Fruck
Lacks all conviction
Fruck is just this guy, you know?
User ID: 889
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
7mo ago
My take is that the kiss itself, not really that bad, but also something that does reflect on power dynamics, both men/women but also boss/employee. It deserved a real apology which was not given, instead the apology was not only extremely insincere, but also a result of behind the scenes pressure to sweep it under the rug and downplay. Rubiales doubling down was awful and it is kind of dystopian to see so much applause. He's the one playing a victimhood narrative, not Hermoso. Which is crazy! She didn't even talk about victimhood AT ALL until AFTER Rubiales basically lied about the kiss. I might add that Rubiales' version of events is in my opinion not supported by the video of the kiss, where they don't seem to have much of a conversation at all.
Yeah, sorry chum but I don't see anything in your post that changes this from the he said she said nonsense I thought it was in the first place. She says he lied about asking for a kiss. Why is she more credible than him? Because you empathise with her more. Anyone who feels the opposite will find Rubiales more credible. But we didn't record that exchange so we'll never know. What we did record has Rubiales mouth blocked by Hermoso's head while they hugged, which would also be a good way to say a few things in a roaring stadium.
Also
Commentary: Note how he focuses on how he's almost forced to apologize, how he created a distraction, and how he minimizes everything that happened. He doesn't even say what he did, he just says "what happened, happened". No big deal, no big deal. It's all about the consequences of his actions and nothing about how it could have made her feel or if he truly made a mistake. No, it's an apology that he "has to" make. This is, IMO, extra clear in the original Spanish and with intact voice inflections, etc. and I've tried to render the overall "vibe" of his comments accurately, though Spain-Spanish isn't my forte.
This is how every public facing representative apologises. Minimise everything that happened. Nobody was hurt by it, it was just a mistake. And yet, he does own up to his mistakes. He calls them his mistakes, he says he is embarrassed for distracting from the team's victory. Should he have busted out a whip and struck his sin away? Obviously Rubiales desperately needs some pr person by his side to slap the side of his head every time he opens his mouth, but once again it feels like we are razing the countryside over a minor interpersonal conflict, which is what nearly every msm cancel culture crusade turns out to be.
Instead, Hermoso is only a reluctant participant in the whole debate who might have though it also wasn't a big deal and wanted to move on herself, until pressure and slander essentially forced her hand.
Say what. So you think she didn't think it was a big deal except he said she said yes and that made it a big deal, because she was ok with the non consensual kiss but not ok with him claiming it was consensual, so after days of silence she released a statement denouncing the nonconsensual kiss?
Also why did this need a new thread?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
Thanks for this, it's a perfect example of what I'm talking about.
For fucks sake you have catch 22 flair, how do you not understand the concept of farce?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
6mo ago
Saving the term insurrection for the capitol shenanigans is in essence agreeing it was an insurrection. I do not and I have no respect for the idea, so I call anything Trump 2020 related an insurrection with the exact same amount of respect for the term as I would use referring to the capitol shenanigans, which is to say none.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
11mo ago
He’s a perfect example of someone who needs to be removed from the gene pool, improving the genetic stock of humanity immediately.
Would we immediately improve the genetic stock of humanity by killing all the spastics, speds, psychos, schizos and spergs? I think we would destroy it. It is said that the line between genius and lunatic is very thin, because while mental illnesses have many negative effects, they also have positives - most importantly they provide diversity of thought, the only diversity that matters. As a result the intelligent have often been viewed with suspicion throughout history, new paradigms of thought often look like madness to the unenlightened.
Of course this doesn't mean we should coddle the mentally ill or excuse them when they harm others. But doctors are currently hard at work developing treatments for heritable disorders, and with advances in genetic engineering the possibility of ameliorating their negative effects grows nearer and nearer. It might even be the case that society resolves these issues in our lifetimes, meaning no one will have to suffer the adverse effects of conditions like schizophrenia, psychopathy, adhd and autism. Then the mentally ill will be both your genetic and social superiors, instead of just the second.
Because that's another thing you are missing - you might be genetically superior to a schizophrenic hobo, but you aren't his social superior. And you will always be a white nationalist thespian manlet cowering in fear from society's dregs, seething that society doesn't do more for your safety because you can't - you have said as much yourself. So it is possible - probable even given current trends - you will be accosted again. And people don't cower before a social inferior, that's an oxymoron. You wish you lived in a society where people you consider genetically inferior were your social inferiors, but you don't. You live in this society, where you get dominated by hobos.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
I was sincere about wanting movie recommendations. The joke was in the premise. That's the set up. Furthermore the pretending to be retarded meme is about someone doing something stupid in earnest then claiming it was a joke to escape ridicule. It is not doing something you think is too outlandish to take seriously and then having to disappointedly explain that you were joking. How much further do you need this broken down?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
11mo ago
After all, Neely was merely ranting, and while it's a common feature of schizophrenics, isn't inherently dangerous.
Is it? Have you been polling schizophrenics for their proclivity to rant? I suppose we should assume 90% of the top level posters here are schizophrenics yeah?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
I can get thoughtless good faith responses from reddit or Facebook or a million billion other places.
