburn
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2014 3:57 am

Re: ILP rules and the permaban of Lys?

Postby Carleas » Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:36 pm

You too seem to be fallaciously dividing the question. In order for a set of 15 posts to be banworthy, does every post need to be independently banworthy?
User Control Panel > Board preference > Edit display options > Display signatures: No.
Carleas
Magister Ludi
 
Posts: 6105
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 8:10 pm
Location: Washington DC, USA

Re: ILP rules and the permaban of Lys?

Postby Mr Reasonable » Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:43 pm

Arbiter of Change wrote:You're the one making declarations, I'm merely asking for you to prove them. I'm not interested in any of your opinions until you do so.

X: I claim A
Y: Prove A
X: Stop nipping me in the bud dude. Search for it yourself.
Y: You made the claim, if you want it to be taken seriously, you have to provide the proof. Otherwise others are free to dismiss it.

Who do you think is right, X or Y?

Do you think others are obliged to take your claim seriously, when you don't provide the evidence to back it up?



The evidence is over in the file cabinet...so to speak. It's here. Now if you want to continue huffing and puffing, instead of doing a little work, then that's your problem. Did you miss the part about how I'm not interested in doing any of this with you?
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 26064
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: ILP rules and the permaban of Lys?

Postby perpetualburn » Sun Jul 19, 2015 10:00 pm

Carleas wrote:You too seem to be fallaciously dividing the question. In order for a set of 15 posts to be banworthy, does every post need to be independently banworthy?


You're unreal... You will say anything to get out of having to explain how a post is banworthy won't you? You'll keep turning things around to keep things "grey"... And I'm the one "fallaciously" dividing the question...

Does every post need to be independently banworthy? Are you asking me what I think the rules should be now? What say the actual moderator?

When you pointed to Lys's last 15 posts was this a completely random sample or was there something about the content of the majority of these posts that lead you to refer to them specifically? Did you not refer to them because the majority of these posts contained quotes of Satyr's? And given that all use of quotes in these 15 posts seem relevant to the topic and not spam (thus all sharing a similar character), I am simply asking you to explain specifically why a single post is banworthy (and, in explaining this one post, you unburden yourself of having to explain all of them) Again, you seem to be evading the most simple request to provide clarity by returning to the "no bright line" argument as if there is nothing in a single post that can be pointed to, to provide clarity (which is nonsense).
Last edited by perpetualburn on Sun Jul 19, 2015 10:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
As a pillar of rising smoke did my angel condescend and appear, standing without reserve on the exhausted banks of infinite sorrow.

http://knowthyself.forumotion.net/f6-agora
perpetualburn
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2014 3:57 am

Re: ILP rules and the permaban of Lys?

Postby AutSider » Sun Jul 19, 2015 10:06 pm

Carleas, it is noted how you didn't respond to the brunt of my argument in which I exposed you and your standards. I don't feel anymore need to clarify any of my other points. Unless you decide to further continue the discussion I began with my arguments regarding the expression of ideas, I consider this exchange concluded and have nothing more to add.

mr reasonable, then go away. I am not the one who asked you your opinion about anything. YOU came onto a thread and posted the kind of opinion, or, more accurately, a claim, which requires supporting evidence to be taken seriously.

The only way I've ever interacted with the guy was to ask him to cut out the poetic prose bullshit and state his points like a man, and he refuses. So a few times I pulled his meaning from it's intentionally obfuscated context and showed it to him, and that's that.


That's your claim. If you want it to be taken more seriously than an animal's fart, provide evidence. Otherwise, GO AWAY already.
User avatar
AutSider
BANNED
 
Posts: 3337
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 9:04 pm

Re: ILP rules and the permaban of Lys?

