K5 and Adequacy at War: the escalation continues.

Stories

Diaries

Polls

Users

Web Adequacy.org

Home

About

Topics

Rejects

Abortions

This is an archive site only. It is no longer maintained. You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email will not be read. Please read this page if you have questions.

Poll

Votes: 5

K5 and Adequacy at War: the escalation continues.

Author:

elenchos

Topic:

Diaries

Posted:

Jul 22, 2001

Comments:

Kuro5hin.org, reeling from a crippling loss of talent to the dark forces of Adequacy.org struck back with a vengance today, with this thermonuclear troll/satire/I-don't-know-what-to-call-it article. The man in charge of planning the counterstrike against Adequacy's campaign of burlesquing the pernicious arguments of the web's blowhards, David Duke, explained the strategy this way: "We knew that intelligence and reason were not realistic options for us. The best thing to to when some smart-alec is lampooing you is to out-lampoon the lampooner. Go so far off the deep end that their caricature of you looks like a compliment!"

Stunned by this curveball, the mood at Adequacy.org headquartes can only be described as shell shocked. Said Adequacy editor osm, "I dunno. Maybe we should just give it up and do some sort of high-concept thing like This American Life, or... or... appeal to the people maybe. Sure! We could be the world wide web's answer to Rosie or Oprah!"

Streetfighter John Saul Montoya seemed to be taking the opposite approach, brandishing a motorcycle chain and switchblade, "I knew it would come to this. Been looking forward to it, as a matter of fact. There's only one way to deal with people like this you know."

More diaries by elenchos

	So shaken as we are, so wan with care,
	Oh! I'm in such inner conflict and turmoil! Oh!
	Stories I'd like to see:
	To the management:
	I don't know enough history to write it, but...
	Is this a troll?
	Has anyone heard of a book called...
	Draft for a WTC joke.
	I feel terrible.
	You know...
	One of my nutty English papers.
	Terrorist or freshman?
	Why I write nothing but non-fiction.
	'My dog barks..'
	As I'm sure you can imagine...
	Giftmas break calendar.
	Wow.
	Win fabulous /. Moderator Points in this exciting contest!
	You know...
	Meta crap...
	The Artist...
	Robert Frost: a damn geek.
	Shocking.
	Don't waste your time reading this.
	Who knew?
	Paging Dr. Science, paging Dr. Science...
	Damn them.

Oh, whatever. I do have homework to do, you all realize that don't you?

	It's not any worse than it's ever been (5.00 / 2) (#1)
	by CaptainZornchugger on Sun Jul 22nd, 2001 at 04:02:25 PM PST

	Remember this piece? I found it to be a very enjoyable piece of satire (Urban Existentialist is one of the editors here, right? He's KTB, isn't he?) But of course, the Kurobots took it quite seriously, and seemed overjoyed that someone had put their point of view so eloquently. That was two and a half months ago -- not much has changed. I've stopped paying attention to what makes front page over there. If they want to wank, let them wank. If they want to vote up anything that affirms their security and ignore anything else, let them do so (and I do mean ignore -- people are still asserting that the protesters don't have anything to protest, after it's been explained and explained and explained). I'm already spending more time over here than I am there, and this site hasn't even gotten started. (Lately I've been enjoying Geekizoid more than K5, and that's really scary) No big deal. A few thousand closed-minded obsessive geeks won't hurt anybody. They're too busy playing computer games to even vote for the most part. I'm not dealing with it. I still don't understand why you bother arguing with them.

	When and where has it been explained? (5.00 / 2) (#2)
	by zikzak on Sun Jul 22nd, 2001 at 04:22:19 PM PST

	people are still asserting that the protesters don't have anything to protest, after it's been explained and explained and explained Show me one of those explanations. Show me one argument opposing the WTO, G8, etc. that explains the protest movement without resorting to vague assertions of ecological destruction vague assertions of economic enslavement vague assertions of evil-intentioned complicity vague assertions of government conspiracy vague assertions of corporate control of the world How about, for a change, pointing out specific instances of irresponsbile corporate behavior; detailing the harmful effects (verifiably) of that behavior; offering realistic, effective methods to counteract this behavior; and then putting those suggestions into practice? And maybe, just for shits and grins, the protesters could every so once in awhile make pretend like there really isn't a massive, big-business controlled global conspiracy that operates in cahoots with aliens and the Illuminati.

