Missile or Plane? I can't take it any longer!

[anart]

No, there is no fear here, Maxel. We deal with facts - you peddle obfuscation and muddled thinking - there is nothing to be afraid of from our side of the coin. You make this more clear with each post of yours.

Also, leave my emotional marriages out of it, those are personal and atreides will be very upset with you ...LOL

Ahhhhhh - thanks, I needed that laugh.

You really don't get it yet - this is not a schoolyard where the bully wins - this is an intelligent group of people where truth - facts - always win - I realize that they don't cover truth or facts in basic training; only thinking as you're told to think.

That is really unfortunate for all involved, but - guess what - this is not the military - this is a forum where people will not agree with you just because you insult them or scream really loud or tell them they are wrong despite the facts - you can even pull out your shiny gun and no one here will tell you that you are right when you are not right - frustrating isn't it?

This forum is clearly not for you - it is time you left.

 

[Maxel]

First, I noticed you were not able to explain the contradiction where it is ok to launch insults, accusations and rudeness at me because I don't agree with your position..BUT... it's not ok for me to express an opposite view that logically and explicitly questions your belief. Do as we say, not as we do!

The silence was deafening.

I would actually have respect for you if you just came out and said we only want people here that agree with us!

And now you have truly shown yourlself for what you are:
""""you can even pull out your shiny gun and no one here will tell you that you are right when you are not right - frustrating isn't it?"""""

The immature product of a Hollywood culture who is easily led to the slaughter whining and complaining the whole way but never lifts a finger to maintain our freedoms, including your freedom to flap your ignorant mouth.

If you're representative of what this board has to offer, you are absolutely right. I don't belong here. Keep your blinders on. c'ya.

 

[noise]

I can't speak for the moderators, SOTT's.. I was observing how you took to the line of "NOW you can ban me."
As you put for your perspective you closed with that. I observe that as thickness of skull, but you can twist it however you choose.

My observations aren't absolutes BTW.

 

[Maxel]

Noise, I don't believe for a minute that it was coincidental that in the middle of a discussion my passwords kept being disabled. Three times. I don't think the y wanted to come out and sauy I was banned but thought that by doing that they could make it hard enough that I would leave voluntarily. That is the reason for my comment of "now you can ban me" I stuck around until I was able to say my peace.

And as if I needed proof, look what has happened: I've been invited to leave. And I will, but not until "arssnat" either stops attacking me or outright bans me. Because then the owner of this web board and I are going to have a conversation about Rules and Terms and Conditions and why moderators can ignore them whenever they want.

 

[noise]

OK If it is at all possible. Lets take a look at what happened from a 3rd perspective. This is my own observation. You came on you made some observations. Joe took out the time to try and (again in my own words) steer your mind in the direction of his own observations which probably of themselves amount to more time and research than I have put into this whole site in the 3'ish years I've been reading.

He made his observations which I believe were still somewhat open to discussion and discussion followed. Some of the statements made by you, him or both, and I do want to stress that alot of the statements you made seemed ha! in your face Beeches!, and the debate moved from logical to I have this and it is NOT going to be changed, no matter WHAT. This is just my observation, you of course are entitled to choose to be offended, but I'm NOT choosing for you.

I think you invited yourself to leave, so I quoted above. Let's look at it in a different perspective. (WARNING my analogies suck) Lets say you did something.. mmm kissed my GF or wife or whatever I "think" is MY sacred possesion. Lets also say she asked for it, wanted it etc.. Now I am angry, but am I angry at you, my gf.. or should I blame myself and my own inadequecy? Usually it starts on the Male, then maybe moves to the female but usually never to me, my possesiveness, need to control.

Before you leave I hope you will try and introspect this observation. Maybe your wrong, maybe Joes wrong. I happen to agree with Joe but maybe there is something to your observation about the way things are moderated here. Maybe there is also the possibility some, and "I am not saying you," who have a strong issue with being correct. Often the case with people who are stuck or so strongly opinionated about certain people, events.. they will not acknolwedge they have brain-lock.

Over time - If I were a moderator and I had to go over it with people nearly at a constant rate, well speaking for myself, I would be very very quick on the draw cause in the end alot of bandwidth and time is taken out from furthering the study that this group is pursuing. This goes well beyond politics, 9-11, psychopathy and other general discussions so far as I have observed. I don't have much more I can add so I'll go read a book or something. If you feel your blood boiling or anything just take a time out, reevaluate your position, look over the material as it was presented and if your completely right and all that, well give me/us/them the finger and move on.

Take care!

Edit: There is something I wanted to add. Sorry I did not directly reply. The two links may be kind of like the password situation. I don't know that for certain, but it was an observation that came to mind.

I really aught to get a human editor.. but I am too poor..

Edit edit: "And I will, but not until "arssnat" either stops attacking me or outright bans me." Whatever you've chosen to put under your skin by another person making an observation is something else. In the quote you've allowed your emotional energy overcome your intellectual energy.
http://glossary.cassiopaea.com/glossary.php?l=E a whole list on energy

k, well I'm get to that book.

