A Series of Unfortunate Events: Reflections on My Best Burn

Cabanasprings · Post by **Cabanasprings** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 2:36 pm

What Z said about my wife did not make me look closer at myself. All his remarks did was make me disregard anything he has said or will say in the future.

And KIV - Arf Arf Arf

ZaphodBurner · Post by **ZaphodBurner** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 2:50 pm

Cabanasprings wrote:What Z said about my wife did not make me look closer at myself. All his remarks did was make me disregard anything he has said or will say in the future.

Observable behavior:...he can dish out judgements and abuse others but he can't take it himself. Big surprise, yeah?

Dude, I played you like a fiddle.

And, regardless of whether you'll admit it to yourself, words stick, and your jealous, insecure psyche will ultimately regard them whether you want it to or not:

Tomorrow, next week; in a dream; sometime when you hear the word "whore..."; when you're drillin' the old lady out and you look into her disinterested eyes and suddenly another woman's image pops into your head; when you suspect somebody's image has popped into hers... these words will surface, tap-tapping in your cranium.

Big boys know they can't stick their fingers in their ears and pretend they don't hear.

-zb
"T'is some visitor," I muttered, "tapping at my psyche door."
Quote the Burner, "she's a whore..."

ZaphodBurner · Post by **ZaphodBurner** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 2:56 pm

Xvirgin wrote:

Slap the ol' whore on the ass for us when you get home, m'kay?

-zb[/quote]

You're making the assumption that she (the spouse) took off to Burningman with an ex-boyfriend and boned him.

CS made no indication that his wife sleeps around. I would think insults could at least be topic appropriate.[/quote]

The original poster has no spouse at all to have slept around on. CS made a public assumption that she was a "whore" based on variables of which he knows nothing and abstractions which are meaningless to the people he abused.

*shrug* I merely demonstrated that we can all do that, and then stepped back to watch him discredit me for doing the same thing he did to the original poster.

-zb

Nightterror · Post by **Nightterror** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 3:38 pm

ZaphodBurner wrote:
Cabanasprings wrote:What Z said about my wife did not make me look closer at myself. All his remarks did was make me disregard anything he has said or will say in the future.
Observable behavior:...he can dish out judgements and abuse others but he can't take it himself. Big surprise, yeah?

Dude, I played you like a fiddle.

And, regardless of whether you'll admit it to yourself, words stick, and your jealous, insecure psyche will ultimately regard them whether you want it to or not:

Tomorrow, next week; in a dream; sometime when you hear the word "whore..."; when you're drillin' the old lady out and you look into her disinterested eyes and suddenly another woman's image pops into your head; when you suspect somebody's image has popped into hers... these words will surface, tap-tapping in your cranium.

Big boys know they can't stick their fingers in their ears and pretend they don't hear.

-zb
"T'is some visitor," I muttered, "tapping at my psyche door."
Quote the Burner, "she's a whore..."

I don't get it - he (CS) dished it out and you abused his wife not him. I don't think you proved that he couldn't take it. I don't think you have proved anything. But I would love to see you continue. Another thing I noticed is that UBU has to explain what you mean to the other readers. hhhmmmm.

dublix · Post by **dublix** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 4:09 pm

I really hope not.

To any Presumptuous, Judgmental, and Condescending asshole:

Since when has flaming on message boards become such a popular past-time? It's almost a sport. It is quite sickening, really. A waste of time, bandwidth, and memory. I mean, honestly.

In my book, there is a huge difference between an opinion, and hate. Why must everything in our world be two-sided. Here we have the wonderful Internet in all of its glory, with its massive capabilities of instantaneous information sharing, and ability to connect people and overcome great distances. Yet, what do some of us choose to do with it? Pick fights. With people they do not know nor know anything about. Pfbt. Probably about topics they have yet to experience.

Why? Perhaps because they have no worry of getting punched in the head or stabbed? Heh. Come to my neck of the woods and start talking smack. You'd be lucky to end up apologizing.

