A revolution in thought

[Vivisectus]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

No inconsistencies are adding up except in your mind. It is true that early on he wrote some things that were changed later. We're talking about a 20 year gap. He did not change the core discovery. He just changed some of the extension of the principles. I remember him vividly sharing with me that money given to citizens who could not meet their standard of living would not have to pay it back. It took him a long time to work out the economic system so there were bound to be some changes. I, as the true steward, never forgot this conversation he had with me. Even when this discovery is acclaimed, certain things will be analyzed and tweaked in the extension. For example, it will be carefully analyzed to determine what is a true hurt. Citizens would want to know what these hurts are, as they would not desire to strike a first blow (an unprovoked hurt to someone) knowing they would never be blamed. You still have no conception of the two-sided equation which is why you are balking at everything.

So your version of the book says money given to citizens does not have to be paid back, even though that contradicts the text we know was written by the author, based on something you claim your father once said?

And hey look! It happens to be pretty convenient for someone who relies on public money.

Deary dear.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Vivisectus

So your version of the book says money given to citizens does not have to be paid back, even though that contradicts the text we know was written by the author, based on something you claim your father once said?

And hey look! It happens to be pretty convenient for someone who relies on public money.

Deary dear.

You are becoming more snarky toward me than is warranted Vivisectus. As I told you, the extension can be tweaked. The discovery is without flaw. You can't know this because you don't understand it. What is the discovery? You don't have a clue.

[ChuckF]

Among the most striking consistencies in the Corrupted Text is the consistency with which its corruptions inure to the benefit of the very one who hawks it for lucre online. This is an important reason why the Corrupted Text is Corrupt and must be rejected.

As the mathematical and undeniable True Steward of the Authentic Text, I am pleased to offer - in a manner that brooks no opposition - the Authentic Text as written by the Author and published in his lifetime, free of self-serving interests of those who traffic in and seek to profit from its Corruption. At long last, the Authentic Text is rediscovered and restored after having been rejected, discarded, and Corrupted. The Authentic Text lays bare the Corruptions of the Corrupted Text that have infested this thread like a virus.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

Among the most striking consistencies in the Corrupted Text is the consistency with which its corruptions inure to the benefit of the very one who hawks it for lucre online. This is an important reason why the Corrupted Text is Corrupt and must be rejected.

As the mathematical and undeniable True Steward of the Authentic Text, I am pleased to offer - in a manner that brooks no opposition - the Authentic Text as written by the Author and published in his lifetime, free of self-serving interests of those who traffic in and seek to profit from its Corruption. At long last, the Authentic Text is rediscovered and restored after having been rejected, discarded, and Corrupted. The Authentic Text lays bare the Corruptions of the Corrupted Text that have infested this thread like a virus.

What is the discovery Chuck? As the new steward you should know this so spit it out. Does the cat have your tongue?

#ChuckIsNoTrueSteward

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

What is the discovery Chuck? As the new steward you should know this so spit it out. Does the cat have your tongue?

Oh, peacegirl, you know by now that I am not the new steward - I am the True Steward of the Authentic Text. I have always been and shall always be the True Steward of the Authentic Text, just as 3 is to 6 has always been and shall always be as 4 is to 8! The "new" stewardship to which you repeatedly refer is just another of your nefarious and infamous Corruptions!

Your blameful directives do not compel, peacegirl; your greater satisfaction apparently lies in Corruption for your own benefit, as evidenced by the $41.00 Corrupted Text that you hawk for sale online. We reject your Corrupted Text. We shall interpret the Authentic Text as written by the Author and published in his lifetime, and shall do so without blame from you. This is the essence of True Stewardship.

I cannot blame you for this hurt that you have done and continue to do to the Authentic Text, peacegirl, but I can - and shall continue to - permit the Authentic Text to resonate as was actually intended by the Author, free of the violent distortions and Corruptions you have inflicted on it for these many years. You see, peacegirl, the Authentic Text succeeds when it is liberated from your Corruptions; this is the precise reason that I am recognized as the True Steward of the Authentic Text! (Thank you for suggesting the poll, by the way.) This is why, in a handful of posts and a few months, I have cultivated here an interest in and respect for the Authentic Text - while your Corrupted Text has failed to find purchase, despite your 16,000 posts over five years! That is the power of the Authentic Text in the hands of me, its True Steward. It is equally the infirmity of your Corrupted Text; its Corrupt nature its evident to all. For proof of this, consider: how many admirers have joined your Facebook page devoted to your Corrupted Text?

