Subject: Re: With friends like Erik, c.l.l doesn't need enemies From: Erik Naggum <erik@naggum.no> Date: 1999/09/20 Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Message-ID: <3146818456668748@naggum.no> * Raffael Cavallaro | [deletia] you once wrote that you only responded to what I had done, and that you weren't to blame for anything you were doing. I didn't have that excuse since I had started a new thread, in your opinion. you also suggested that I stick to Lisp in comp.lang.lisp, but you didn't have to, because of the license to post irrelevant drivel in response to things you found offensive. I suggest you start taking your own advice, and just shut up. as for your ability to read things into other people's posts, your "frankly racist" in response to the fact that the context in which people normally speak do not include starving and oppressed people in the third world, was sufficient to tell me that you are quite fanatical and should be ignored. insofar as you continue to attack me, I respond only to show that you are off mark. I don't discuss your insane conclusions, and I have no interest in talking with you at all. confine yourself to what _you_ experience, what _you_ feel, and state _your_ assumptions and reactions, and I don't have to say anything. as long as you elevate your fanatical idiocy to universality, you have to be shot down, every time. and since you sign off with your degree, I must assume that it is relevant to why you have to engage in these face-saving exercises where the other guy must be blamed for everything offensive in the world. I have seen your kind a lot, Raffael Cavallaro, and since the stuff I'm being accused of are mutually exclusive, and always the very obvious "enemy" of whoever is attacking me, such as being a traitor to the white race when I attack racist idiots, a racist when I don't agree that the white race is responsible for every ill in the world or I embrace every race except that I ignore the third world when discussing most topics, a capitalist pig because I'm not joining the working class, a dangerous communist when I express my disdain for certain parts of society that some people think only communists can attack, etc. common to all you insane fanatics is that I trigger your hate response, not for anything I do, but for something you need to express your hatred of and which you find evidence of in just about anything. like, the other day, I was accused of being a neo-nazi by one idiot who had read my web pages, and the next day, a neo-nazi said he'd kill me because I collaborate with Jews and communists and his favorite euphemisms for immigrants and homosexuals. you know what I think amidst all this hatred? that it is very useful to learn how people don't think at all, but instead let their dysfunctional emotions lead them to extreme destructiveness. if we know who those people are and we make them expose themselves, the world becomes a safer place for all. but what am I actually doing? I refuse to believe most of the drivel that people take for granted -- instead I seek to understand how such views could crop up in the first place. in so doing, I do in fact endanger their views and their beliefs, so there's no problem seeing why some people respond emotionally. what's puzzling is that a Ph.D is unable to pull himself together and think. what's puzzling is that fairly erudite people still protect their silly beliefs with emotional abandon and nothing else. it's almost as if I catch people red-handed in the foul act of not thinking, and then they behave as most people do when caught in an act they would be very ashamed of admitting openly. but such shame is counter-produtive in the extreme, and when it takes the shape of projection and false accusations against others to detract people's attention from the fact that Raffael Cavallaro is so fanatical that his credibility is exactly zero, it works only to destroy the sender of such incredible idiocy. finally, a small but important issue which keeps coming up with alarming frequency: those who attack me, do so for things I have not actually done, but they assume I would do, for things they could not know even if they were true, but necessarily must assume, and they attack me for holding views and attitudes for which there exists a plethora of evidence to the contrary. it seems one-dimensional people have to attack me, because what I do is deny one-dimensional people the right to exist. and, yeah, of course, I get this "you see the world in black and white" all the time, because I refuse to see a particular issue in a gray that would allow others not to make up their mind. I have come to conclude that one-dimensional people are completely unable to see the image for all the single-color dots in two-dimensional half-tone images. if you want me to accuse me of anything, accuse me of having no respect at all for one-dimensional people, but all you really have to do to create a new dimension in your life is to learn to be able to appreciate that context bounds meaning, that no context is wrong, and that only the act of assuming meaning outside context is wrong. put another way, especially for Raffael: try to read people to understand what they have meant, not what you would have meant had you used the same words. #:Erik