| |
Main
Date: 04 Jan 2009 20:59:02
From: CheckRazor
Subject: A Plea to RGP (not for money)
|
Please do not respond to any posts from to LaCostraNostra/IgotSkillz.
This is a person who welched on a debt, and should not be recognized
by the good folks of RGP.
I realize he is considered to be the Village Idiot of RGP, and reading
his posts can be somewhat entertaining, but responding to him is a
crime.against all of us that keep our word, and pay our debts on
time.
I urge you to ignore him for the year 2009, since he has no honor.
|
|
| |
Date: 06 Jan 2009 14:27:41
From: garycarson
Subject: Re: A Plea to RGP (not for money)
|
Does he owe you money?
He doesn't owe me money.
On Jan 4 2009 11:59 PM, CheckRazor wrote:
> Please do not respond to any posts from to LaCostraNostra/IgotSkillz.
>
> This is a person who welched on a debt, and should not be recognized
> by the good folks of RGP.
>
> I realize he is considered to be the Village Idiot of RGP, and reading
> his posts can be somewhat entertaining, but responding to him is a
> crime.against all of us that keep our word, and pay our debts on
> time.
>
> I urge you to ignore him for the year 2009, since he has no honor.
------
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
|
| |
Date: 06 Jan 2009 13:37:34
From: Dave the Clueless
Subject: Re: A Plea to RGP (not for money)
|
On Jan 4, 11:59=A0pm, CheckRazor <Luv2skibumps_...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> Please do not respond to any posts from to LaCostraNostra/IgotSkillz.
>
> This is a person who welched on a debt, and should not be recognized
> by the good folks of RGP.
>
> I realize he is considered to be the Village Idiot of RGP, and reading
> his posts can be somewhat entertaining, but responding to him is a
> crime.against all of us that keep our word, and pay our debts on
> time.
>
> I urge you to ignore him for the year 2009, since he has no honor.
Honor means nothing more than prickly infantile vanity dressed up,
usually, in desperate class-consciousness. Of all the symptoms of a
weak ego, honor is the most embarrassing, and the most harmful. In a
right-minded society it would be made a capital offense. (In women
honor usually means chastity, also a bad idea but not nearly as
pernicious.)
I do not mean to rail against the virtues, manly or otherwise. A few
of them seem to have merit. Courage is doubtless admirable, at least
when not engaged in by criminals or ambitious soldiers. Loyalty to
friends in the face of adversity is to be commended. Common decency
has its allure and occasional practitioners. Honesty? I think it worth
trying, though with care until we ascertain its effects. But honor? It
is a sure indication of a bad character.
Consider its usual display throughout history. A duke or baron, or
some such befeathered artifact of excessive inbreeding, encounters
another, a count perhaps, or more likely a no-count, who is in a bad
mood. This latter says, =93Yomama, Monsieur. Your granny wears combat
boots.=94
Whereupon the duke, instead of saying, =93Oh buzz off, Lancaster, before
I York a knot on your head=94=97this would be sensible and therefore
inadmissible in affairs of honor=97takes off his glove and throws it on
the ground. This benefits dry cleaners, though a man with one glove
looks eccentric. Anyway, this constitutes a Challenge, more to common
sense than anything else.
And so the Duke and the Count meet on the Field of Honor, in the
manner of small boys settling a dispute on the playground after
school, but with more gauds and glitter. A duke disposes of greater
resources than does a third-grader, though this may be the only
distinction. After fulsome precedent ceremony, they fight with swords,
suggesting grave inner dimness, until one pokes the other, who
thereafter waits for peritonitis to set in. The survivor stalks off
with the ostentatious pride of a swamp bird in mating season, his
honor satisfied.
Smarter people would settle quarrels by playing marbles, I think.
Now, credit where credit is due. Most often, the code duello approach
to honor served to rid society of men it would be better off without.
A country can prosper without dukes, while a strike by the plumbers
would be disastrous.
But sometimes the effects of aggrieved vanity were actually
deleterious. In 1832, Evariste Galois, a preternaturally talented
French mathematician, died in a duel at age twenty, fortunately having
invented the theory of groups beforehand. His was an extraordinarily
unuseful foray into the practice of honor. What might he have done had
he insisted on marbles? Honor has a high price.
Military men are particularly susceptible to notions of honor, and
should be indoctrinated against it in their formative years. They
employ it largely as a veil covering their actual business, which has
generally consisted in killing, raping, burning, and pillaging, in
putting cities to the sword, massacring the unwilling conscripted
peasants of the opposing army, and generating widows, orphans, and
prisoners for the slave trade.
None of this would seem particularly honorable if examined carefully,
so it carefully isn=92t. The soldierly focus is on teary-eyed memories
of fallen comrades, on the bravery of the cavalry at Balaclava or of
the leather-jacketed bomber crews who burned a hundred thousand
civilians to death per night, and such like.
The infantilism undergirding honor can be seen in the game of chicken.
