Los Obliviados y Los Olvidados

In the recent lulz about subtle vandalism in an otherwise obscure WP article about Sporks and Bufoons, I wrote this meta-comment:


Normally, an educator (parent, teacher, mentor, or coach) echoes a more refined version of a learner's erratic gesture, thereby providing a more refined model for the learner to imitate back.

But once a young person has become set into a persistent pattern that no longer improves, the parental echo has to switch gears, either to a meta-cognitive feedback message (a diagnostic remark about the youngster's pattern of behavior) or a parody that amplifies the silliness of some aspect of the youngster's pattern of behavior.

When this correction process goes haywire, one has a pathology known as Mimetic Nihilism.

That's where parody, satire, sarcasm, irony, puns, and comedic timing come into play. These are artfully distorted echoes which are calculated to awaken the subject from his or her obliviousness.

We should have a seriously ridiculous discussion thread on Sophistry, Casuistry, and Mimetic Nihilism.

Let the games begin!

Maybe Wikiversity can support a Clown College.

Loco Classico —

The Best-Barbed Bit O' B[url]esque (B-B-BOB) I ever read is Plato's Socratic Dialogue, «The Sophist».

Read It — Itsa Riot !!!

Ja³

P.S. Sorry, Moulton, you can't post in this Φorum without a suitable Topic Icon, so pick one PDQ. —Ja³, writing as e-moderator.

The topicons are the same thing as the posticons at the ⊥ of your edit window.†

And just for asking that question, I hereby revoke your Old Coot's Discount Card.

Ja³

† Just to keep it really confusing, Somey has listed the emoticons in different orders in the different skins, so you have to guess what skin someone is coding with before you can decode their emoticons properly, reducing us all to the condition of Windowless Leibnizian Monads. Put that in your Haphazard Accidental Guessing Game Emotional Roulette Theory Of Mind (HAGGERTOM) and smoke it.

Posting is not so easy behind the Brechtian Icon Curtain.

I woodent know — I've been Absent Post ever since the Post Modern Dyslexicons annexed Postdam.

Ja³

Mimetic Nihilism for Dummies

Circular Firing Squad - People involved in an idea or policy that is obviously self-defeating to everyone else but them. Used to described some group that is so clueless that one could show them a diesel engine and ask them to find the spark plugs. See also Numpty.

Numpty - Someone who (sometimes unwittingly) by speech or action demonstrates a lack of knowledge or misconception of a particular subject or situation to the amusement of others. A reckless, absent minded or unwise person. A person who never has or never will have a fucking clue what he is doing. An idiot, a silly person. A person so stupid they are incapable of understanding the simplest of things. See also Circular Firing Squad.

Producers' Note —

The previously announced premier of «Springtime For Hitler» has been canceled for the duration.

Somehow, it just won't seem funny until after the war.

And even then, only if the Good Guys win.

See you in the movies, but later …

Antic Rouge Show, Inc.

Disappointment Haunted All My Dreams


As a consolation for the unexpected cancelation of «Springtime For Hitler», we are disappointed to note that the only remaining productions we can await with breathless torpor are «Akahele» and «The Final Absolution».

Φiddle, Nero.
Nero, Φiddle.

And the banned played on …

Ja, Ja, Ja …

Blackmail vs Bullying


That's not the question I asked you to opine on.

Let me restate it.

If "blackmail" is defined as "being told something to force me to do something against my wishes" (namely to redact a song parody on my personal blog to avoid being blocked on Wikiversity), then is that an instance of "blackmail" under your definition? And if not, what is the technical name of Jimbo's gambit, and what is the defining distinction between Jimbo's gambit and "blackmail" as exemplified by the Lar/Proab case?


Alas, the definition of "blackmail" remains vague and undefined. I still don't know whether or not DB would consider Jimbo's bullying remark to be an instance of blackmail (under his definition).

More to the point, is the kind of bullying that Jimbo employs in the above cited example a staple feature of WikiCulture, regardless of whether it's called "blackmail" or "bullying" or "anankastic conditional" or "my way or the hiway"?

The first definition doesn't seem to cover the Lar/Proab case, as nothing of value was demanded. The second definition does include the part about bullying (compelling someone to act against their will), but that definition also includes the demand of something of value in return.

It occurs to me that both cases (Proab vs. Lar and Jimbo vs. Moulton) are instances of bullying (rather than blackmail), since the basic script is "do as I demand or I will do something to harm you."

It occurs to me that invoking legalisms like "blackmail" or "extortion" is a rhetorical device that compounds and inflames the issue, rather than helping settle a disturbing conflict.

No matter what one calls it, my personal feeling is that the bullying practices are corrosive and, in the long term, ineluctably erode the ethical integrity of the project.

I understand it is easy to miss posts from time to time:




Now is there any reason that this, along with the related posts above, shouldn't be moved to the tar pitted thread that was their origin? I didn't agree to tar pitting in first place (because Proab's misconduct should be confronted) but once that has been decided upon it ought to be respected.

Ja Ja