Skepticism and The Normal

[Gnu Ordure]

And the time he spends posting on internet forums is less time he's polluting the entertainment industry

You're missing the point, z.

JREF is part of the entertainment industry.

This is Episode 7 of "The Bubb Show", coming to you live from whatever screen you're looking at right now...

And you're on it.

At least comb your hair...


Moby said :

In a strange way, this has actually been a quite informative thread, covering many topics and raising some interesting points. You don't usually get that when a troll starts a thread.

And it's not just entertaining, it's educational too !!!

It's not strange, Moby. It's built into the structure of the show.

Each episode of the Bubb Show goes in a different direction, depending on the unpredictable contributions of the target audience. Reality TV at its best. The philosophers, the logicians, the religious and the skeptics all responded to OS012 in their own way, and in each case the resultant discussions were educational...

(this may simply be a reflection of my own relative ignorance, of course. I am a gnu of very small brain).

as the Prof said :

He brought up game theory but was hopelessly confused about it.

... yes, my point is that the subsequent discussion was interesting and informative...

Funnily enough Gnu, that's not a bad summary.

Well, that's very kind of you, flim, though I'm slightly uncertain of the implications of the 'funnily enough'.... ?

Why shouldn't I possess adequate summarization skills ?

Is it cos I is gnu ?

Not so..

You must have heard on the television or the radio, the phrase:

"Here is the Summary of the Gnus..."

So you know full well that we gnus are rightly respected throughout the English-speaking world for our skills in the ancient art of Su-Ma-Ri.

It must be something else...


Oh wait...

Ah, your not still thinking I'm Bubb, are you ?

I think one crucial point that you’re missing is that Bubb has not maintained any sort of moral high-ground in terms of keeping the discussion civil and on topic.

Who said Bubb has to maintain the moral high ground ?

Does every thread posted here have to be "moral" ?

Whatever that means.




It's entertainment.


It's as 'moral' as 'Life of Brian'.

And just as thought-provoking.

He has resorted to name calling, misogyny, being rude, supercilious, dismissive and downright personally insulting

He gives as good as he gets.

Check previous episodes. He never starts it.

Whatever.

It's all part of the show.

He’s taken this to a ridiculous level by not admitting when he’s been straightforwardly wrong about such simple things as the definition of words

ah, you spotted that ?

it is a leitmotif, I believe....

I like to think of Bubblefish as a kind of catalyst for discussion. While he never alters his views, admits being wrong, or acknowledges other points of view as valid, the topics brought up have been very interesting.

Agreed, Jonny.

Going back through the thread (I finally gave it a front-to-back read), we touched on an amazing number of subjects

That's how it works, TheGline...

Read the previous episodes, if you want ... they're all interesting, in various ways...




And as regards banning, I believe only one of the seven episodes of the Bubb Show so far has culminated in a banning. On the whole, Bubb tries to avoid the attentions of moderators; whatever his intentions may be, I'm pretty sure he doesn't want to lose his audience, so getting banned would be somewhat counter-productive in that regard.


One of the interesting things about the Bubb Show is the nature of Bubb. It's a recurring theme. In each episode, the particpants discuss the nature of Bubb. Who is he ? What's his name ? What is he doing ? Why is he doing it ? Does it matter ? And who cares ?

I have no idea.

But, I choose to understand Bubb as "The Bubb Show". He makes sense to me like that.

But I admit I'm just guessing.

However, one result of my choosing to interpret Bubb's behaviour in this way is that, unlike many of you, I bear him no ill-will.

The opposite, in fact...


Gnu.

 

[Z]

Actually, he didn't 'give as good as he gets' - he started some of the drama himself. And ultimately, that's what ejected me from this discussion on any serious level - his decision to resort to a vile name-calling exercise in a completely unprovoked scenario.

And in the end, he's not really that entertaining... The side discussions here were far better than any drivel he spouted forth, and since putting him on ignore I've only noticed the quality of this discussion improving.

At least, until you showed up, gnu. And you know what they say... no gnus is good gnus.

 

[Gnu Ordure]

Actually, he didn't 'give as good as he gets' - he started some of the drama himself

maybe he did...

bad bad bubb...






But he's a drama queen, z.

Is that illegal ? or immoral ? or unethical ?

Should he be banished ?


To continue the Life of Brian analogy, that film was considered immoral (blasphemous), and sinful, and was banned (in certain places) ....

Until common-sense prevailed...




Likewise, Bubb has committed no crime.


He produces this show:

If you don't like it, switch over (or try to get the show closed down, as you wish).