It is by my undeniable mathematical nature that I am compelled of my own free will to be the True Steward of the Authentic Text, now and for all time.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

Oh, peacegirl, you know by now that I am not the new steward - I am the True Steward of the Authentic Text. I have always been and shall always be the True Steward of the Authentic Text, just as 3 is to 6 has always been and shall always be as 4 is to 8! The "new" stewardship to which you repeatedly refer is just another of your nefarious and infamous Corruptions!

Your blameful directives do not compel, peacegirl; your greater satisfaction apparently lies in Corruption for your own benefit, as evidenced by the $41.00 Corrupted Text that you hawk for sale online. We reject your Corrupted Text. We shall interpret the Authentic Text as written by the Author and published in his lifetime, and shall do so without blame from you. This is the essence of True Stewardship.

I cannot blame you for this hurt that you have done and continue to do to the Authentic Text, peacegirl, but I can - and shall continue to - permit the Authentic Text to resonate as was actually intended by the Author, free of the violent distortions and Corruptions you have inflicted on it for these many years. You see, peacegirl, the Authentic Text succeeds when it is liberated from your Corruptions; this is the precise reason that I am recognized as the True Steward of the Authentic Text! (Thank you for suggesting the poll, by the way.) This is why, in a handful of posts and a few months, I have cultivated here an interest in and respect for the Authentic Text - while your Corrupted Text has failed to find purchase, despite your 16,000 posts over five years! That is the power of the Authentic Text in the hands of me, its True Steward. It is equally the infirmity of your Corrupted Text; its Corrupt nature its evident to all. For proof of this, consider: how many admirers have joined your Facebook page devoted to your Corrupted Text?

It is by my undeniable mathematical nature that I am compelled of my own free will to be the True Steward of the Authentic Text, now and for all time.

Repetition # ???? Who knows how many times you have repeated yourself. I have absolute trust that the guests are savvy enough to see right through your facade.

#ChuckIsNoTrueSteward

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Repetition # ???? Who knows how many times you have repeated yourself.

peacegirl, why should the consistently mathematical and undeniable reality of my True Stewardship of the Authentic Text trouble you? It is clear that you reject the Authentic Text in favor of the Corrupted Text that you hawk to unsuspecting readers for profit. This is a hurt to the Authentic Text, of course, but when cleansed of distorting Corruptions, the Authentic Text and me (its True Steward) are made of stronger stuff than your blame.

I have absolute trust that the guests are savvy enough to see right through your facade.

You have that right of way, peacegirl. That is your business, not mine.

However, the True Stewardship of the Authentic Text is my business, not yours. I am confident in my Astute Observation that the depth and gravity of the Corruptions passed off in your Corrupted Text are now plain and apparent to all comers.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

peacegirl, why should the consistently mathematical and undeniable reality of my True Stewardship of the Authentic Text trouble you? It is clear that you reject the Authentic Text in favor of the Corrupted Text that you hawk to unsuspecting readers for profit. This is a hurt to the Authentic Text, of course, but when cleansed of distorting Corruptions, the Authentic Text and me (its True Steward) are made of stronger stuff than your blame.

You have that right of way, peacegirl. That is your business, not mine.

However, the True Stewardship of the Authentic Text is my business, not yours. I am confident that the depth and gravity of the Corruptions passed off in your Corrupted Text is now plain and apparent to all comers.

Same old repition which reveals that Chuck is an imposter!

#ChuckIsNoTrueSteward

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Same old repition which reveals that Chuck is an imposter!

#ChuckIsNoTrueSteward

Ok, I hate to break character again so soon, but really: peacegirl, are you not seeing it? It's really not even a little bit subtle.

[Vivisectus]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

You are becoming more snarky toward me than is warranted Vivisectus. As I told you, the extension can be tweaked. The discovery is without flaw. You can't know this because you don't understand it. What is the discovery? You don't have a clue.

You are avoiding the issue - the earlier book states something inconvenient for you, according to you your father thought the exact opposite. You call that "tweaking". Is that the same as alternative facts?

And it is yet another example of very striking differences between your book or what you claim about your father's ideas and the earlier text, that once again happens to coincide with your biases - just like the anti-vaccination drivel you shoe-horned in without making it clear your father never wrote a single word on the subject.

You inserted all this because you assumed it is fine: that is does not touch the core concepts, that it would not negatively influence it's credibility, and that it is morally defensible to paste your opinions about vaccines into a book that is supposed to save the world. You did it more or less in good faith, I am sure.

And that is what is so funny, because according to the book, doing what you did would become impossible: no-one would be able to justify to their conscience something as risky as meddling with something they feel could save the world when they simply cannot know if they are inadvertently hindering its progress, or distorting the way people perceive it's message.