Your actions here, simply put, come across like you were setting out to pick on people from the beginning.
Really? Which ones? The action where I mentioned being a fan of two of the posters who misunderstood? The action where I said I don't think people are actually less intelligent, but behaving less intelligently? The action where I said the problem is people are retreating from their humanity out of fear and complacency? Or is it just the action in the op where I impugned people's intelligence?
I genuinely can't see it. I expected people to be upset with me, but I didn't expect this level of upset, with cjets mantra of mod vengeance and so on - it genuinely looks to me like narcissistic injury (as in identity injuring, not implying narcissism). The conflict I was expecting was for people to bring up examples of times I have been guilty of using semantics and passive aggression to avoid actually engaging, because they absolutely exist. Is any critical comment a gotcha now? Can we not just say "yeah that was dumb, we need to get our act together" Not to mention if I brought it up without an example it would have been immediately dismissed as a strawman.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
Am I wrong about the average age here? The joke was that I was afraid this kid would watch a movie and suddenly flip his entire worldview, a premise that was mocked mercilessly when I was growing up, because "everyone knows" that nobody is influenced by just one thing, everything is a confluence of the innumerable stories everyone hears all day every day. That doesn't mean media doesn't have an influence on people, of course it does! But nobody becomes a nihilist after watching fight club one time, just like nobody becomes a libertarian after reading atlas shrugged and nobody becomes a mass shooter after playing doom - there are a thousand other stops along the way there, and if it looks like an immediate turn that is because prior stories predisposed the person to absorb that influence.
I chose the words "a single piece of media reshaped someone's entire worldview." very carefully, to avoid this exact tangent.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
4mo ago
And in that context, affiliation with mainstream Republicans is much stronger evidence that the guy is serious - the overlap between "mainstream Republican" and "posts 14/88 memes ironically" is basically zero. People who post 14/88 memes ironically are either nihilistic trolls or lefties, and following mainstream Republicans on social media is good Bayesian evidence that someone is neither of those things.
That's a hell of a lot of sweeping generalisations based on the use of four digits, twice. Yeah no one on the planet has ever been an edgy idiot saying stupid shit because it causes a reaction. No, we're rationalists, we're smart, we're Bayesian so we can calculate that 1488 + nihilist/leftist = irony and 1488 + any affiliation with mainstream republicans = hide and protect the Jews.
The funny thing is, the rule of goats says I have to pretend I don't understand trolling either and treat you like an IFLS short busser.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
Is that what I do, relentlessly mock people? I am asking genuinely. Also you have never thanked me for an argument.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
Do you remember the 2016 election? Were you politically active for it? My gut says no, since you mention the mid terms like they tell us anything, but I also get the impression you were just trying to be patronising so I thought I'd ask. How do you think the fact that democrats need more voters and republicans need less voters plays into the situation?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
4mo ago
I'm sorry if this is inappropriate, but do you not think that might be an outgrowth of the fucked up things that happened to you in prior relationships with women? The way I viewed the hypothetical - a proposition from a beautiful stranger that becomes the highlight of your life - we are talking about the kind of hot that short circuits critical thinking. Not knowing someone is usually not enough of a concern to cut through that.
(Edit: fuck I'm an idiot, there's also the possibility you didn't read the hypothetical that way, I'm sorry.)
It looks like I'm the outlier around here though, based on the other replies in this thread. Personally I think it's demographics based - we'd get a different response if the motte skewed younger, more progressive or richer/poorer.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
5mo ago
One might as well ask why most US conservatives who support small government, social conservatism, and armed resistance to an oppressive state here in the US also support sending a bunch of my tax money to Israel's military-intelligence complex to help it fight against a rag-tag band of socially conservative resistance fighters who are using their guns to fight government oppression.
That's a good question too, why not ask it as well? And why on earth are you trying to lowest common denominator this? Holding people to the standard of average political discourse, defending emotional reasoning because it's really easy and requires no thought, boiling everything down to preferences and then giving up. "Hey, even on the motte people have shitty arguments sometimes, so may as well give in to your basest impulses and go who, whom like everyone else".
If you find yourself lowering your standards to rationalise your ideological bedfellows behaviour, doesn't that imply they aren't really your bedfellows on this issue? You don't have to become conservative instead, just hold yourself to the standards I know you prefer deep down (because your post is full of reluctant resignation.) It's the only way to raise the bar again.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
8mo ago
So to respond to my ruse you ignored my point and gave straightforward answers to questions you knew didn't need answers, and to respond to my straightforward series of serious questions you ignored all of them and dismissed me as deceptive.
Your moral grandstanding would work better if you hadn't spent the last two posts trying to provoke me, fyi. And if it wasn't based entirely on the fact I said "advantage" and "playing" in the same sentence. But I understand you are constrained by factors outside your control, so I will take this post in the spirit it was meant and say thank you for hearing me out.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
8mo ago
Doc note I dissent, a fast never prevents a fatness. I diet on cod.