 

[Ruth]

Or is it your fear that I might cause you readers by a logical explanation of facts? Should I just be your sheple and accept everything you say without question?

We do not accept everything that others say, that is for sheeple, as you suggest. We are, however, interested in some of the working hypotheses produced and currently being explored by QFG people and Laura and Ark. If you're interested you can read up on them. They are freely available. Its a really good opportunity to be able to open ones mind.

Or do I have no right to my opinion as well?

Its not your opinion which is the problem, but your behaviour. Anyone can have an opinion, but they are not necessarily backed up by factual evidence (which is often a problem). It is not respectful behaviour to engage in debate with others who are interested in facts and uncovering the truth. First you must find out what facts they are dealing and come up with some good reasons as to why they don't fit with a working hypothesis. This is not done by:...

Endless 'nitpicking' over irrelevent facts that can be just ruse employed by an 'agent' to distract and get people wasting a lot of time and energy in a stupid direction. I hope that you are not doing this deliberately, because if you are, you are wasting a huge opportunity for yourself to move forward.

It seems your emotional marriage to this conspiracy theory is clouding YOUR judgement, not mine.

Conspiracy theory is a silly word with strange connotations. Most people (should) be able to work out that in order for a crime to be commited a conspiracy is necessary (for the criminals to get away with it). I'm sure they don't need a theory for that! Instead we have a what Ark calls a working hypothesis which can be supported by evidence and sometimes lack of evidence.

Maxel, you've lost your grip, and revealed, very clearly, your basic training.

I'm curious Anart, what basic training has this person had? Because if it was in 'agenting' and distracting with things that have already been discussed and are not that important, perhaps it wasn't very good training?

 

[Maxel]

Thank you, noise, for a very thoughtful post.

You see, I'm not trying to force my opinion on anybody. I think I clearly said take it or leave it, in so many words. From the beginning what I wanted was a debate on the merits of the issue. Yes, I have opinions, but they are based on personal observation, work experience and fact. I had hoped that the debate could be conducted in a scholarly fashion, where academics freely discuss their differences on a hypothesis. But, from the very beginning the condescending attitude, the rudeness, and the barely veiled insults started to rear their ugly head. I tried to remain above it and feel I did with a couple of admitted slips into sarcasm. I have gone back and read every post and I don't see any foundation for the accusations that "arssnat" has leveled at me. He clearly has an agenda and combined with his immature mind and dysfunctional personality he immediately tends to go for the gutter.

Look at his statement about "they don't cover truth or facts in basic training". Combined with "this is not the military" and the "shiny gun" comment. I guess he assumes I spent my life in the military and he's trying his best to get to me. I fact I spent a few years in the military and most of my life as a civilian air traffic controller with the FAA. So much for his crack investigative journalistic intuition. He also obviously has some sort of penis envy towards the military. Probably because he's not man enough to ever make it there.

I thought that it would be useful to provide a view from the inside, as it were. I would think that an intelligent moderator, member, whatever would be interested in learning how the system works from somebody that was in the system instead of relying on newspaper accounts. But people like arssnat take that as bullying, I guess.

You and I are ok and I appreciate your follow-up.

 

[noise]

Well it's an honor and a priveledge. Since we are on the topic of assuming I hope it is ok to quote a series from what you just wrote.
"he assumes, he's trying his best, ..So much for his crack investigative journalistic intuition. He also obviously has some sort of penis envy.. he's not man enough to ever make it there" etc..

I'm kind of doubting any of that. Your twisting reality as you have and are doing. Sorry I aint buddy buddy and BTW this good, kind, intelligent, honest, caring person by the Moderator name of "ANART" is a woman, you like me, ASSUME TOO MUCH. Just as you assume there are no radar blank spots, just as you assume the FAA did not have a hand in on it and could not have pulled off 9-11 by helping the government.. so go assume whatever the hell you want with your BS cause not for one second am I gonna buy it so let's not for one more minute assume that "You and I are ok" cause we're not. If you want to manipulate my perceptions of reality further at least do it outside the forum.

have a nice day. 8 )

 

[Maxel]

Here comes another attack;

"""It is not respectful behaviour to engage in debate with others who are interested in facts and uncovering the truth. """
Since when???????????????


"First you must find out what facts they are dealing and come up with some good reasons as to why they don't fit with a working hypothesis"

I've given you plenty of ""good reasons as to why they don't fit"" your "hypothesis""

And I haven't seen any legitimate counters, only attacks or dissmisals such as calling the facts I gave you "endless nitpicking" Did you even read what I posted?

As for the rest, see previous post.

 

[Maxel]

Noise, I will freely admit that I lost it with arssnat and the points I tried to make about behavior are lessened by my hissy fit. But they are still legitimate.