Someone can feel they are doing something good, or at least not harmful... and without the slightest twinge of conscience play around with what they see as something of first importance to the happiness and well being of the entire world.

It is stuff like this that sometimes makes me wonder if what you are doing isn't some kind of trolling, a performance. It is just too wonderfully ironic.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Vivisectus

He told you? So now we have to rely on your memory of what your father said once? When the original text happens to contradict what you like?

What does it say about this in your book? And even if we assume this is not something you changed (which we have no way of confirming), how about the fact that he writes one thing in one book, and then the opposite in another?

Not just something subtly different. The opposite! Would the discoverer of mathematical relations, which are as undeniable as the fact that 1+1=2, make errors to such a degree that he ended up flatly contradicting himself? Without any comment about why he suddenly changed his mind to such an extent? Or is this something you changed because it suits you better? And how can we ever be certain?

These inconsistencies are really starting to add up now.

Again, probably better to just read the original. At least we are certain they are the authors own words.

Your paranoia is robbing you. I refuse to become embroiled in your suspicions that have nothing to do with this discovery. BTW, you never answered me. What is the discovery Vivisectus?

No inconsistencies are adding up except in your mind. It is true that early on he wrote some things that were changed later. We're talking about a 20 year gap. He did not change the core discovery. He just changed some of the extension of the principles. I remember him vividly sharing with me that money given to citizens who could not meet their standard of living would not have to pay it back. It took him a long time to work out the economic system so there were bound to be some changes. I, as the true steward, never forgot this conversation he had with me. Even when this discovery is acclaimed, certain things will be analyzed and tweaked in the extension. For example, it will be carefully analyzed to determine what is a true hurt. Citizens would want to know what these hurts are, as they would not desire to strike a first blow (an unprovoked hurt to someone) knowing they would never be blamed. You still have no conception of the two-sided equation which is why you are balking at everything.

Originally Posted by Vivisectus

So your version of the book says money given to citizens does not have to be paid back, even though that contradicts the text we know was written by the author, based on something you claim your father once said?

And hey look! It happens to be pretty convenient for someone who relies on public money.

You're a follower. We have nothing more to discuss.

You are becoming more snarky toward me than is warranted Vivisectus. As I told you, the extension can be tweaked. The discovery is without flaw. You can't know this because you don't understand it. What is the discovery? You don't have a clue.

Originally Posted by Vivisectus

You are avoiding the issue - the earlier book states something inconvenient for you, according to you your father thought the exact opposite. You call that "tweaking". Is that the same as alternative facts?

And it is yet another example of very striking differences between your book or what you claim about your father's ideas and the earlier text, that once again happens to coincide with your biases - just like the anti-vaccination drivel you shoe-horned in without making it clear your father never wrote a single word on the subject.

You inserted all this because you assumed it is fine: that is does not touch the core concepts, that it would not negatively influence it's credibility, and that it is morally defensible to paste your opinions about vaccines into a book that is supposed to save the world. You did it more or less in good faith, I am sure.

And that is what is so funny, because according to the book, doing what you did would become impossible: no-one would be able to justify to their conscience something as risky as meddling with something they feel could save the world when they simply cannot know if they are inadvertently hindering its progress, or distorting the way people perceive it's message.

Someone can feel they are doing something good, or at least not harmful... and without the slightest twinge of conscience play around with what they see as something of first importance to the happiness and well being of the entire world.

It is stuff like this that sometimes makes me wonder if what you are doing isn't some kind of trolling, a performance. It is just too wonderfully ironic.

I will not say this again. The example I gave on vaccination was an extension of the principles and why it is a perfect example of what will not take place. To repeat: FORCED injections by the state --- with serious penalties if not heeded --- will be eliminated when ALL justification for this mandate is removed. You have no conception of how powerful this principle is in preventing the horrific injuries that have occurred in the name of progress. Up until now there has been nothing to put a stop to the institutional damage that has been perpetrated with impunity. You probably have no idea what I'm even talking about because you don't have a clue as to what this discovery is about even after all these years.

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I will not say this again. The example I gave on vaccination was an extension of the principles and why it is a perfect example of what will not take place. To repeat: FORCED injections by the state with serious penalties if not heeded will be eliminated when ALL justification for this edict is removed. You have no conception of how powerful these principles armrest to prevent the honorific injuries in the name of justice. Up until now there has been nothing to put a stop to the institutional damage has been done with impunity. You probably have no idea what I'm even talking about because you don't have s clue as to what this discovery is about even after all these years.

Same old repetition which reveals that peacegirl is a Corruptor.

[Vivisectus]

The example I gave on vaccination was an extension of the principles and why it is a perfect example of what will not take place.