If you like it, you can just watch.

If you want to, you can join in.




Ignore. Or watch. Or join in.

As you wish.

And in the end, he's not really that entertaining...

this thread has had 35,600 views in 3 months....

And you know what they say... no gnus is good gnus.

hey, I'll do the 'gnu' jokes, if you don't mind....

... my stupid name, my stupid jokes, ok ?


all together now ...



"There's gnuuuu business like shuuuu business..."




.

 

[Z]

Who said he should be banished? He hasn't done anything interesting enough to deserve notice, much less banishment (from an administrative point of view).

And, like I said, it wasn't his contributions that were entertaining, but the contributions of the many other posters who came and went in this thread. In the end, all he did was act as court jester, yet even so, he was all too often dancing on the sidelines while the real show was going on between his guests.

So in a way, he's kind of a weak, lame version of Conan O'Brian, huh?

 

[TheGline]

Who said he should be banished? He hasn't done anything interesting enough to deserve notice, much less banishment (from an administrative point of view).

I agree. Booting him will only give him what he wants: martyrdom.

One of my hobbies is role-playing games. I run and co-moderate a chat site that's designed to support RPGs, and sometimes we have to ban people from the site. The very few times this happens, we inevitably get some form of martyrdom behavior on the part of the banned person -- sometimes they perform "suicide by sysop", just to prove what a bunch of Blue Meanies we all are.

In short, I've seen this sort of behavior entirely too many times. Banning him will just make him feel like he's done the right thing. Ignore him and let him post away, and when he realizes no one is listening, maybe he'll go someplace where has a better chance of being accepted out of hand.

 

[Jeff Corey]

... I'll do the 'gnu' jokes, if you don't mind....

No gnus is good gnus.
(The punchline to a shaggy gnu story)

So these two guys are talking and one sez, "What's gnu?'
"A greek letter?"
"No, that's nu. I mean what is the animal, is it an african antelope or that long haired bovine animal from central asia?"
"No, that's a yak."
" Yeah, I love gnu yak."

 

[TheGline]

No gnus is good gnus.

Aw, we gnu that!

 

[Jeff Corey]

You herd the gnus?

 

[flimflam_machine]

Funnily enough Gnu, that's not a bad summary.

Well, that's very kind of you, flim, though I'm slightly uncertain of the implications of the 'funnily enough'.... ?

Why shouldn't I possess adequate summarization skills ?

I only say “funnily enough” because we’ve already had quite a lot of summaries which cover the thread quite nicely, but yours actually summarises the group dynamic quite well too.

Quote:
I think one crucial point that you’re missing is that Bubb has not maintained any sort of moral high-ground in terms of keeping the discussion civil and on topic.

Who said Bubb has to maintain the moral high ground ?

Well it is his thread (as you have said) it is a discussion started by him about his ideas. As such you’d think it would be in his interest to keep the discussion on track and diffuse any tension so we can actually discuss his ideas. But, of course, he doesn’t do this, instead he actively participates in escalating the situation through his childish tit-for-tat strategy. Initially I think most of the bad-feeling starts with people getting frustrated with Bubb for his inflexibility and his inability to maintain a rational discussion. From there he just encourages it to explode into name calling and outright abuse, for that, if nothing else, he deserves everything he’s got (online at least, otherwise I hope he’s hale and hearty).

Does every thread posted here have to be "moral" ?

Whatever that means.

I have no idea. I think you’re just typing for the sake of it now.

As for you being Bubb, I don’t know. You share some stylistic traits, but you also seem to be altogether more sane and reasonable than Bubb



...insert "gnu" joke here...

 

[Mojo]

...insert "gnu" joke here...

"Read my lips: no gnu taxes" - George H.W. Bush.

 

[JQH]

A pride of lions ambush a herd of gnus at a waterhole and eat them. Afterwards one lion says:

"That was the end of the gnus, now the weather"

 

[Gnu Ordure]

Oh, I see.

You were politely waiting for me to make one little joke about my moniker, and then the flood-gates could legitimately be opened ...



Go ahead, it's ok...

I've head them all before...



Can you imagine what my school-days were like, with a name like mine ?


Luckily, (or possibly, consequently), we gnus have very thick skins.

Now where were we ?

z said :

Who said he should be banished?

Lots of people, z. I could find you quotes of people openly supporting his banishment on the various Forums; I also believe that people have privately asked moderators to ban him.

Often, this seems to be because some people define Bubb as a troll, who must therefore be silenced.