	Heh. (5.00 / 2) (#6)
	by CaptainZornchugger on Sun Jul 22nd, 2001 at 04:52:20 PM PST

	I didn't say that the arguments or explanations were sufficient or adequate; and being that I neither agree nor disagree with the protesters at this time, I'm probably unqualified to write one. But comments like this make it clear the existence and content of those arguments, incomplete as they may or may not be, has not been acknowledged by the poster at all. To me, that reflects the prevailing sentiment on K5. You may disagree.

	you can search for your own reasons, rather than (5.00 / 3) (#9)
	by Anonymous Reader on Sun Jul 22nd, 2001 at 06:03:33 PM PST

	expect someone to make sense of current events in an attempt to rationalize tomorrow's history today. The reasons must exist, after all; it isnt "normal" for the Gluttinous Eight to suffer disaffection to the degree that they cannot convene anywhere in the world without rioting. ecological destruction How much arable land must be destroyed by the grazing habits of McCows before SUV owners say enough is enough? The economic agenda is dictated by people with vested interests in controlling consumer habits toward expensive, non-renewable products which adversely affect people downstream of the original consumptive choice. Is this what it means to be an economy, then? When someone like Bush turns around and sells out on every election commitment, do not then gainsay people's sense of betrayal by asking for a summation of the facts. Bush was committed to the same set of facts, so what happened? Who bent his ear? What makes temporary sacrifices for future viability impossible? Not voters, surely. economic enslavement The fewer choices you have, the greater your enslavement. World trade organizations and mega corporate conglomerates do not give people real choices for the way they should apply their productive forces. Either Mexico approves this or that treaty -- which by some righteous force of synchronicity consistently favor corporate conglomerates -- or they are invited to not develop their economies. The choices in these trade agreements beg their own questions. What if we want to pose a different set of questions? You have to impose such institutions of extreme capitalism because left to their own devices, people will act as they do on the unregulated internet -- ignore any so called natural and voluntary desire to reward commercialization. How about, for a change, pointing out specific instances of irresponsbile corporate behavior; How about, for a change, recognizing dissatisfaction and a willingness to step outside the institutional rules of engagement imposed purely to protect against change? You are an editor of a site which routinely posts stories meant to undermine the implications of arbitrary social values promulgated as Truth.

	Hmm (5.00 / 3) (#10)
	by zikzak on Sun Jul 22nd, 2001 at 07:37:43 PM PST

	you can search for your own reasons, rather than expect someone to make sense of current events in an attempt to rationalize tomorrow's history today So I am supposed to blindly accept that the riots are justified based solely on the fact that there are lots of people rioting. Then I am supposed to invent a reason that I find palatable for me to join in the riots. Whether my reasons are complimentary to the reasons of the other rioters is irrelevant as long as I participate. How much arable land must be destroyed by the grazing habits of McCows before SUV owners say enough is enough? Yes, the McCows. The same ones that also deforested the Amazon basin, no doubt. The fact that McDonalds has nothing to do with what you are talking about doesn't matter though. It is perfectly ok to make a large corporate entity the enemy even if they have nothing to do with what you are fighting against. The end always justifies the means. And don't forget to drag the SUV owners into it, too. Two convenient scapegoats for the price of one! Bush turns around and sells out on every election commitment If you find this unusual or surprising then you are a piss-poor history student. That doesn't make it right, but it would be nice to see people stop acting like the US Presidency has all of a sudden been invaded by the anti-Christ. Who bent his ear? [...] Not voters, surely. Who niavely believed that the son of a former president with close ties to the oil and gas industries would follow any sort of environmentally positive agenda? Again, not the voters. They knew, for the most part, what was going to happen. His ear was already bent and everyone knew it. Bush hasn't betrayed anybody except a handful of extremely gullible fools. You have to impose such institutions of extreme capitalism because left to their own devices, people will act as they do on the unregulated internet -- ignore any so called natural and voluntary desire to reward commercialization. I like your Internet. Where can I find it? My Internet is full of people willingly paying for porn, people sending their co-workers "funny" email, and spammers clogging everyone's inbox with advertisements that, believe it or not, often work. The existance of my Internet can be verified with ample statistical evidence, while yours seems to be little more than wishful thinking. How about, for a change, recognizing dissatisfaction and a willingness to step outside the institutional rules of engagement imposed purely to protect against change? That is the only thing I recognize in the rioting - that a small fraction of people are extremely dissatisfied with their world to the point that they are protesting, and in the case of a much smaller fraction, rioting. People feel a unique pathos that is only possible when all their material needs have been satisfied and they can not find any noble purpose in their life. This puts them in the position where they are open to any sort of relief that is offered. Some turn to religion, some to their families, and some decide to rage against the entire world that they have decided is responsible for the icky angst they feel. And now that you think I am the embodiment of evil, let me say that I think it is absolutely wonderful that so many people are so bored and dissatisfied with the state of the world that they are reacting so strongly and in such large numbers. But I think they are reacting stupidly. The hippies of the 60's screamed, yelled, and protested against the wrong things and in the wrong ways. As a result they had very little effect on the world. The anti-globalization protesters are doing the same thing. Rather than accepting that much of how society works is good, they see a few wrongs as justification for a total overthrow of our entire world. Read the history books. Especially the parts with plithy quotes about those who are doomed to repeat things. You might be shocked to discover that screaming and yelling is most often not the most effective way to bring about change.