Peacegirlese at it's finest!

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Vivisectus

Peacegirlese at it's finest!

Try as you may to turn this into a smear campaign, you will fail because I Am The True Steward. As the true appointee, I fulfilled this sacred role by doing everything possible to protect his work! I have absolute confidence that people will see through the hidden agenda that has infiltrated this thread, which is to discredit my father without a fair trial.

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I Am The True Steward

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Notice how the people are imitating Chuck's style of writing. They are even copying his mannerisms.

[Vivisectus]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

Ok, I hate to break character again so soon, but really: peacegirl, are you not seeing it? It's really not even a little bit subtle.

Originally Posted by Peacegirl

Try as you may to turn this into a smear campaign, you will fail because I Am The True Steward. As the true appointee, I fulfilled this sacred role by doing everything possible to protect his work! I have absolute confidence that people will see through the hidden agenda that has infiltrated this thread, which is to discredit my father without a fair trial.

[Vivisectus]

Well, at least in the new world which started in the 20th century no-one would be able to justify meddling with the mathematical discovery that has lain hidden behind the door marked "man's will is not free".

But until at most 16 years ago, we will just have to put up with this kind of irresponsible behavior, which the perpetrator can only justify to herself because she knows she will be blamed for it.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Vivisectus

Well, at least in the new world which started in the 20th century no-one would be able to justify meddling with the mathematical discovery that has lain hidden behind the door marked "man's will is not free".

But until at most 16 years ago, we will just have to put up with this kind of irresponsible behavior, which the perpetrator can only justify to herself because she knows she will be blamed for it.

I don't have to justify anything to myself because I am not a perpetrator. You still don't get it.

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I am not a perpetrator.

Vivisectus, I think this is fair - I would use the word Corruptor*. On the other hand, one who perpetrates Corruptions could credibly be described as a perpetrator, so in that sense Vivisectus' usage is accurate.


*Corruptrix?

[Stephen Maturin]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Try as you may to turn this into a smear campaign, you will fail because I Am The True Steward.

peacegirl, why are you always parroting ChuckF? I'm sure the guests can see what's really going on here.

Originally Posted by Vivisectus

So your version of the book says money given to citizens does not have to be paid back, even though that contradicts the text we know was written by the author, based on something you claim your father once said?

And hey look! It happens to be pretty convenient for someone who relies on public money.

Indeed. And since we know that peacegirl is compelled of her own free will to prevaricate at all times, because being a big fat liar is her path of greater satisfaction, the only reasonable conclusion is that her claim about how Lessans changed his mind subsequent to publishing the Authentic Text is yet another intentional falsehood.

In any event, it's not going to be pretty when Big Daddy Trump and that nice Mr. Ryan from the U.S. House of Representatives kick peacegirl off the public money gravy train. Since peacegirl considers an honest day's work beneath her, one or more of her children will get stuck subsidizing her drinking, squabbling with strangers on the internet, and doing violence to the intellectual legacy of Seymour Lessans.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

honorific injuries

[Angakuk]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Granted, that was a silly comment. I said it when I was naive and new to the internet. So use it to make fun of me as you all love to do!

I will and I don't need your permission.

[Angakuk]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

David, something must be wrong with your comprehension. THAT WAS THE OLD VERSION. He talked to me about it and said that no citizen who needed money to sustain their standard of living (even if they were mentally ill) would not have to pay the money back! What is it you don't understand? The reason they would have to take his card away temporarily is because he would be unknowingly taking advantage. No one would be able to cheat the system with this kind of arrangement unless they were mentally ill. But mental illness will be virtually wiped from the face of the earth once a new generation is born into the new world.

Peacegirl, is it really too much to expect your comments to actually be relevant to the quote that you are responding to?

What am I thinking? Of course that is too much to expect.

[Angakuk]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

It is true that many men before me, including socialists,
communists, even capitalists also thought they had discovered the
cause of, and solution to, the various problems of human relation, and
their enthusiasm was no doubt just as positive and sincere as my own.
However, there is this difference between us. I have absolute proof
that cannot be denied by any reader; they did not.

If Lessans had such proof, why didn't he include it in his book?

[Stephen Maturin]

Ang, it seems highly likely to me that Lessans did include the proof in his book, but peacegirl scrubbed, rafaelized and corrupted until nothing remained of it.

[specious_reasons]

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

Ang, it seems highly likely to me that Lessans did include the proof in his book, but peacegirl scrubbed, rafaelized and corrupted until nothing remained of it.

I almost feel bad for Lessans - all the times I derided his book for structural problems that were probably introduced by peacegirl.