Sorry, I couldn't help myself.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
8mo ago
I appreciate strong definitions too (although it's a war we have thoroughly lost, because strong definitions mean accountability and the mainstream can't abide that) but ethnic cleansing isn't the term I am looking to define - weasel wording is. What is weasel wording if it isn't relying on fuzzy definitions to push an agenda while maintaining plausible deniability?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
9mo ago
No, don't anyone run anything through gpt anything, just write marginally better. It takes two seconds to recognise the natural breaks in a post you just wrote - here break just before "I think what is needed" and then again before "It functions like a". Not that that would save what appears to be an academic shower thought with no avenues for discussion, but neither would making it more readable. Do you think guyoninternet can't write a post without devolving into dense jargon filled onanism? Because I think he can, he does so in his other shower thought op later in the thread.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
9mo ago
That's right kids, Seething Resentment TM. You're soaking in it! When life gives you lemons, don't get mad, get very quiet and tense, so tense pooping gives you a hernia, and only express it online or in massive silent explosions at various slow or indifferent drivers in traffic on your daily commute. Seething Resentment TM. Da na na na nah, I'm lovin' it!
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
9mo ago
Sass? Sass? Oh no.
Did you read the next sentence? The one where I say "I obviously love sassiness"? One might get the impression I didn't think this was the worst thing in the world. That I thought you behaved spectacularly shitty towards Nanta but that it was an understandable mistake borne of a power imbalance that has previously gone unnoticed because your level of sass was too low to add heat. And that now your level of sass is rising, it has become noticeable and resulted in you accidentally overstepping the line, because you are in an elevated position of respect and users can't respond with equivalent sass.
I still reject your claim that I rope-a-doped Nantafaria into getting banned.
Well of course. I don't mean because of what you have written, I knew you would reject the idea before I even posted my op. It doesn't bother me mind you, don't think I'm complaining about it, it's just a fact. I hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, and that Amadan will reject anything I say regardless of what it is. If I said water is wet you would reject it.
Well, on the one hand, virtually all reports on mod notes are because someone (usually the moddee) is pissed off about it. Or because the mod was too "sassy." But a bunch of volunteers agreeing "Hey, this post is actually pretty bad" could in fact be useful information for us.
So you reject the idea that mod notes shouldn't be in the mod queue because mod notes get reported almost entirely out of spite, but could be useful information on very rare occasions (rarer occasions than this presumably)?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
9mo ago
I would, but I don't think mods should be strictly professional. It's the power balance that gets me here, and while the mods are usually quite good about it, I am not the only one to notice the sassiness which has recently been creeping into amadan's mod notes. And while I obviously love sassiness, it is possible to bring it to a post at a level that wouldn't get a user banned, and he should stick to that in mod notes, or accept that the additional heat he is adding will receive a commensurate response.
Also it still seems pointless to me to see mods in the volunteer queue.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
Fffffffffffffff
I wrote a lot of truly excellent posts that are now gone, and that hits hard, but I just want my joke about buying chickens for $20 back. And I know that wasn't captured by the aaqc system because none of you motherfuckers are sophisticated enough to appreciate my genius.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
3mo ago
If instead you go the route of saying “I am arbitrarily drawing the line at humans because I am speciesist, but all other animals are fair game,” can’t someone else arbitrarily tighten that circle further and say “I am arbitrarily drawing the line at whites because I am racist, but all other humans and animals are fair game”?
Is there an argument that both allows you to ethically kill or factory farm animals for food, without also allowing someone else to ethically kill or factory farm animals for food? (Disregard how inefficient and pointless factory farming humans for meat would be, this is just a question about the ethics of it.)
Well if someone made the 'racist' argument I would tell them good luck with the law, which cares not about your bizarre dietary principles. But really my argument, which I think solves the dilemma in your second paragraph, is that I won't eat anything that can argue for its life. Humans are the only creatures that can do so to my knowledge, so I won't eat humans. If chickens or pigs developed that ability I don't think I'd be able to eat them either.
Hey Wellness Wednesday, I've completely lost faith in the motte this week. See I've used "I think I fucked up my niece/nephew by playing a single song/tv show/movie" as a premise about a dozen times over the course of my life, and the only time it was taken seriously was with a group of college freshmen. Everyone else immediately understood that it was a premise, because you would have to be totally disconnected from reality to think a single piece of media reshaped someone's entire worldview. 100% disconnected, Being There disconnected.
But the thing is, I know the motte isn't full of freshmen, it's full of gen xers and millenials. And yet posting here was the second time my ridiculous premise was taken seriously. I used to make jokes 10 times as convoluted on /r/cwr and everyone got them, and when I'd do one on the motte I'd get accused of going for cheap laughs!
So it brought to mind a lot of other things I have noticed over the past few months, which can be summed up like this - I no longer believe I am stupider than the average motter. But, and this is the important part - I still know I'm a fucking idiot. Half of the cwr threads might as well be written by markov bots these days, there are still quite a few insightful comments every week, but so much of the rest is just rote bullshit. Just everyone talking down to each other, using passive aggressive laziness to evade the modhats - but not even making it entertaining, it's just talking points vs talking points.
I want to feel stupid again. I want to have to bring my a-game again. I don't know how to make that happen.
More options
Context Copy link