	desperately seeking a leader with press contacts (5.00 / 4) (#11)
	by Anonymous Reader on Sun Jul 22nd, 2001 at 09:27:36 PM PST

	And now that you think I am the embodiment of evil No, just the usual. People arent evil, people are broken dreams carried away by streams of inertial and revolutionary forces we will read about in tomorrow's history books. Read the history books. I'll do that. Do you have a recommended reading list which skips over the violent bits? "Then, some stuff happened, and the world changed." The existance of my Internet can be verified with ample statistical evidence, I do not wish to dispute the word of pornogrophers and spammers, but I have to point out that market indicies are the superior method for verifying the effectiveness of dot com masters of the universe. I think it is absolutely wonderful that so many people are so bored and dissatisfied with the state of the world that they are reacting so strongly and in such large numbers. So there is a point behind their irrational behavior, after all. But I think they are reacting stupidly. I tried to make both the lowly protesters and the elite global traders listen to me. Why should they listen to you? You are wrong about the effectiveness protesters. If you were right, the occasion to defend yourself in this thread would never have arisen. Do you defend the sad state of investigative journalism by justifying the ease and cost effectiveness in reciting news manufactured at government source? On CNN, yesterday, they scrolled a message by a State Dept press flunkie who wished to inform the world that Bush regretted the death of a protester. (Bush is a busy man, presumably, who stays up nights writing his own speeches.) What do these protesters have to do in order to get CNN to interview them, in fucking person? Are reporters terrified of stumbling into a nest of terrorists? Is that why none of them seem to be lifting an investigative muscle? Well, the protesters are a quick study. Manufacturing news, staging circuses -- what is the qualitative difference? I do not want you or self satisfied kurobots (not to accuse you of such membership) to put on red noses and slip into bowling shoes, for that would undermine the effectivess and legitimacy of protest. I want people to demonstrate moral outrage over undefended innocent property. I want people to defend jeeps running over dead protesters. I want people to articulate their reactionary reasoning because, paradoxically, their eloquent articulation is more effective than anything the protesters can say for themselves. If you were a betting man, what would you wager that the next protest will be the biggest yeat? Rather than accepting that much of how society works is good Few people need to argue the mechanism of how things work (I do) in order to dispute who and what it should end up working for. This is all about a loss of control over one's fate. If you think otherwise, then you should quote from the text of trade treaties written and read in secrecy. We've been spolied by democracy and resent being lectured on peace by Machiavellians whose secretly negotiated peace we do not want; a world of peaceful corporations is not good enough. I'm uninterested in peacefully agreeing to buy what is offered for sale, I want to change the nature of the goods sold. By the way, the 60s did change the world.

