Revision as of 00:10, 8 February 2006 edit165.196.104.81 (talk)No edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 11:35, 11 February 2006 edit undoHerostratus (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers53,318 edits What is this?Next edit → | ||
Line 84: | Line 84: | ||
hope you can make it, man. | hope you can make it, man. | ||
:I'll try. | :I'll try. | ||
== What is this? == | |||
Re ... what was that? Did someone get access to your account, or did you have a moment when you were not yourself? Assuming a temporary indiscretion, I won't tag you, but please... no. ] 11:35, 11 February 2006 (UTC) |
Revision as of 11:35, 11 February 2006
Hey,
I'm an editor at The American River Current. I noticed your post on the talk page of the American River College article, and would like to discuss your post further. Please shoot me an email to adrian@adrian.org. Thanks :)
Adrian Lamo 06:34, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Anarchism
Hi, could you sign your post and get searching for sources that support your claim. Thanks :) - FrancisTyers 06:33, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
- This is kinda embarassing, but I'm fairly limited in the sites I can visit due to restrictions from my mother. It's not as bad as it sounds, it's only because she's paranoid about viruses, but this is one of the few sites I can access and so I don't think I can find much. I have a few books on anarchism, but they don't have anything to back that up, because they don't even talk about anarcho-capitalism (what a surprise). I think someone else should try to find that. I am actually looking through one of my books now to see if I can find any relevant info, and when I do I'll post it. I put some chomsky quotes up earlier, but he did actually recognize anarcho-capitalists, but said that they were not part of the international anarchist movement and had little in common with the majority of anarchists. Actually, I guess that might kinda work, although I don't have the cites to that (I printed it out months ago and don't know where it is from.) It might be on one of the sites I can look at, so I'll look there. Oh, and I signed my post right after I did it, I realized I had not. I keep forgetting to sign posts. It's not purposeful, and I've called myself on it a couple times. The Ungovernable Force 07:35, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
- luckily, it was on one of the pages I can go to. Here it is . I will post this on the anarchism talk page.
- I forgot to sign again (I told you I have a problem with that ;) The Ungovernable Force 07:40, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
- Hi, books are great, I think we have to put anarcho-capitalism in a historical perspective. Do you mind listing which books you have? Perhaps there are some quotes in them that could be useful. - FrancisTyers 15:22, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
- Like I said, none of my books deal with an-cap. Here is my list of books that have are by/about anarchists (as well as anthologies with anarchist contributers):
- Anarchism by Daniel Guérin w/intro by Noam Chomsky. I was looking through the intro and it might have some relevant quotes, but I will read it later today hopefully.
- My Disillusionment in Russia by Emma Goldman.
- Secrets, Lies and Democracy by Noam Chomsky (no mention of anarchism).
- Voices of a People's History of the United States compiled by Howard Zinn and Anthony Arnove.
- The Communist Manifesto and Other Revolutionary Writings (don't know who compiled it b/c my friend is borrowing it.
- Recipes for Disaster: An Anarchist Cookbook by CrimethInc Ex-Workers' Collective. The Ungovernable Force 19:34, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
- Like I said, none of my books deal with an-cap. Here is my list of books that have are by/about anarchists (as well as anthologies with anarchist contributers):
- Hi, books are great, I think we have to put anarcho-capitalism in a historical perspective. Do you mind listing which books you have? Perhaps there are some quotes in them that could be useful. - FrancisTyers 15:22, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
- I forgot to sign again (I told you I have a problem with that ;) The Ungovernable Force 07:40, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
- luckily, it was on one of the pages I can go to. Here it is . I will post this on the anarchism talk page.
...