Flamers: Stop using the Internet as your training wheels. If you're so righteous and strong... go make a stand behind your words. Stop hiding behind them.

If you're bored. Play minesweeper or Spider Solitaire. Spare your brothers and sisters from your merit-less derision and ridicule.

p.s. Do any of the threads on the eplaya stick to the topic as the replies grow? Or does it all eventually turn into people flaming and hating on eachother?

deliveryboyespecialle · Post by **deliveryboyespecialle** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 4:22 pm

dublix wrote:Since when has flaming on message boards become such a popular past-time? It's almost a sport. It is quite sickening, really. A waste of time, bandwidth, and memory. I mean, honestly.

Since Al Gore invented the internet in the 70's.... it's practically tradition now.

ubu · Post by **ubu** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 4:42 pm

way back on usenet, dublix, this flame war stuff started. It can reach the level of high art occasionally on such venues a slashdot.

Eplaya ranks as rather friendly. This particular dispute is no flame war. and frankly your physically threatening remarks about coming to your neck of the woods are no help at all.

howard rheingold used to say that you can make a forum that much better by modelling the kind of behavior you want. so start a nice guy thread. see what happens.

to those who say that nasty online behavior does not show the true self that emerges in face to face encounters, i'm tempted to recall zizek's rejoinder that the violent video game personae of cubicle constrained corporate yes men are closer to who they really are than their bland, face-time personae. or even their make happy burning man personae.

dublix · Post by **dublix** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 4:53 pm

[quote="ubu"]
Eplaya ranks as rather friendly. This particular dispute is no flame war. and frankly your physically threatening remarks about coming to your neck of the woods are no help at all.
[/quote]

I'm simply saying none of these flamers would dare say any of this to someones face. In person.

It was not meant as a threat to anyone, just a little contrast and comparison.

ZaphodBurner · Post by **ZaphodBurner** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 4:55 pm

Nightterror wrote: I don't get it - he (CS) dished it out and you abused his wife not him. I don't think you proved that he couldn't take it. I don't think you have proved anything. But I would love to see you continue. Another thing I noticed is that UBU has to explain what you mean to the other readers. hhhmmmm.

We don't know whether UBU "had" to explain it to others, but I'll be happy to explain myself:

He had no reason to call the OP a whore except for his own empty judgement. I had no reason to call his alleged wife a whore by the same logic.

He rejected my argument while standing by his own even though they're identical. When he called her a whore based on his values, he claimed righteousness. When I referred to his relationship using the same term, he disregarded "anything I said or will say in the future."

I proved he could give it out but not accept it and proved he was a hypocrite by allowing him to reject an argument that merely mirrors the one he brought to the discussion when he abused the original poster.

I simply mirrored his argument back at him to test his predictable inability to accept it himself.

As to his "wife," I have no remorse for pointing out that she's a whore because to us she's merely an abstraction put forth by an anonymous jackass making unsolicited and abusive judgements about somebody here. We don't even know for sure that "she" exists. I abused him, not his alleged "wife."

Hope that helps.
-c

ZaphodBurner · Post by **ZaphodBurner** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 5:00 pm

dublix wrote: I'm simply saying none of these flamers would dare say any of this to someones face. In person.

Well, then, you're incorrrect.

-zb

Kinetic IV · Post by **Kinetic IV** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 5:08 pm

Well, then, you're incorrrect.

Definitely incorrect.

dublix · Post by **dublix** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 5:13 pm

[quote]
Well, then, you're incorrrect.
-zb[/quote]

No, you eat the cat poo! :lol:

I do believe I have as much proof that I am correct that you have of me not being, and well I have no real proof.

But I gladly accept your opinion on that matter.

kthanks.