Postby Mr Reasonable » Sun Jul 19, 2015 10:18 pm

Hey man, it seems like you're the only one who doesn't realize that all the rest of us have already been through the whole bit about this stuff with that guy. You're asking for evidence, I'm telling you where it is. Me not bringing it to you on a silver platter and making it easy for you isn't the same as it not being available to you. The fact that you can't seem to understand that makes me wonder if you're even being serious. If you don't want to talk to me, then great. Stop doing it. Stop mentioning my name constantly as if you've got some kind of crush on me. I'm having a hard time envisioning you as being past your early 20s. So grow up an bit, go and get yourself an education, and then come back and look at your behavior here and realize, after you've matured a bit, just how retarded you're being. I honestly can't believe that carleas has entertained you for this long. Guess what? Every one of us is not only familiar with, but generally tired of the rhetorical tricks that you think you have up your sleeve. None of what you're doing is new or original, and the more you do it, the more you seem like you're the only one who doesn't see how things actually are. The fact that you're not embarrassed makes me wonder if you're aware of how you're actually coming across.

I'll bet anyone here 100 bucks that he can't stop, and that in spite of saying he doesn't want to talk to me, he'll keep saying my name. It's because he's a....

You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 26064
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: ILP rules and the permaban of Lys?

Postby Carleas » Sun Jul 19, 2015 10:32 pm

perpetualburn wrote:[...] explain how a post is banworthy

You're making the same mistake Arbiter seemed to make not too long ago, and which I responded to here and here (Arbiter later clarified that he was not making an argument, perhaps I am mistaken here as well).

One's actions taken as a whole can be ban worthy, even when no individual action is ban worthy. Posting one long quote from a banned user is different from doing it 15 times. It's different from doing it after being told not to do it. Again, take the trivial case: if someone posts a solid, well-thought-out reply, that's clearly protected; if someone posts word-for-word the same, well-thought-out reply dozens of times to everyone who responds, that's clearly not.

You want there to be a single post for which Lys was banned. But she wasn't banned for a single post. She was banned for a whole bunch of posts constituting a pattern of conduct; the pattern is bigger than anyone post, but it sufficiently demonstrated by 1) her 15 most recent posts, combined with 2) her knowledge of our position on acting as an a proxy for a banned user.

Arbiter of Change wrote:Carleas, it is noted how you didn't respond to the brunt of my argument in which I exposed you and your standards. I don't feel anymore need to clarify any of my other points. Unless you decide to further continue the discussion I began with my arguments regarding the expression of ideas, I consider this exchange concluded and have nothing more to add.


To the extent the "brunt of [your] argument" depended on the false premises to which I did respond, I don't see how my reply can be characterized as unresponsive. If your premises are wrong, there is not brunt left in your argument.

It has, however, been a pleasure. I mean that. I appreciate your criticism, and I don't think as highly of the nothing-but-grey-area system as I did when we began. I maintain, however, that Lys' banning was both justified and fair.
User Control Panel > Board preference > Edit display options > Display signatures: No.
Carleas
Magister Ludi
 
Posts: 6105
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 8:10 pm
Location: Washington DC, USA

Re: ILP rules and the permaban of Lys?

Postby iambiguous » Sun Jul 19, 2015 10:38 pm

Carleas wrote:
iambiguous wrote:Lyssa's Satyrean dumps are a technical violation and that's the excuse used to bump her out.

Or so it seems to me.


What would convince you that the way it seems to you is not the way it is?


That's my point though. There is no way in which a moderator can convince another of what their "true" motive/intention was unless the other is able to crawl inside the moderator's head when a decision is being made. We can only either accept or not accept the explanation. Always from within the context as we construct it.

In other words, here we can only take our own subjective leap to one or another conclusion. And that's before we get to the part where we are able even to delude ourselves that we are doing something for this reason and not another.

My point then is always to note the manner in which some will argue as though we really can pin things like this down rationally, logically, essentially, objectively.

Carleas wrote:You seem thoroughly convinced that Satyr's ideas aren't scary. Are his ideas quasi-scary, such that the average reader might mistakenly be scared by them? Is Satyr the only person professing those ideas online today? On ILP?


All I need do here is to point out that others view my own moral and political narrative [rooted in my "dasein dilemma", rooted in nihilism] as in turn a scary way to view the world.

And indeed I have been banned from places like this -- http://forums.philosophyforums.com/ -- precisely because the substance of my arguments so perturbed the powers that be there. In that case Postmodern Beatnik. But I was banned not as a result of the arguments I was making. No, of course not. Instead, he informed us, I was banned for being a troll.