Thanks for the kind words, I try and keep my political beliefs off Misplaced Pages, moreso when doing mediation. I was struggling towards the end and wasn't really being effective, which is why I handed it over to Nicholas. The right of free movement is one of those no-brainers that should be patently obvious to anyone who gives it any thought. Feel free to use the list as you wish, a warning though, its likely that anything not in confirmed will be wrong. If you can confirm some all the better :) - FrancisTyers 16:04, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
- All I can confirm is Mexican Spanish, and it's already confirmed The Ungovernable Force 03:05, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Fair Use Image
I have removed a 'fair use' image from your userspace. FU images are not allowed to be user in userspace - please see the #fair use polict at WP:FU. I assume you were ignorant of this policy, but please be aware that users are now beeing blocked for violations of it. Please read it before using any more images on wikipedia. Thanks. --Doc 10:00, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but I really want to know who considers that a copyrighted image? Maybe you don't know anything about food not bombs, but no one involved would ever consider suing someone for using their logo like that. It's a group of anarchists who are opposed to capitalism and the government. I don't think they care if people use their logo. I do see that the image says it's copyrighted, but why? If I find a non-copywrited version online, is that ok? The Ungovernable Force 05:17, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
- If you click on the image and find the copystatus lag, you'll find it is listed as being used under 'fair-use'. Fair use tagged images must not be used other than as outlined by WP:FUC. The legal situation is, I think, debatable, but nevertheless, that is absolute wikimedia policy as dictated by Jimbo. The image, of course, may be wrongly tagged (I don't know), but the policy is you can't use images unless they are tagged as GDFL or pd released - if you think the tag should be changed, you'll have to take that up with others. --Doc 09:00, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Revert explanation
Why did you remove my lowercasing of "User" and my removal of the apostrophe from "it's"? And with an edit summary of "rvv"? I don't wish to edit war, but ask you to restore the changes. Or at least explain why they were inappropriate. — Knowledge Seeker দ 06:40, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
- I was not changing that, I was changing the imature vandalism that made the userbox insulting to userbox supporters. I will add your grammatical changes back in, assuming there is still need. I didn't realize that. The Ungovernable Force 06:42, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, that's fine; thanks for the apology. I thought perhaps you felt a sense of ownership of the template and didn't approve of anyone else modifying it or something. Maybe in the future when someone makes a change you don't like, you can just edit those changes out instead of reverting all the way back to a version before those edits. — Knowledge Seeker দ 04:19, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Mediation Cabal status update - Anarchism
Dear The Ungovernable Force: I'm Nicholas Turnbull, mediator and coordinator down at the Misplaced Pages:Mediation Cabal. This is a status update regarding a mediation request that you are involved in, Misplaced Pages:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-01-07 Anarchism. I have written my initial view on the case and would be grateful if you would please consider what I have written there; in particular, I'd be grateful if you would please carry out the task I asked for to write a single sentence overview of what you think is wrong with the article, so that we can compare viewpoints to come up with a collective solution. Thank you very much for your participation. If you require any assistance relating to this matter please do not hesistate to contact me. Best regards, NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 20:58, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
RfAr for RJII
Just wanted to let you know that I asked one of the arbitrators who accepted the case, Fred Bauder, if he felt the arbitration would continue. He responded that it probably would, although he had not looked at it yet. If you have evidence to bring, you might want to post it here. I think that the case is much less likely to be dropped if there is a large amount of evidence from different users. Even if this RfAr is dropped because Firebug left Misplaced Pages, the evidence could be copied to any future arbitration. TomTheHand 16:22, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Protest Warrior discussion
Don't ever confuse me with a member of ANSWER, who frankly are fascists (though not nazis) as far as I'm concerned. Not trying to sound harsh towards you, I just can't stand those authoritarian commies. And not all PW's are necessarily nazis or even real fascists, but in my opinion, some of the things supported by that group have fascist and jingoistic overtones. My own opinion though. This observation is mainly from a limited pool of knowledge about the group though, but even still. If you want to have a serious and polite discussion on the matter, feel free to start it here or on my userpage. It'll give me a chance to see how your guy's minds work. I do honestly respect other people's opinions, even if I don't agree (with the exception of full-blown nazis, racists, fascists, and other bigots/authoritarians). And calling someone a fascist in a protest setting is a lot different than in a rational debate. In protests emotions run high and group mentality kicks in, so if one person calls someone a fascist, everyone does. I would probably shout that at you during a protest, but in a real debate things become a lot different, because you can actually reason with people. The Ungovernable Force 01:37, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
- To start off with, my apologies for the ANSWER thing; as I said afterwards, I hadn't read your userpage first. As for how my mind works, for me personally I'm in PW for precisely the reason you dislike ANSWER. I can't stand the fact that unreformed Stalinists dominate street protests, and for me, Protest Warrior is the best way to counteract that. I'm hardly the typical member; I'm not a hardline rightist, major war hawk, Republican ideologue, or anything else. For me, PW is an ally of convenience and nothing more; I spend almost as much time arguing with the denser members as I do the WWP flunkies.
