October Stundie Finals

[Agatha]

I'm unfamiliar with Janispaula/Peacegirl. What was that all about?

This is where it started on IIDB: http://www.freeratio.org/thearchives/showthread.php?t=216884

And there were four continuation threads:
http://www.freeratio.org/thearchives/showthread.php?t=221373
http://www.freeratio.org/thearchives/showthread.php?t=224097
http://www.freeratio.org/thearchives/showthread.php?t=233377
http://www.freeratio.org/thearchives/showthread.php?t=240537

Great chunks of the book are also posted here, although the discussion only ran to 22 pages: http://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=157029

Warning, the crazy is very strong and there are no swear filters on either of those sites.

Basically, some bloke had some wildly wrong theories about sight in the 1950s, expanded this to a whole philosophy for a new society, and wrote an appallingly bad book. After his death, Janis/peacegirl hawked the book round hundreds of forums trying to spread the word and many people spent hours trying to explain where the ideas were wrong. It was an education, though I think Janis learned less than everyone else.

 

[Venom]

O DAMN.

I was looking at the one I voted......the snarky "appeal to reason" one that many people thought was just too simple and cleverly dumb to be passed up.

Then I looked at my atomic bomb quote which managed to rack up 19 votes.

Then at the very bottom there was 79 for #20.....I just had to see how good it was.

 

[Cocana The Second]

Yep, 20 is an absolutely stunning stundie

 

[Klimax]

I don't think #10 qualifies.

 

[Travis]

Why?

 

[akama1]

15 was part dare part troll and did make me laugh in an ashamed way.

But 20, having read the thread as it was happening, it took me a while to catch on he believes that we see because our eyes send out beams instantly and resister what they hit, hence his belief that we can not see things further away than we are born. I am still stunned by this "logic"

 

[Travis]

15 was part dare part troll and did make me laugh in an ashamed way.

But 20, having read the thread as it was happening, it took me a while to catch on he believes that we see because our eyes send out beams instantly and resister what they hit, hence his belief that we can not see things further away than we are born. I am still stunned by this "logic"

What?

That could have been a Stundie separately!

 

[Horatius]

What?

That could have been a Stundie separately!

Of course, that was the accepted notion of how vision worked.... a few hundred years ago.

 

[twinstead]

Yup. In the context of what he actually believes, #20 may not technically be a Stundie because what he said would follow what he believes. What he actually believes is Stundie-worthy too, so the poor lad is doomed no matter which way he turns; he is the Stundie KING!

 

[Horatius]

Yup. In the context of what he actually believes, #20 may not technically be a Stundie because what he said would follow what he believes. What he actually believes is Stundie-worthy too, so the poor lad is doomed no matter which way he turns; he is the Stundie KING!

It's still Stundie worthy though, as he's recognized a contradiction between his understanding of how the universe works, and everyone else's understanding of how the universe works. However, rather than conclude that he might be in error, he decides it's everyone else that is in error. That sort of arrogance, coupled to an error that encompasses so much of how the universe works*, makes it Stundie worthy.



*Seriously, if he doesn't get how light works, how can he get anything else? This not only screws up his understanding of things like stars 11 billion light years away, it screws up closer things too - how does he imagine he can see the Moon, which is a 3-second round trip for light, unless he stares at it for at least three seconds? And why do we need sources of light, if it's all really eye beams? And how do solar cells work? I could go on....

 

[Klimax]

Why?

Being just wrong isn't stundie worthy. (And no CT in sight or broken logic)

He is wrong about connection between CD protection schemes and profit from mass lawsuits. However that is understandable considering what RIAA did and possibly not knowing that copy protection managed already to fail for audio-cd.(Sony rootkit fiasco and likes)

There were Mass Settlement letters and Mass Lawsuits by RIAA and MPAA(this is second reason why that connection doesn't exist,MPAA still tried). They thought it had higher margins then product itself, which however ended as PR problem and not so profitable in the end.(costs of laywers and lawasuits.)

This bloody things is quite complicated and goes on since early 00s.

Note: This is based upon presented quote. And IANAL...
Wiki article might be good start (looks from skimming good and objective) : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIAA_lawsuits

 

[aofl]

I didn't vote for #20 because I was positive it was a troll. But now I've gone back and read the entire thread it was from.

How depressing.

In my defense, however, I want to point out that the post was dated October 2010, not 2011.

A

 

[Andy_Ross]

Come on you none voters, only 3 more to get 100!

 

[akama1]

Come on you none voters, only 3 more to get 100!

2 more now

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

Only 1 more now!

Just noticed I hadn't voted this month. Darn tootin' I'm voting for 20! ... and of course for the inevitable 3 or 4 Icke offerings ...

 

[LashL]

#100

 

[Rich_C]

I'm disappointed that #1 has been overshadowed. That one is brilliant. But #20 is an all time great. I voted for 1 and 20.

 

[Travis]

There is some method to the madness of number placement.

 

[Sabretooth]

I voted 8, 10, 11, and, yes, 20, before I even read the rest of the thread. 20 has got 105 votes (81%). Truly the best one I've seen since I've been a member here...

 

[twinstead]

This whole thread started when I was born