Nightterror · Post by **Nightterror** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 5:27 pm

ZaphodBurner wrote:
We don't know whether UBU "had" to explain it to others, but I'll be happy to explain myself:

He had no reason to call the OP a whore except for his own empty judgement. I had no reason to call his alleged wife a whore by the same logic.
He rejected my argument while standing by his own even though they're identical. When he called her a whore based on his values, he claimed righteousness. When I referred to his relationship using the same term, he disregarded "anything I said or will say in the future."

I proved he could give it out but not accept it and proved he was a hypocrite by allowing him to reject an argument that merely mirrors the one he brought to the discussion when he abused the original poster.

I simply mirrored his argument back at him to test his predictable inability to accept it himself.

As to his "wife," I have no remorse for pointing out that she's a whore because to us she's merely an abstraction put forth by an anonymous jackass making unsolicited and abusive judgements about somebody here. We don't even know for sure that "she" exists. I abused him, not his alleged "wife."

Hope that helps.
-c

Don't want to ruffle feathers but it appears to me that CS did in fact base his judgement on what the OP wrote - crying boyfriend at home, slept with ex. Right or wrong, it is an opinion based on the facts as he perceives them.

Whereas his wife's actions have yet to be presented and therefor have no basis.

Just my opinion but the validity of your argument diminishes when name calling begins.

FWIW

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Sep 21, 2005 8:50 am

ZaphodBurner wrote:
Nightterror wrote: I don't get it - he (CS) dished it out and you abused his wife not him. I don't think you proved that he couldn't take it. I don't think you have proved anything. But I would love to see you continue. Another thing I noticed is that UBU has to explain what you mean to the other readers. hhhmmmm.
We don't know whether UBU "had" to explain it to others, but I'll be happy to explain myself:

He had no reason to call the OP a whore except for his own empty judgement. I had no reason to call his alleged wife a whore by the same logic.

He rejected my argument while standing by his own even though they're identical. When he called her a whore based on his values, he claimed righteousness. When I referred to his relationship using the same term, he disregarded "anything I said or will say in the future."

I proved he could give it out but not accept it and proved he was a hypocrite by allowing him to reject an argument that merely mirrors the one he brought to the discussion when he abused the original poster.

I simply mirrored his argument back at him to test his predictable inability to accept it himself.

As to his "wife," I have no remorse for pointing out that she's a whore because to us she's merely an abstraction put forth by an anonymous jackass making unsolicited and abusive judgements about somebody here. We don't even know for sure that "she" exists. I abused him, not his alleged "wife."

Hope that helps.
-c

What did you expect him to say? 'Yeah my wife is a whore'? Or, 'oh crap, I'm so sorry for calling the OP a whore, you are so right ZB, what was I thinking?'

ZaphodBurner · Post by **ZaphodBurner** » Wed Sep 21, 2005 10:21 am

So as not to clutter up the discussion with my own posts, I'll try to address two comments here:

Xvirgin wrote:
ZaphodBurner wrote: I simply mirrored his argument back at him to test his predictable inability to accept it himself.
-c
What did you expect him to say?

I thought I just told you that. My intent was to prove that if the criticism and insult turned around on him, he would shut it down; he could call her a whore based on his perception of her lifestyle, but if somebody does the same to him, he disregards that person. He can hurt people with his opinion but can't accept people's opinion of him.

Didn't care how he said it, but expected him to respond in the exact manner in which he did.

Dublix: "I do believe I have as much proof that I am correct that you have of me not being, and well I have no real proof. But I gladly accept your opinion on that matter. "

LOL. I have proof. Such things are unpleasant and off-topic here, but I'll explain if it matters. (Made the evening news, though.) Otherwise, I enjoyed your comment.

-c

Cabanasprings · Post by **Cabanasprings** » Wed Sep 21, 2005 10:37 am

Nightterror wrote:
ZaphodBurner wrote:
Cabanasprings wrote:What Z said about my wife did not make me look closer at myself. All his remarks did was make me disregard anything he has said or will say in the future.
Observable behavior:...he can dish out judgements and abuse others but he can't take it himself. Big surprise, yeah?

Dude, I played you like a fiddle.