	Yes, you could use a leader (5.00 / 3) (#14)
	by zikzak on Mon Jul 23rd, 2001 at 12:58:33 AM PST

	Might I recommend jsm as your leader? He perfectly nailed one aspect of the negative results of greedy global corporations in two sentences, the majority of it done in one. Do you have a recommended reading list which skips over the violent bits? Sure. Any history book that focuses on human innovation instead of wars would do just fine. Henry Ford has influenced USian society exponentially more than Hitler, Trotsky and Napolean combined. And not in a good way either, IMO. So there is a point behind their irrational behavior, after all. There was a point made in Seattle. Very clear and powerful. Two years later and that point has been lost because it was never followed up with anything worthwhile. Just more of the same "we're pissed of and we are going to break things" idiocy. What do these protesters have to do in order to get CNN to interview them, in fucking person? Be more clear in their goals. Explain things in terms that even the most clueless, selfish person can understand. Organize in a more effective way than just provoking anarchists via mail lists. Stop believing that some inherent goodness in humanity is enough to sway the general population. Infiltrate organizations. Sieze power. Take control. Subvert from within rather than try to force change from the outside. Employ the media as a tool for propaganda, including all the negative aspects that word conveys. Get your hands dirty, because that's how battles are won or lost. You can't clean the outhouse if you are afraid of getting a little shit on you. Would Thoreau have had anywhere near the impact he did if Emerson had not been there to promote his writings? I want people to demonstrate moral outrage over undefended innocent property. Moral outrage will get you no where. Clever media manipulation can dramatically change the world while hardly spilling a single drop of blood. But you already know this. If you were a betting man, what would you wager that the next protest will be the biggest yeat? I am not a betting man, but I would still wager that the next protest will be as ineffectual as this one was unless the message can be simplified and promoted in sound bites. That's ugly reality for you. I know hundreds of people on a first name basis, but less than 10% of them are even aware that the G8 met in Genoa this past weekend. I'm uninterested in peacefully agreeing to buy what is offered for sale, I want to change the nature of the goods sold. As am I, but the vast majority has no problems with it. You will never change that, either. Again, that's ugly truth. The resistance to change is not because corporations are afraid of it but becaue most people are afraid of it. This is all about a loss of control over one's fate. Agreed, but don't hold any delusions about other people caring whether or not they have control over their fate. It is about your control over your own fate that is at issue. If you allow yourself to see it as something purely selfish then you will be much more successful in achieving your goals. And I really don't have a problem with that because what you want is a whole lot closer to what I want than the desires of the faceless, non-thinking masses. The ultimate irony is that it really is about elitism and believing that you know what is best for other people. Stop trying to believe that you have some common good in mind, because you don't. You are doing the same as all the other power brokers by trying to force your world vision onto the rest of the planet. I would like to see you succeed, but being teargassed and shot is not the most effective way to do so.

	South African AIDS drugs (5.00 / 4) (#12)
	by jsm on Sun Jul 22nd, 2001 at 11:07:40 PM PST

	The main purpose of the WTO these days is to force Third World countries to sign up to Western IP rights, meaning that South Africa and Brazil would no longer be able to produce cheap knock-off AIDS drugs. Which is as close to pure evil as you're going to get people admitting in a press release. ... the worst tempered and least consistent of the adequacy.org editors ... now also Legal department and general counsel, adequacy.org

	I do it because... (5.00 / 3) (#3)
	by elenchos on Sun Jul 22nd, 2001 at 04:31:53 PM PST

	Well, I don't know. Same as trying to beat a soulless, mindless machine at a game. Just to see what I can do. Can I piss this guy off? Can I make him look like an idiot? Can I make him realize he looks like an idiot? Can I make him decide to stop being an idiot? But it does start to get stale, and the quality is terrible. I have people telling me that the majority of USia agrees with them because that's what most of their friends and and co-workers agree with. That is not challenging. It makes me miss trhurler terribly. At least he can reason, more or less. And I miss all the smart people who have left K5. I miss them more than I can say, and I'm sad. Very, very sad. You know, talking to no one but fools does not bring out the best in a person. sniff I do, I do, I do --Bikini Kill

	Smart people like who? (5.00 / 3) (#13)
	by rusty on Mon Jul 23rd, 2001 at 12:21:38 AM PST

	And I miss all the smart people who have left K5. I miss them more than I can say, and I'm sad. Like who? That refrain has been repeating since February, 2000. You need to get with the new style. K5 just sucks now, it wasn't ever good. There never were any smart people. Keep up, man!