This curious parallel to aristocratic bloodletting was played decades
ago by brooding teenagers with ducktail haircuts and a pack of Camels
rolled into the shoulders of their tee-shirts. One adolescent duelist-
in-waiting would insult another in some mortal manner. =93Yer a yellow-
belly Yankee,=94 perhaps, or =93You=92re a four-eyed sissy.=94 The other,
experiencing a hormone surge frequently confused with a call of honor,
accepts the challenge to play chicken. They=92re going to settle it man
to man, though emotionally they belong in diapers.
So they meet in their cars at night on a deserted stretch of road,
each with friends as witnesses and supporters (exactly like nominally
adult duelists with their pistols and seconds: there is no
difference). The witnesses get out and the antagonists, facing each
other from behind the wheels of their cars at a distance of perhaps a
mile, race furiously at each other like rutting mountain sheep. The
idea is that whoever swerves to avoid a collision is a coward, and
thus besmirched. Of course they then both survive, and can continue
trying to tap the cheerleaders.
Here is the very essence of honor, an engorged, all-consuming vanity,
a willingness to die for one=92s ego. Marbles, I insist. Much better.
This irrational behavior finds a place in international affairs. In
fact, it comes close to being international affairs. One sees it often
in the unwillingness of countries (read: psychological short men in
charge of countries) to back down when nothing important is at stake,
or to cut their losses when hobbyist wars go awry.
As noted, today our thunder-thump patriots say that we must find an
honorable exit strategy from Iraq. This means that if we can=92t steal
the oil, we can at least pretend we won the war gloriously. Again,
honor is ego: We aren=92t going to swerve. Better that we bankrupt the
country, fill the hospital wards with paraplegic and blind teenagers,
kill who-cares-how-many Iraqis, than blink. Mine is longer than yours.
It is, it is, it is.
Honor is a protective device for people whose self-esteem needs
protection. Picture some archduck in England=97actually =93archduck=94 was =
a
typo, but I think it better conveys the sense. Anyway, this gorgeous
trinket of chivalry, which is itself a loathsome hotbed of honor,
probably has twelve toes from more intermarriage than a holler in West
Virginia, and a thistle-down intelligence, and the self-reliance of a
queen ant. He is a monument to non-hybrid unvigor.
How does he protect his etiolated parsnip-like self-esteem from some
village kid named, oh, say, Newton, who would regard him as the
intellectual equivalent of a turnip? Easy. He invokes his honor.
Defensive vanity. =93A mere commoner. Pish.=94 Elevated nose, depressed
intelligence.
None of this is necessary. Perhaps the greatest military thinkers in
history are Fredwitz and James P. Coyne, in that order. Dr. Coyne=92s
proposed exit strategy is simple: =93OK, on the plane. Now.=94 Should this
seem unfathomable by its complexity, it could be reduced to four
words. But no. What general, what president who has said =93Mission
accomplished,=94 is going to admit that it didn=92t work so well? We must
leave with honor. Not necessarily with all our body parts, or all the
soldiers we came with, but with honor.
copied from http://fredoneverything.net/FOE_Frame_Column.htm
|
| |
Date: 06 Jan 2009 07:39:04
From: FangBanger
Subject: Re: A Plea to RGP (not for money)
|
On Jan 4 2009 10:59 PM, CheckRazor wrote:
> Please do not respond to any posts from to LaCostraNostra/IgotSkillz.
>
> This is a person who welched on a debt, and should not be recognized
> by the good folks of RGP.
>
> I realize he is considered to be the Village Idiot of RGP, and reading
> his posts can be somewhat entertaining, but responding to him is a
> crime.against all of us that keep our word, and pay our debts on
> time.
>
> I urge you to ignore him for the year 2009, since he has no honor.
Mommy ..Mommy ..he was mean to me , I am going to ask the other kids not
play wif him !!
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.
Voltaire
_____________________________________________________________________
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com
|
| |
Date: 05 Jan 2009 14:40:22
From: Senator Millionaire
Subject: Re: A Plea to RGP (not for money)
|
How much does he owe?
|
| | |
Date: 06 Jan 2009 08:46:43
From: charrison100
Subject: Re: A Plea to RGP (not for money)
|
On Jan 5 2009 5:40 PM, Senator Millionaire wrote:
> How much does he owe?
He made some bet about not posting for a year if Obama won. Then he
created another username and continued posting.
Skillz has been gone for a while so i missed the bet details. As soon as
nostradumbass was found to be him he went into the killfile too. I did
this before the bet for many other reasons.
Kevin is a very troubled person.
Chris
-------
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
|
| |
Date: 05 Jan 2009 14:24:09
From: Porsche_Dan
Subject: Re: A Plea to RGP (not for money)
|
On Jan 4, 8:59=A0pm, CheckRazor <Luv2skibumps_...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> Please do not respond to any posts from to LaCostraNostra/IgotSkillz.
>
> This is a person who welched on a debt, and should not be recognized
> by the good folks of RGP.
>
> I realize he is considered to be the Village Idiot of RGP, and reading
> his posts can be somewhat entertaining, but responding to him is a
> crime.against all of us that keep our word, and pay our debts on
> time.
>
> I urge you to ignore him for the year 2009, since he has no honor.
I agree. He is in my kill file and I will also kill file IGOTSKILLZ
fan boys that keep bumping him. Life is too short for that shit.
|
|