This is another strand of the Bubb Show (a strand it shares with many threads), that in almost every episode, some people try to expel him.

Which is entirely unnecessary because as Bubb has previously demonstrated on several occasions, if he is ignored, he goes away.

z :

In the end, all he did was act as court jester,

I rather think Bubb would be happy with that description, z.

In medieval times, the jester had a privileged position at court. He reported directly to the king, and was valued for daring to tell him the truth (under cover of 'jest'), whereas the other sycophants of the court could not be trusted to do so.

But Bubb isn't just the jester.

It's his show.

He created the back-story, he wrote OS012 (which I see as the 'MacGuffin', Hitchcock fans), he introduces the show, he facilitates the interactions...

And the resulting shows are entertaining, interesting, and informative.

I think Bubb deserves some credit for this; I know lots of you don't. You seem to see the show happening in spite of Bubb, when I see it happening because of him.

But to me, there is evidence of deliberation: each episode follows a similar arc, there are identifiable patterns of dialogue, recurrent themes - all seen from the perspective of each particular Forum...

Booting him will only give him what he wants: martyrdom.

I don't think he does, TheGline...

As far as I know, he's never committed 'suicide by sysop'. He wants his show to stay on air.

Ignore him and let him post away, and when he realizes no one is listening, maybe he'll go someplace where has a better chance of being accepted out of hand.

Indeed, that's what he will do.

A quick perusal of previous episodes would have revealed this.

But if you all want to spend 79 pages reaching the same conclusion, you go right ahead...

I'm glad you did though, because it's been fun...

As such you’d think it would be in his interest to keep the discussion on track and diffuse any tension so we can actually discuss his ideas.

Flim, what exactly are Bubb's interests ?

We don't know, do we ?

You assume he wants to discuss OS012.

I'm assuming OS012 is merely the MacGuffin (again - sorry, non-movie-fans; you'll have to wiki it).

As for you being Bubb, I don’t know.

Actually, can I be the first to say how enormously suspiscious it is that I have returned to this thread, after a considerable absence, just as Bubb has been temporarily indisposed due to work commitments ?

Exactly as my first appearence here coincided with another of Bubb's temporary absenses....

Spooky. or what ?

No, listen, Flim, check previous episodes... Bubb has never sock-puppeted, and I don't think he would do it because he tries to play by the rules... and most Forums forbid sock-thinging...

So you're suspiscions are unfounded, ok ?


Gnu.

 

[Pragmatist]

Actually, can I be the first to say how enormously suspiscious it is that I have returned to this thread, after a considerable absence, just as Bubb has been temporarily indisposed due to work commitments ?

Exactly as my first appearence here coincided with another of Bubb's temporary absenses ....

Spooky. or what ?

No, listen, Flim, check previous episodes... Bubb has never sock-puppeted, and I don't think he would do it because he tries to play by the rules... and most Forums forbid sock-thinging...

So you're suspiscions are unfounded, ok ?


Gnu.

Interesting sentence structure you have.

One sentence per line with a blank line in between.

Like this.

And just like Bubblefish...

Of course I wouldn't expect Bubblefish to be honest about his use of sock puppets, he's not very honest about anything else.

Your language structure is very similar to Bubblefish's too.

Fewer spelling errors, but not entirely absent.

And occasional lapses of capitalisation of names and at the beginning of sentences.

Also just like Bubblefish...

Funny that, huh?

 

[Gnu Ordure]

Damn.

My little joke of deliberately mis-spelling 'your' rather lost its impact when surrounded by three inadvertent errors, didn't it ?

Sorry - I was trying to knock the paranoia on the head, not re-ignite it...




In recompense, can I offer to have my ISP compared to Bubb's ? I don't know how to do that, but probably the moderators do. If he's in LA, then I'm at least 8000 miles away from him, and I'd be happy for that to be made clear, once and for all.

Apologies again.



Gnu.

 

[Z]

Great... now it's become the Gary Gnu show.

There is one rule I wish that JREF had and/or would enforce: once the original topic is resolved, the thread should be closed. It would certainly shorten a LOT of these threads, and might help keep everyone on track better.

As for this whole question of socks, let's keep in mind that Rome doesn't see himself as Bubblefish; Bubblefish is a character, distinct and separate from Rome. So if Rome is also Gnu, then (in his mind) Gnu isn't Bubblefish, even though they're both Rome.

Ya gotta see this from a C-List Hollywood point of view, which is about where Rome falls: it's like one actor playing two different characters on one show. Dr. Evil isn't Fat Bastard, but they're both Mike Meyers.