- To sum up, I'm in because I oppose the same people PW does, not because I agree with their every tenet. I refuse to partake in protests in support of Bush; when I choose to go on a march, it's to have fun annoying the piss out of the idiots in the neon-green vests. I can stand PW mainly because it does have a strong libertarian element that's in it for the same reason I am; were it only Bush-bots, I'd just sit out the whole thing in disgust. Rogue 9 07:36, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
- Just join a black bloc, then you could be against bush and disagree with the ANSWER folks ;) To be more serious though, I don't believe that "unreformed Stalinists dominate street protests", most people are just progressives. Of course, ANSWER is a front group for the WWP, but most people associated with ANSWER don't know that, just like most people don't know that Not in Our Name (NION) and World Can't Wait are fronts for the Revolutionary Communist Party USA, which is bascially a Maoist-cult centered around Chairman Bob Avakian. The average protesters have their hearts in the right place, but are either too reformist (the majority) or too authoritarian (the minority, but the ones who run the big coalitions, with the exception of UPFJ, which is really reformist). The interesting thing about it all though, is that before the war, anarchists were actually doing a lot of the organizing, but now these authoritarian communists are more in control of the calls to action and lining up all big mobilizations, whereas us anarchists usually just do break-away marches. Sad in my opinion, because after Seattle, we had a lot of momentum as a movement, and we still have a lot of it, but ANSWER and NION etc are sucking all the spontaneous nature of the protests out.
- I don't know if I can really fault you for working with them even though you disagree with a lot of their ideas, because I too am guilty and often work with progressives and the ocassional authoritarian commie (but I do draw a line with that). I am glad to hear that you don't actually support a lot of their ideas though. Anyway, since it came up, what are you ideas on the minutemen? The Ungovernable Force 05:52, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
- I've had bad experiences with a black bloc before; I'm not eager to throw in with them. I used to run with Anti-Racist Action way back when Clinton was President, I was sixteen years old, and my main problem was the fucking Klan trying to reassert themselves in Indiana, but ARA was too eager for "direct action," as they called it, which could be accurately translated to mean "let's start a riot." I'm also distinctly not an anarchist; while I don't like government overstepping it's bounds, I really don't like situations that don't have the rule of law; true anarchy is power by personal might, which is not a good situation in my eyes. I've known some good guys who go with the black blocs (Schuminweb for instance), but they have too much of a tendency to get way the hell out of control. As for Seattle, the momentum I saw there consisted of that possessed by rocks flying at windows; if wanton destruction is what the anarchist movement wants, then frankly I wish no part in it.
- As for the Minutemen, it's their right to form a citizen's militia if they so choose. Beyond that, I don't have an opinion on them because I haven't seen them at work; if they work for racist reasons then fuck them, but if they're really just in it to hold the border, then I have no problems. For illegal immigration in general, my position is to open up immigration, issue green cards to anyone who wants to work (meaning simple border checks without quotas, allowing anyone without a violent criminal record who wants to work into the country). Then lock down the border; with unrestricted legal immigration in place, anyone who attempts to run the border obviously has criminal intent. This will never be implemented, of course, because it makes sense and Washington doesn't deal in sense. Rogue 9 16:47, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Subhumans Concert
hey, I am really lost about how to talk over wikipedia, so I am sorry if I am fucking up your site. alright, the show is 7:30pm on Thursday, March 30 at The Empire downtown. The bands confirmed are Subhumans, Born/Dead, and World Inferno. All ages see you next week man
this is one of the pages I created
22:30, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Ill get around to finishing it.....later.
Individualist anarchism and anarcho-capitalism
Thank you for your comments on Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Individualist anarchism and anarcho-capitalism. I have closed the debate as no consensus. Please note that this does not preclude further discussion of eventual disposition of the article, including keeping, merging, redirection, or a further nomination for deletion. Again, thank you for your comments. -- Jonel | Speak 03:27, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
KFC Protest
hey, I am going to this protest against KFC on April 1st (its not a joke) and Id like to know if you'd to come too and help me represent the SacFNB with myself and others. information for it is here hope you can make it, man.
- I'll try.
What is this?
Re this... what was that? Did someone get access to your account, or did you have a moment when you were not yourself? Assuming a temporary indiscretion, I won't tag you, but please... no. Herostratus 11:35, 11 February 2006 (UTC)