	Oh, I don' t know. (5.00 / 1) (#29)
	by elenchos on Mon Jul 23rd, 2001 at 06:54:58 PM PST

	I think what I perceive as the intellignce of the people I'm talking to is really just a reflection of how interesting I'm being. But there is also an ebb and flow of good stories and good discussion on K5, and when it is good it makes me feel good all around. When things like this shooting in Genoa happen, it brings out the worst in people, and they fight over the stupidest things, and go off on the warpath based on nothing but preliminary reports and rumors. It reminds me of the anti-Arab race riot that happened in Oklahoma City after the bombing there. I wonder if there's a way to plan for things like this. There are more demonstrations planned this summer, and the odds are good something terrible will happen at one of them. And then there will be a bunch of people running off half-cocked, reacting way out of proportion even before anyone knows what really happened. If you know ahead of time that will happen, can you think of a good way to respond? Just ignore it? Maybe remind them of the past? When a child is crying and won't stop, you can play them a tape of their previous tantrum. Shuts em right up. Remember that for when you have kids. I do, I do, I do --Bikini Kill

	Yes I have found that frustrating too (5.00 / 1) (#4)
	by bc on Sun Jul 22nd, 2001 at 04:32:30 PM PST

	As seventypercent said somewhere else, the problem with a democratic weblog is that people will have a tendency to vote up articles they agree with. There are sometimes exceptions to this all the same (such as Jin Wicked's wonderful 'Programming is not Art' article, which pissed them all off hugely, and yet they still voted it up) but usually not. We set up this website because it allows us to post whatever the hell we want, and hopefully (as the editors have varied opinions) there should be a steady diet of wildy varying views. Personally I have an fairly strong dislike for linux articles and reviews of this and that techie breakthrough now, I'm just completely sick of it and I amn't a computer buff anyway. And anything sufficiently controversial or funny that is submitted stands a good chance of being published as well. So it is a sort of liberation from the usual constraints. I'm also getting fed up of the whole kuro5hin/slashdot scene. I was talking to zikzak about this on IRC, and we both agreed that it is utterly tiresome now. We all want this site to have a varied audience, not just people in the computing industry or tangential to it and with the right political views. As new readers are, at the moment, coming from many different places and not just being stolen from the k5/slashdot readership we seem to be acheiving this, at least to some extent. Some of the articles have exposed a lot of people who don't usually visit weblogs at all to the site, and word of mouth is a factor too. I have also come to dislike meta-nonsense like this very comment too. The endless self referential crap gets on my wick. Personally, I don't want this website to be associated with the k5-/.-geekizoid triumvirate, I'd like it to be somewhat apart without much crossover (sort of like plastic is, but with better, funnier articles and users who aren't wankers). So hopefully things can be varied and refreshing here, I certainly hope so. ♥, bc.

	For some reason... (5.00 / 1) (#5)
	by elenchos on Sun Jul 22nd, 2001 at 04:46:15 PM PST

	The thing I want to avoid most at Adequacy is kissing ass. Especially since the editors here have (ironically) set themselves up as royalty. How can a person not set out to tweak your noses? How can anyone resist trying to deflate your (ironic) egos and pomposity? You needn't have told me that the thing you can't stand is that you are just another appendage to the k5-/.-geekizoid triumvirate, or that everything here is merly some kind of answer to what goes on at K5. Rusty gets pissed when you imply that he's in competiton with /. too. So, well, sorry if I bugged you. Don't mean to bug ya. Honestly, if I ever have an original thought again (which is looking doubtful these days) I'll be sure to bring it here, instead of pointless meta crap. Until then... I do, I do, I do --Bikini Kill

	Yeah (5.00 / 1) (#7)
	by bc on Sun Jul 22nd, 2001 at 05:33:06 PM PST

	We didn't set it up to be an answer to anything, we just set it up because we like writing articles and enjoy debate on weblogs, and this gives us the greatest freedom to do so. We did it for the fun, not as part of some movement or counter-revolution. Nonetheless the origin of this site is wrapped up in the history of kuro5hin, and slashdot more so, just like almost every other weblog has a lineage. Still don't like meta stuff though. And I did like your diary, it didn't bug me at all. ♥, bc.

	debate (5.00 / 1) (#15)
	by alprazolam on Mon Jul 23rd, 2001 at 12:07:52 PM PST

	so far the debate i've seen here hasn't been very good really, not like a good old trhurler/ubu vs streetlawyer/eluddite steel cage match. of course it's a lot easier to wrap your head around 20 comments than 200 barely related comments.