Or it could just be a case of like attracts like...

At any rate, it seems Gnu has even less to offer the discussion than Bubb, so I don't see that there's much point continuing to pontificate on the matter. Nevertheless, for the sake of the Reader, I append this note as a public service.

 

[sinnikal]

I dunno, 'Bubb Show', entertainment, internet theatre, performance art......?
Gnu, whatever way you try and dress it up, your steadfast support sounds like nothing more than a tired re-working of the old troll excuse "It was only a joke"

 

[Gnu Ordure]

Great... now it's become the Gary Gnu show.

Sorry, z, you lost me there...

Who's Gary ?

So if Rome is also Gnu,

z, please, come on...

I've stated quite clearly that I am not Bubb (as well as, I admit, making jokes that I might be him).

Those jokes aren't funny anymore, and in my last post I freely volunteered to allow the moderators to compare my ISP address with Bubb's, and to announce that Bubb and I are in fact posting to this Forum from opposite sides of the globe.

Which would settle the matter.

Fair enough, z ?


What else can I do ?

At any rate, it seems Gnu has even less to offer the discussion than Bubb,

Actually, I'm not really involved in the discussion, z; my observations have been about the discussion.

I have simply offered my interpretation of Bubb's long-term activities. A couple of people have said they found my observations interesting, but feel free to interpret Bubb in your own way.

Gnu, whatever way you try and dress it up, your steadfast support sounds like nothing more than a tired re-working of the old troll excuse "It was only a joke

sinnikal, I'm not dressing it up.

It's a matter of interpretation.

None of us knows why Bubb does what he does.

You interpret him as a troll, implying that what he does is anti-social, useless, self-serving and fundamentally negative.

Whereas I interpret him as a producer of an on-going series of semi-scripted encounters akin to reality-TV.

And because I see him in this way, I experience his productions as social, useful, selfless, and fundamentally positive.

Which is reinforced by my undeniable experience of his shows as also entertaining and informative.



But is it possible to prove which interpretation is correct ? (Notwithstanding any other possible scenarios - eg Bubb is clinically insane).

I don't think it is.

Even if Bubb confessed (to one thing or the other), we still wouldn't know if he was telling the truth....




Believe what you want to believe.*




What else can we do ?







Gnu.





* "Nothing is easier than self-deceit. For what each man wishes, that he also believes to be true"

- Demosthenes


and/or


"Such are promises: all lies and jest;

Still, a man hears what he wants to hear

And disregards the rest."


- Paulosimones.

 

[flimflam_machine]

You interpret him as a troll, implying that what he does is anti-social, useless, self-serving and fundamentally negative.

Yes, since he insults belittles, dismisses and aggravates those who disagree with him, and he does not stay within the structure of a reasonable, rational debate. The overall impression is that he craves attention more than an actual exchange of ideas.

Whereas I interpret him as a producer of an on-going series of semi-scripted encounters akin to reality-TV.

And because I see him in this way, I experience his productions as social, useful, selfless, and fundamentally positive.

Wow, if you are Bubb (which I strongly suspect) then you have just set a new record for narcissistic idiocy. “His productions” what a ******* tosspot! People aren’t here to be produced, directed or manipulated into a particular course of action or type of discussion. Many people have accepted that if Bubb hadn’t started these discussions they would never have encountered some ideas or even this forum. Fine. But, funnily enough, people are generally happy and keen to discuss these topics without an aggravating, preening little troll to goad them into it. So his starting this thread may have been useful, but his contribution beyond that:

“social”?: no it has been consistently antisocial, insulting and inflammatory, diverting effort away from useful discussion.

“useful”?: no he has adopted such a ridiculously non-sensical approach to so many idiotically trivial items that the actual informative content of this thread has been severely limited.

“selfless”?: no, if he/you sees these discussions as “his productions” then he is obviously doing this for his own ends. If he wanted productive discussions then he could have produce it without resorting to his trollish behaviour. Which suggests that even if there is a desire to elicit a productive discussion he gets a pathetic kick out of the opportunity to act like a narky teenager in an environment where he’s not going to get a well deserved slap. Not to mention that the generally unpleasant feeling of this thread has left me, and maybe others, distinctly pissed-off when walking away from our computers. Something which I suspect he either doesn’t care about, or as before, gets some pathetic thrill from.

“fundamentally positive”?: no, for all the reasons above.

 

[Professor Yaffle]

You know, just once

 

[Professor Yaffle]

I would like to make the 3000th post in a thread...