And Satyr embodies the delusions and the dangers of objectivism [as I construe it] like few others I have bumped into online.

Or, as I noted to arbiter on another thread, objectivists of his ilk are no doubt what prompted Roger Waters to compose this: https://youtu.be/1vDczley1R8

Deconstructing them is now sort of what I do. My own contribution to the human race as it were.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 37190
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: ILP rules and the permaban of Lys?

Postby A Shieldmaiden » Sun Jul 19, 2015 10:55 pm

Postby RickLewis » Mon Nov 05, 2012 7:30 am

Turns out that Satyr, Atthet, Apaosha, johngalthasspoken, Outsider and Recidivist also hang out together on: http://knowthyself.forumotion.net

From what I read there, they have been thrown off quite a few philosophy forums, but they generally think it is fun to join a new one, and see how far they can gradually push the limits before they get banned.

We had an invasion by this bunch a year or so back, and as we are usually pretty relaxed here they gradually reduced the forum to chaos until we eventually had a purge and chucked them all out. I'm reckoning that history is likely to repeat, and that certainly seems to be what they expect themselves. However, I'm short of time (and interest) so I'm going to sort of skip to the last page by banning them all straight away. Satyr, Outsider and johngaltetc have already been banned and Apaosha was (as far as I remembered) still under a lifetime ban from last time - not sure how he snuck back in! - so really I'm just banning Recidivist now. Atthet (aka "Purple Dragon", apparently! :mrgreen: ) can stay for the time being because he is relatively harmless and knows he'll get a ban every time he steps over the line.

Of course, this is deeply illiberal of me and in an ideal world I'd go through the steps of warning them, giving them temporary bans, giving them last chances etc as they gradually ramp up the mayhem, but (as they say on Tralfamadore) so it goes. Anyone who wishes to debate them can still do so, over on their forum: http://knowthyself.forumotion.net/t895-philosophy-now


From Philosophy Now Forum
Last edited by A Shieldmaiden on Sun Jul 19, 2015 10:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The man that walks his own road, walks alone

Old Norse Proverb
User avatar
A Shieldmaiden
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2048
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 6:13 am

Re: ILP rules and the permaban of Lys?

Postby perpetualburn » Sun Jul 19, 2015 10:56 pm

Carleas wrote:
One's actions taken as a whole can be ban worthy, even when no individual action is ban worthy. Posting one long quote from a banned user is different from doing it 15 times. It's different from doing it after being told not to do it. Again, take the trivial case: if someone posts a solid, well-thought-out reply, that's clearly protected; if someone posts word-for-word the same, well-thought-out reply dozens of times to everyone who responds, that's clearly not.

You want there to be a single post for which Lys was banned. But she wasn't banned for a single post. She was banned for a whole bunch of posts constituting a pattern of conduct; the pattern is bigger than anyone post, but it sufficiently demonstrated by 1) her 15 most recent posts, combined with 2) her knowledge of our position on acting as an a proxy for a banned user.


But those 15 posts are all different... In other words, she is not posting "word-for-word the same, well-thought out reply dozens of times to everyone who responds"...So what does the pattern reveal... That she included various ideas of Satyr that related to the topics at hand over the course of 15 posts? You're phrasing things like she was blindly quoting Satyr without regard to the subject of the thread, but how can a pattern be formed(in the moderator's mind) when each post is relevant to the topic of its respective thread? There's only a pattern if the posts are irrelevant, no?

So, given that A) her 15 most recent posts do not demonstrate a pattern of misconduct (i.e. a pattern of repeating the same (word for word) ideas over and over again, and that B) she is not acting as a proxy for a banned user if her use of quotes is relevant to the thread (as you've said is fine)... the ban still seems unjustified.
As a pillar of rising smoke did my angel condescend and appear, standing without reserve on the exhausted banks of infinite sorrow.

http://knowthyself.forumotion.net/f6-agora
perpetualburn
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2014 3:57 am

Re: ILP rules and the permaban of Lys?

