Title: What would it take to get Pericles to come here and post. Source:
[None] URL Source:[None] Published:Jan 12, 2015 Author:A K A Stone Post Date:2015-01-12 20:37:53 by A K A Stone Keywords:None Views:49915 Comments:110
I read a few of your posts. Didn't know who you were. I didn't agree with much but you were respectful and sincere.
I might start a sock puppet decoder ring thread, for all of the aliases used by different people on these forums.
It's the two new unknown sock puppets that you need the ring for.
I don't care if people have had multiple IDs as long as they're honest about it. If they're playing games and hiding who they are, you know they're up to no good.
I might start a sock puppet decoder ring thread, for all of the aliases used by different people on these forums. It's the two new unknown sock puppets that you need the ring for.
Calling the different names I used a sockpuppet is a stretch. I never posted simultaneously with two different account names. It is not like the name I pick for an online forum can not change like a SS card or my driver's ID.
It is not like these names I use for forums are copyrighted or in any way my real names.
I may change my name on forums. But I don't have multiple accounts on each forum playing games or pretending I am a group ganging up on someone or on a topic.
Calling the different names I used a sockpuppet is a stretch.
Only a little. I would call them retread accounts if you got banned, like at TOS, and came back under a new handle. Then there are sleepers or zombie accounts, extra IDs for making mischief. I see your point that you were actively posting (and not to disrupt) under each handle in succession. So retread is probably more accurate.
I'm not sure that being a retread is that much more dignified than a sockpuppet. These terms get used loosely.
Wait...are you asking for help in going back to TOS? Or just conversing?
To go back, just click the heels of those ruby slippers 3 times and recite, "There's no place like Rome, there's no place...". : )
If you want to go back, I can tell you how. So could any number of people here, in private forum mail if you like.
Your problem is that your professional prose style would give you away. You write too well; it's pretty unmistakable. So you might get back there for a while but you'd be found out. And, unlike Goldi, Robinson tolerates no retreads.
Wait...are you asking for help in going back to TOS? Or just conversing?
To go back, just click the heels of those ruby slippers 3 times and recite, "There's no place like Rome, there's no place...". : )
LOL
Your problem is that your professional prose style would give you away. You write too well; it's pretty unmistakable. So you might get back there for a while but you'd be found out. And, unlike Goldi, Robinson tolerates no retreads.
This is true. Vic's style is pretty unique. And he's too cerebral for most of TOS. However for a poster to be hit with the charge of "RETREAD!!" (or troll) it would have to be assumed that Vic has made enemies of petty mitpickers there. Have you, Vic? If not, TC has his balloon tethered to Oz on standby to Kansas.
However for a poster to be hit with the charge of "RETREAD!!" (or troll) it would have to be assumed that Vic has made enemies of petty mitpickers there. Have you, Vic? If not, TC has his balloon tethered to Oz on standby to Kansas.
I never really thought about that. Given some of the outrage that folks have expressed at me, the heat of the invective, just for stating my simple (if at times detailed) opinions, I suppose that there are some people whom I make batshit crazy just by opening my mouth.
I think these are mostly matters of style. France is America's oldest ally, but a lot of Americans are allergic to things French, and I do write with more than a little garlic.
Given some of the outrage that folks have expressed at me, the heat of the invective, just for stating my simple (if at times detailed) opinions, I suppose that there are some people whom I make batshit crazy just by opening my mouth...
...I do write with more than a little garlic.
I don't think your penchant for garlicky detail was the issue. Or was it? Yes, there may have been some batshit-crazy posters at FR who were also mods.
Refresh my memory. What exactly was your "offending" post at FR?
Was putting up with 8 years of Clinton worth it to get rid of Bush? Yes, yes it was."
THAT was a bit to radical for the Cult of Bush to wrap their fawning heads around, wasn't it? LOL
These days, Freepers are in open revolt against ALL things Bush. TEN YEARS TOO LATE. Thus, you were waaay ahead of the curve, as were most excommunicated Freepers here or at LP.
These days, Freepers are in open revolt against ALL things Bush.
Well, W Bush was better than his daddy. I didn't hate W. Still don't. He made mistakes. So have I.
His worst mistake from a national security perspective was not treating 9/11 like Pearl Harbor and going to Congress next day to ask for a Declaration of War. It could not have been resisted, and with full war powers we would have been able to lick the whole Muslim world in 5 years, control the world's oil supply (at a time when Russia was too weak to do anything, and China was not prepared to take up the leadership, and Europe was willing) AND bring the national finances well in hand with war taxes. AND keep the public together and eager to finish the fight against the evildoers.
By using war fever, Bush could have overwhelmed the lobbyists and the monied interests, and by using war powers, he could have so swiftly, forcibly and irresistibly redistributed their money through war taxes that the deficit would have been a permanent surplus, the national debt would have plunged, AND the power of the oligarchy would have been seriously clipped (by taxes removing their money and unified public war fever and anti-sedition laws and taxes and regulations forcing them to march in step).
That would have given America a win on all levels. But Bush is a man of the oligarchy. Not a brilliant one, not a mover and shaker, but one easily swayed by them. So instead we played at war, have lost it, and our financial stability, and everything. He failed because he did not do the right thing at the critical moment.
And then there was the Miers/Schiavo fiasco which betrayed the pro-life base.
The first thing set Bush's presidency and America up for disaster. The second turned me against him personally. The Terri Schiavo affair showed both Bush boys as cowards, at best, or actually aligned with the bad guys.
In any case, my criticism back THEN on FR was aimed at H.W. Bush.
I read his lips: he lied to me and hiked taxes. And when we had Saddam Hussein's evil regime in the palm of our hand, we let him go.
I have no patience for Poppy Bush, and no patience for his supporters either.
FR is the face of the GOP. That is the Republican Party. That's who makes it up. That's how they think (or rather, don't).
Well, W Bush was better than his daddy. I didn't hate W. Still don't. He made mistakes. So have I.
No, he wasn't. Both were bad, Dumbya was far worse. He should be tried for war crimes, along with Obama.
Oh, dear, I just had a flashback of those awful Daily Dose Busholatry threads at TOS. That was a close call but don't put me on the prayer list just yet. : )
Other than reading and posting on the RF, I don't read or participate in the FR political threads. I may have posted on those threads about 7-10 times total.
Sometimes it's just too inviting to avoid a thread as this one:
It seems both ghettos towed out their big guns for the above thread.
You weren't there for the old days, Calvinists Against The World. LOL.
Quite a crew. I recall we used to stop one thread and continue the topic on a new one when we hit 500 posts. So you would have Predestination XXIII or Irresistible Grace XXXII.
Those weren't one-liner posts either. Lots of really long quotes and extensive essays and debates.