And, regardless of whether you'll admit it to yourself, words stick, and your jealous, insecure psyche will ultimately regard them whether you want it to or not:

Tomorrow, next week; in a dream; sometime when you hear the word "whore..."; when you're drillin' the old lady out and you look into her disinterested eyes and suddenly another woman's image pops into your head; when you suspect somebody's image has popped into hers... these words will surface, tap-tapping in your cranium.

Big boys know they can't stick their fingers in their ears and pretend they don't hear.

-zb
"T'is some visitor," I muttered, "tapping at my psyche door."
Quote the Burner, "she's a whore..."
I don't get it - he (CS) dished it out and you abused his wife not him. I don't think you proved that he couldn't take it. I don't think you have proved anything. But I would love to see you continue. Another thing I noticed is that UBU has to explain what you mean to the other readers. hhhmmmm.

That part really confused me too NT, I have no idea what it is "I can't take." I have not been insulted in the least. Z - made remarks about my wife. That's fine with me. Z is allowed his opinion of my wife the same as I am allowed my opinion of Sara. I know I am not a "fucking idiot" so what he says doesn't bother me. The same as Sara should just ignore me if she doesn't agree with me.

Thanks for making the point.

SaraSioux · Post by **SaraSioux** » Wed Sep 21, 2005 10:41 am

I'm glad to see dublix joined in the chatter. It's too bad he decided not to elude to which role he played in my little story. :)

This whole thing actually has an air of beauty to itself. It started as my own tearful reflection, and then passed through discussions on sex, love, morality, religion, reality, kindness, maturity, relationships, hatred, and the nature of the Internet in general.

I know the words "performance art" can be used so liberally to apply to most anything, (anyone who saw the bondage in my Bman pictures has seen me use the words liberally already,) but if I may be so bold, let me do it again.

Look at this performance art.

Like a tie-dyed smear of chaos, the minds intertwining, arguing, disagreeing, forgetting what they first started arguing about in the first place. A linguistic dance, back and forth, travelling so many different directions of thought.

The theme this year was the psyche. The discussion here is all about the psyche. Each of ours, our significant others, the collective, it's all been discussed, and frankly I think that means we're fullfilling our roles exactly as we should.

"There can be no good, without evil." Whether that's true or not, there would be no knowing who the "good" were in this thread without having a really clear picture of who the "bad" are.

I have just enjoyed this journey through each of your opinions, responses, and experiences. I think it's beauty as well, I love the way people connect, and I love that we have the freedom to do it! I know I said that before and CS implied that it was hypocritical, but it's true. It may make me sad that people will say such awful things, but it makes me so happy that they have the right to do that. And so do I!

You suck if you don't understand my story. You're cool if you did. You're lame if you have no opinion at all. Feel something at least.

I love you Burning Man, and all the little Burners you hold.

MissNev · Post by **MissNev** » Wed Sep 21, 2005 11:52 am

Sara, I'm definately not "lame," (I hate that word...reminds me of my Jr. high school aged daughter). I have absolutely no opinion. Your experience is yours. I really don't care one way or the other. Not giving a shit about what you did on the Playa does not constitute being "lame." It's a good story with a very predictable outcome. Nothing more.

4caminos · Post by **4caminos** » Wed Sep 28, 2005 5:20 pm

man, Sara, great thread.
I'm glad this year turned out good for you.

I didn't make it this time around, but it's always good to hear of positive experiences.

Cabana Boy.
you are fucked up.
In any world.

4Caminos

zeigen · Post by **zeigen** » Sun Oct 02, 2005 11:27 pm

Cabanasprings wrote:...only a coward apologizes for someone else.

I'm sorry you feel that way.

--Z.

P.S. Sara, thanks for your story and your pictures.

A Series of Unfortunate Events: Reflections on My Best Burn

is this what Burners do 51 weeks out of the year?

Re: is this what Burners do 51 weeks out of the year?

I love you ePlaya