Postby Mr Reasonable » Sun Jul 19, 2015 11:05 pm

He's not talking about the posts as individuals, he's talking about the set of posts. A set is an abstract entity. They teach you about them in philosophy school.
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 26064
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: ILP rules and the permaban of Lys?

Postby AutSider » Mon Jul 20, 2015 12:12 am

Carleas, if you answer this question of my:

Because if Lyssa reworded his ideas in her own words, you would then say that she is just copying Satyr's ideas and adding a few letters here and there to avoid making it obvious, wouldn't you?


with a yes, then there truly is nothing left to debate. Because if you do answer it with a yes, it means that it is not even the particular, let's say, "Satyresque" style of expression that bothers you (which is ridiculous enough, that you would ban some ideas from being posted because you don't like the style or the poster who espouses them), but any sort of expression of such ideas, and when called upon this, you can then retreat back into "gray areas", aka, your personal, subjective, mostly subconscious judgments and distinction-making that you cannot justify or even properly explain to anybody else, so there is nothing left for me to attack or criticize but to say that I ardently disagree with such a rule system, and that if implemented in human political reality, I think it would fail, horribly.
User avatar
AutSider
BANNED
 
Posts: 3337
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 9:04 pm

Re: ILP rules and the permaban of Lys?

Postby phoneutria » Mon Jul 20, 2015 2:25 am

Aoc, do keep in mind that carleas pays for this website with his very own credit card.
phoneutria
purveyor of enchantment, advocate of pulchritude AND venomously disarming
 
Posts: 3345
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 5:37 am

Re: ILP rules and the permaban of Lys?

Postby Sauwelios » Mon Jul 20, 2015 2:33 am

perpetualburn wrote:
Sauwelios wrote:I discern four relevant parties to this issue. The first consists of promising young men like Arbitrary Change; I shall call them "the goats". The goats are charmed by the bleak piper's death song, whose theme is the ideal of the "free-spirit". That goatman, in turn, constitutes the second relevant party. Now the third consists of those who are not so charmed by his song. They are those who are sufficiently free of youthful male passion to be able to see the former's abductive reasoning for what it is. And then there are the actual philosophers, or their representatives....

My last direct confrontation with Satyr was when he barged into my "How the French Became So Gay" thread and hurled himself at me as if to tear me to pieces. I was alarmed by his extremely angry manner, but now I understand that he was just play-acting. This does not mean that I needn't be alarmed, however, since he plays at anger to create anger, to anger others against the object of his own feigned anger...

Unlike Satyr, however, even apaosha did not ab-duct "liberal" into "liberal democrat". And indeed, if anything I'm a liberal aristocrat. In fact, Satyr actually got his idea of a hierarchical forum--where he appeals to the goats' pride by giving them an above-average rank--from my erstwhile forum, The Nietzsche Pyramid. And did you know that he was not originally banned from ILP, but only restricted to The Rant House? Just as he himself now does not usually ban people, but only restricts them to The Dungeon? I should still have the email in which he told me that, and asked me if I knew another forum for him to post at. He then followed me to The Nietzsche Forum, where he suddenly and immediately turned on me. The rest is history.


This is interesting and I always wondered why Satyr was so hard on you (and I agree with your assessment of Satyr in the "How the French Became So Gay" thread), but I fail to see how this has any bearing on the banning of Lys. How does this clarification (of the history between you and Satyr (not even you and Lys), help clarify the reasons given by Carleas for Lys's banning? Unless it's only meant to serve as an interesting anecdote? In which case, wouldn't it be off-topic?


I suppose, but it's not only meant to serve as an interesting anecdote. My point is that Satyr's expressions of his positions, though lacking in (sound) reasoning, are convincing for quite a few people and, considering the nature of those positions and of those people, are dangerous to philosophy. Lys is someone who needs an exemplar of what she has called the "Satyr Type" in order to cleave to it. Currently, that exemplar is Satyr. So if you give Satyr a permaban, you should do the same for Lys: as Carleas and Only Humean have made abundantly clear. But hey, I'd be open to a discussion of the pros and cons of allowing both of them back into the Rant House!


perpetualburn wrote:Additionally, If Satyr was merely restricted to the Rant House for what I'm sure are far greater "offenses" than Lys, then why would you "absolutely" agree with the decision to permanently ban Lys?