	Debate? What debate? (5.00 / 1) (#16)
	by SpaceGhoti on Mon Jul 23rd, 2001 at 12:23:43 PM PST

	The only thing you'll find here is a series of polarized statements diametrically opposed to each other in philosophy, intent and occasionally format. The concept of rational debate is irrelevant; the Editors (Infinite in Their Wisdom) seek "lively debate" in which people make lots of indefensible statements and attempt to argue them by stint of circular and irrational logic. This site inspires debate similar to that of an LA riot. A troll's true colors.

	Is this thread typical then? (5.00 / 1) (#17)
	by Anonymous Reader on Mon Jul 23rd, 2001 at 12:31:42 PM PST

	I don't recognise the website you describe. You must be thinking of alt.flame - as far as I can see adequacy is very serious about deleting the more foolish posters. I came here from gothling message boards and debate here is much better and more interesting (&funny too!). Refreshing I find it. qgot

	Space Ghoti (5.00 / 1) (#18)
	by dmg on Mon Jul 23rd, 2001 at 01:01:30 PM PST

	I think I've warned you before about 'trolling'. This comment skates on very thin ice. You are lucky I have not deleted it. It was a very close run thing, but I decided to let it stand, since there is a small possibility you actually believe what you are saying. Perhaps you could think before posting, which will help you to avoid coming across like a 'troll' thank you time to give a Newtonian demonstration - of a bullet, its mass and its acceleration. -- MC Hawking

	So delete it. (5.00 / 1) (#19)
	by SpaceGhoti on Mon Jul 23rd, 2001 at 01:05:55 PM PST

	The fact that I believe what I say doesn't change its trollish nature. You are an Editor (Infinite in Your Wisdom), which is why this is a troll and this is not. My message in both cases is the same, but directly challenging the validity of the Editors (Infinite in Their Wisdom) is strictly verboten. I bow to your superior wisdom. A troll's true colors.

	Has it ever occured to you (5.00 / 1) (#20)
	by CaptainZornchugger on Mon Jul 23rd, 2001 at 01:23:19 PM PST

	That they just don't like navel-gazing and meta-commentary all that much? Particularly when you have little to suggest except what they've probably already discussed in IRC among themselves, and little to say except that you just 'don't like the discussion because it's not serious enough'? If you want to have a discussion without appearance of sarcasm or irony, you are certainly free to do so. But constantly criticisizing the editors' discussion style seems pointless (since they certainly won't change) and possibly does border on what 'trolling' might be considered on a site such as this (where the traditional sense of trolling is obviously meaningless) Forgive me for sounding like a fan-boy (particularly when they can speak fine for themselves), but this is their site.

	Yup (none / 0) (#21)
	by SpaceGhoti on Mon Jul 23rd, 2001 at 01:35:19 PM PST

	It has occurred to me. It would seem that I am suffering from a severe case of apathy. If they want to think their shit doesn't stink, they're quite welcome to make that claim. You're right: it is their site. They make the claim that everything posted is serious, except when meant in jest. The fact is that in context everything seems to be humorous, except that the Editors (Infinite in Their Wisdom) make claims that various articles are meant in earnest when I can't tell them from the ones meant in jest. Until they delete me, I will exercise my right to free will and expression and call them on their shit. It's providing me with great entertainment to find new ways to describe how their shit reeks and to see how they come up with explanations of how it doesn't. I'm not Gisano claiming that anyone is raping my butt; I'm expounding on my deeply-held beliefs and considered opinions, which dmg claims is my right on this site. The problem is that my opinion is that this site is full of shit. That isn't a terribly popular opinion, nor is it conducive to a pleasant day. But they keep coming up with new and inventive ways to inspire me to describe how full of shit they are. So I'll do my level best to come up with new and inventive ways to describe it. Add me to a killfille. Vote me down. I'll even ask Opalhawk to stop modding me up. Don't read my comments if you don't like them. Or, conversely, feel free to call me on my shit. It's not like I have a better grasp on The Truth than anyone else. A troll's true colors.