However, by "assumptions that there are no blank spots in the radar coverage is a fact. I happen to know that from work experience, but that's easily verifiable by doing some legitimate research. As is all of what I presented as fact. When I was expressing an opinion I said so.

As to you and I being ok....well, so much for the olive branch.

On the same post:
First: """Well it's an honor and a priveledge. Since we are on the topic of assuming I hope it is ok to quote a series from what you just wrote. """

Second: """so go assume whatever the hell you want with your BS cause not for one second am I gonna buy it so let's not for one more minute assume that "You and I are ok" cause we're not. If you want to manipulate my perceptions of reality further at least do it outside the forum."""

Wow, is everybody on this forum on drugs?????

C'ya.

 

[Beau]

Maxel, the same thing happened to me with the login issues, and I'm a moderator!! I couldn't log in the last few days either. This is no conspiracy to not let you post. If you had been banned you wouldn't even have been able to go to the login screen.

But, by flaming one moderator you ARE breaking the forum rules. What kind of discussion do you think will occur with forum admins? Do you think you can just come in here, attack our ideas, and then flame the people who have pointed out your false logic? Yeah, you're gonna be banned.

I don't believe for a minute that it was coincidental that in the middle of a discussion my passwords kept being disabled. Three times. I don't think the y wanted to come out and sauy I was banned but thought that by doing that they could make it hard enough that I would leave voluntarily. That is the reason for my comment of "now you can ban me" I stuck around until I was able to say my peace.

And as if I needed proof, look what has happened: I've been invited to leave. And I will, but not until "arssnat" either stops attacking me or outright bans me. Because then the owner of this web board and I are going to have a conversation about Rules and Terms and Conditions and why moderators can ignore them whenever they want.

 

[Ruth]

Here comes another attack;

"""It is not respectful behaviour to engage in debate with others who are interested in facts and uncovering the truth. """
Since when???????????????

This is not another attack. Why should I wish to attack you? You assume I have the energy (or wish) to waste it? :D

"First you must find out what facts they are dealing and come up with some good reasons as to why they don't fit with a working hypothesis"

I've given you plenty of ""good reasons as to why they don't fit"" your "hypothesis""

And I haven't seen any legitimate counters, only attacks or dissmisals such as calling the facts I gave you "endless nitpicking" Did you even read what I posted?

As for the rest, see previous post.

We are not on the same 'wavelength', I fear. Have you even read what we have posted? The emotions will get in the way, as I well know (and funnily enough, I know where you are coming from - those emotions can be 'difficult'). Time to take a step back and make a re-assessment. You might be surprised. If we (and others) are on the 'same team', then it takes time and difficulty to 'see' this. Sometimes from both sides, I have no doubt.

What do you feel? And what do you want?

 

[Ruth]

Noise, I will freely admit that I lost it with arssnat and the points I tried to make about behavior are lessened by my hissy fit. But they are still legitimate.

Well, sometimes it is best to quiet - or me, and 'arssnat' (and God knows how many other people?), will 'spank' you until you learn to be 'quiet'. Its good exercise, especialy with an olive branch....

However, by "assumptions that there are no blank spots in the radar coverage is a fact. I happen to know that from work experience, but that's easily verifiable by doing some legitimate research. As is all of what I presented as fact. When I was expressing an opinion I said so.

As to you and I being ok....well, so much for the olive branch.

Well, so much for the olive branch.. smack, smack, uhm, naughty boy?

On the same post:
First: """Well it's an honor and a priveledge. Since we are on the topic of assuming I hope it is ok to quote a series from what you just wrote. """

Second: """so go assume whatever the hell you want with your BS cause not for one second am I gonna buy it so let's not for one more minute assume that "You and I are ok" cause we're not. If you want to manipulate my perceptions of reality further at least do it outside the forum."""

Wow, is everybody on this forum on drugs?????

C'ya.

Err, no, are you? And , more importantly, which ones? We need to know, you know... Just data gathering, you know... Its important!

 

[atreides]

Maxel has been banned for not meeting requirements of emotional stability, and for making a mod have to write to me at 4am because he couldn't behave himself. Oh, and drugs are bad, mmkay?

Message: "Now you are banned, sorry it took so long, upgrades and all. Sorry about the password thing, that was just serendipity, from our perspective anyway."

 

[Niall]

I don't believe for a minute that it was coincidental that in the middle of a discussion my passwords kept being disabled. Three times.

Well aren't we special? It happened to me three times also over last coupla days! Funny, for a guy who's insisting "WHAT CONSPIRACY?", it's pretty paranoid of you to presume that a 'ghost in the machine' (in this case, your SotT account) was sent there to interfere with whatever fantastic proclamations you have to share with us and the wider world ;)

LOL, tis beautiful when they actually TELL US what they are, all of their own volition!!...

The immature product of a Hollywood culture who is easily led to the slaughter whining and complaining the whole way but never lifts a finger to maintain our freedoms, including [my] freedom to flap [my] ignorant mouth.