See above. By the way, that was his original "ban". I'm not so sure it was for greater offenses than Lys'. In the meantime, however, almost seven years of at least as offensive behaviour have gone by. And in any case, perhaps Lys is even more dangerous than Satyr? To end with a Nietzsche-quote: "[M]an is at the bottom of his soul merely evil, woman however is bad there." (Zarathustra, "Of Old and Young Womlets", my translation.)
User avatar
Sauwelios
Philosophical Supremacist
 
Posts: 7182
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 7:07 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: ILP rules and the permaban of Lys?

Postby Carleas » Mon Jul 20, 2015 4:35 am

perpetualburn wrote:[G]iven that A) her 15 most recent posts do not demonstrate a pattern ... of repeating the same (word for word) ideas over and over again...

Are you familiar with the concept of analogy? Because this is a bit like trying to explain something to Amelia Bedelia. What I'm trying to do, PB, when I "take the trivial case", is to show you that the general principal on which you're relying (the no-one-thing-was-enough-so-all-the-things-together-can't-be-enough principle) is incorrect, by showing you that it is clearly incorrect in a specific case: repeating the same thing over and over. Just as in the trivial case, no one post is basis enough on which to evaluate the act: to see the harm you need to take each post in the context of all the other posts.

I hope this helps. I encourage you to read that wikipedia page about analogy, and other related articles. I can't personally recommend Amelia Bedelia, but I know people who loved them. Certainly you might be able ... analogize ... to your own predilection for taking things too literally.
Arbiter of Change wrote:Carleas, if you answer this question ... with a yes, then there truly is nothing left to debate.

Boy, you make saying yes very tempting...

But I don't think the answer is yes. I actually don't think this is a clear yes-or-no question. Like in a related problem, where someone is trying to figure out when a heap of sand stops being a heap by removing one grain at a time, I don't think Lys stops behaving as Satyr's proxy at a clearly defined point as she gradually replaces one word with another in something Satyr has written.

I'm a little baffled by the underlying premise here, though. Does Lys not understand the ideas well enough herself to express them without mechanically replacing Satyr's words with synonyms? Or has Satyr actually expressed the ideas so perfectly and clearly that no restatement in anyone else's words (unless it is a replacement by mechanical substitution of synonyms) will so perfectly and clearly convey the idea? Neither premise is at all plausible; even considering the very best that humanity has produced, it is unlikely that any time-bound and context-free expression is the best way to convey an idea in a living discourse.
User Control Panel > Board preference > Edit display options > Display signatures: No.
Carleas
Magister Ludi
 
Posts: 6105
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 8:10 pm
Location: Washington DC, USA

Re: ILP rules and the permaban of Lys?

Postby MagsJ » Mon Jul 20, 2015 8:43 am

To the op... if you too post on Satyr's behalf once more, you too will be permabanned.
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ

I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Wait, What! - MagsJ

You’re suggestions and I, just simply don’t mix.. like oil on water, or a really bad DJ - MagsJ
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 20298
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Suryaloka/LDN Town

Re: ILP rules and the permaban of Lys?

Postby AutSider » Mon Jul 20, 2015 8:59 am

See Carleas, this is what I mean. Once more? When did I EVER post on Satyr's behalf here? I do not recall quoting him ONCE in my entire history of being on this forum.

And as I said, you can check my IP address, and unless Satyr is flying from continent to continent daily, just to post on ILP, I don't think you have reasonable grounds for a ban.

Then again, you can refer back to grey areas... I am arguing in favor of a banned member after all. Might as well permaban me too, after all, it is POSSIBLE that Satyr is flying from continent to continent to post on ILP. He is known to be obsessed with it, and if based on this possibility you also judge that it is probable, then bye bye Arbie, yes?
User avatar
AutSider
BANNED
 
Posts: 3337
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 9:04 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Meta



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users