	Hmmm.. (5.00 / 2) (#22)
	by CaptainZornchugger on Mon Jul 23rd, 2001 at 01:52:48 PM PST

	I very much enjoyed your piece, 'Master of Nightmares'. I was forced to waste a significant portion of my day on it, as I was unable to stop reading. What authors would you consider your inspiration for that piece? (That, by the way, is what I call a 'complete change of subject'. It's what I do when I like the person I'm conversing with, but the particular topic of discussion has become tiresome to me)

	By gum (none / 0) (#25)
	by SpaceGhoti on Mon Jul 23rd, 2001 at 02:06:39 PM PST

	I believe I'm blushing. You flatter me, sir. And here you claimed you didn't like Science Fiction. But I'm quite pleased you liked King of Nightmares. I had no specific inspiration for the story, save for the image in my mind of a man sailing over smooth water in a dream that suddenly takes a turn for the worse. It was also my intention to attempt to describe a scene with all the vibrancy and vividness of Stephen King's earlier work. I say "earlier work" because I haven't paid much attention to him after It and Tommyknockers. A troll's true colors.

	Is that a formal request? (5.00 / 1) (#23)
	by opalhawk on Mon Jul 23rd, 2001 at 01:53:39 PM PST

	I rate you up because I happen to agree with you. But you are intelligent, and you don't need my "help". I am not sure my ratings mean anything here anyway, except that I do agree... Frankly I think the trusted user status is a ridiculous thing to have if we are going to be chided and rebuked for using it. I still agree with you, but I don't need to rate you up for you to know that.shrug You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted, then used against you.

	Yeah, let's call it that. (none / 0) (#24)
	by SpaceGhoti on Mon Jul 23rd, 2001 at 02:01:32 PM PST

	I formally request you cease and desist all moderation for my comments. People might start thinking we were sleeping together, or something. Please understand that I know that you agree with me, mostly because I tend to agree with much that you have to say. I'm still going to vote your poems up to the front page, like your latest. My request is not intended to be a personal attack. A troll's true colors.

	Oh no worries! (5.00 / 1) (#26)
	by opalhawk on Mon Jul 23rd, 2001 at 02:16:37 PM PST

	I am not taking this as an attack! I just think it is both humerous and pathetic that people seem to be upset that 1. I agree with you and 2. I vote you up to show that. But no worries. I am going to abide by your request and refrain from publicly agreing with you... here. You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted, then used against you.

	'Prime Minister of Nightmares,' then (5.00 / 1) (#27)
	by CaptainZornchugger on Mon Jul 23rd, 2001 at 02:40:12 PM PST

	People might start thinking we were sleeping together, or something. I can't possibly imagine what would cause anyone to draw a conclusion such as that.

	gasp You found me out! (5.00 / 1) (#28)
	by opalhawk on Mon Jul 23rd, 2001 at 02:59:58 PM PST

	Don't tell SpaceGhoti's Wife on me! I am afraid that she might beat me! You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted, then used against you.

	I would prefer that you not kiss my ass (5.00 / 1) (#8)
	by Adam Rightmann on Sun Jul 22nd, 2001 at 06:00:09 PM PST

	as I've head this is prelude to some of the more deviant aspects of English Style Love. You are certainly entitled to your opinions, even if they are counter to the opinions expressed by the editor's. I may even mod them up, just to the world how sadly deluded you are. A. Rightmann

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 Adequacy.org. The Adequacy.org name, logo, symbol, and taglines "News for Grown-Ups", "Most Controversial Site on the Internet", "Linux Zealot", and "He just loves Open Source Software", and the RGB color value: D7D7D7 are trademarks of Adequacy.org. No part of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written permission by Adequacy.org and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to legal@adequacy.org.