Comments on: Ethics of Collapse

By: In Pursuit of Mysteries » Blog Archive » Whoa…Meltdown, dude!

In Pursuit of Mysteries » Blog Archive » Whoa…Meltdown, dude! — Mon, 10 Apr 2006 06:46:34 +0000

[…] I’ve saved off the post but there is no reason to post it really and given the tension, it seems wise not to throw more fuel on this particular fire. Jason or Mike on the site have deleted it and it was clearly spurred by the conversations on Friday and last night into today. I do hope that people can take a deep breath, have a long talk, and not blow this out of proportion. I certainly don’t think it is necessary for Anthropik to do some sort of purge in order to remove people. People rant and people say things but they are rarely as simple as their interactions online. […]

By: Mike Godesky

Mike Godesky — Mon, 10 Apr 2006 04:03:29 +0000

You know what? This thread has outlived its usefulness. I’m closing it.

I’ve already said everything I have to say on the matter. If you guys want to continue this course of personal mudslinging, take it off the site.

To those who at least tried to have an intelligent discussion here, I apologize. But that’s the way it goes sometimes.

And I think it’s important that we all remember that the internet is serious business.

By: Benjamin Shender

Benjamin Shender — Mon, 10 Apr 2006 03:58:50 +0000

Mike, I’m not trying to rewrite history. Miranda made a post saying that she was depressed, and that she was looking foward to life after the collapse. Everyone was very supportive until Al. Al missunderstood the deal and attacked. You and Jason joined the battle on Al’s side. I defended Miranda. The worst part was that you didn’t attack Miranda’s article. You attacked Miranda, Al’s strawman, and me for defending Miranda. That’s what happened. Deal or don’t. But if you don’t want to discuss the issues at hand, be silent.

I know what the definition of a sociopath is. And I’m pretty sure I’m talking to one right now.

Awww, are you an Al breaking up? You two were such a sweet couple.

By: M

Mon, 10 Apr 2006 03:25:31 +0000

Frankly, I couldn’t care if I came off as callous and cruel.
The post in question did in fact help me make decisions.
It made me realize what is and Is NOT important to me. Who is and who is not important to me.
Where my loyalties truly lie.
That people will treat you like shit when you are at your lowest low without caring, because they in turn are callous and cruel.
That people listen to the loudest voice in the crowd, and not the ones trying hard to speak the truth.
You, jason, al, you don’t know me.
You don’t know the pain I feel when I think of the mass deaths of people.
I’ve had to hold back the tears at times, same as Giuli. But I do look forward, I do see clearly what life could be like years from now.
And yes, it is good.
You can call me callous, but it wont bother me, as you don’t know me and I don’t know you.
The person that knows me extremely well, Ben, is the one that defended me. go figure.
No way is there actually something to that!

By: Mike Godesky

Mike Godesky — Mon, 10 Apr 2006 03:15:32 +0000

Still trying to make the discussion appear to be about something it wasn’t, Ben? I guess I can’t blame you, since it’s the only way you might be able to come out of it not looking like a monster.

Frankly, if it had been a simple misunderstanding, it might have been okay. That’s what I assumed it was at first, which is why I didn’t post right away. But your “explanations” only made you sound more callous, not less. So yeah, I didn’t post until after Al. This may come as a shock to you, but I have other things to do with my time than to monitor the site 24 hours a day. By the time I had caught up, you and Al were already going at it. By the time I woke up the next morning, the thread had already been closed. But I assure you, I don’t need anyone else’s help to recognize the sort of disgusting disregard for human life that you demonstrated in your posts.

I know what the definition of a sociopath is. And I’m pretty sure I’m talking to one right now.

By: Benjamin Shender

Benjamin Shender — Mon, 10 Apr 2006 02:52:17 +0000

Sorry, Miranda was gleefull about one thing. Enjoying the fullness and sweetness of life so long denied us. What a monster.

By: Benjamin Shender

Benjamin Shender — Mon, 10 Apr 2006 02:50:45 +0000

I didn’t say collapse. I said crash. Miranda didn’t say crash, she said collapse.

Never did Miranda “gleefully” anything. If you have a problem with something being said you should ask a question. It seems that you instead chose to keep your own counsel. And once Al spoke up you jumped in. Apparently you were insufficently sure of you conclusion then. You and Jason said nothing about it personally or publically until Al said something. Apparently, unknown to me, Miranda has repeatedly said such things. Unknown to me, although neither of you talk with her much at all, especially compared to me. Really, it seems that you weren’t responding to the article at all. You were responding to Al. You chose to ignore Miranda’s post and respond postively to Al. The fact that Al chose missunderstand and ignore Miranda (despite her repeated attempts to explain) and to then attack her was incidental. Your callus disregard for another life, sub-human or not, disgusts me. And your claims of compassion seem the hypocritical posturing of a monster. Do you know the defintion of a sociopath, Mike?

By: Miranda Belcher

Miranda Belcher — Mon, 10 Apr 2006 02:46:30 +0000

yes Mike, I am laughing at you. I wasn’t intially, but I certainly am now. I could care less if you are loyal to me. You want to know what I meant? Obviously the 3 of you, yes it was only 3 that apparently didn’t understand, of you cared to listen when I’ve said it before.
Do I want the death of people? No. You know what I do want? I want to see the world the way it will be AFTER the collapse. I want to live life with fullness after the Collapse. I want to love and live and be happy in my life with those that I love, those that are my family, my tribe, my friends, in the world that will be after the collapse.
If that makes me selfish, some “Mirandroid” (that’s rich by the way), then frankly, I don’t give a damn anymore what you think of me.
Clearly you didn’t care to listen before, so why should i care if you listen now?
You aren’t bloody likely to.
It anyone’s name as been smeared here, it’s been mine, and Ben’s. Not anthropik’s.
The smearing comes from a misunderstanding and then playing up that misunderstanding.
Like I said, I don’t for loyalty from you or anyone else in Anthropik. Why? Because if the “tribe” of Anthropik is going to act as such to me, essentially ignore what I’m saying and stating flat out that they don’t give a shit about what I feel, I’m done.
i’m sure jason will be happy when he returns.

By: Mike Godesky

Mike Godesky — Mon, 10 Apr 2006 02:37:51 +0000

Hahahahaha.

You’re laughing at me now? I’ll be sure to remember that.

I pointed out the fact that Ben in fact did say something!

Yes, he did. Just nothing productive. If anyone has a problem with something that somebody else wrote, they’re free to say so. That’s the nature of a public thread. Ben didn’t do that. He just came in and started crying about how we’re picking on him.

So you are saying that Al is in the right for essentially putting Ben down because of something Ben said in a past thread?

Al has his opinion, and quite frankly, I can’t blame him for it. You might not like it, but we’re always judged on our past actions. And in that thread, Ben certainly did work hard for the title of “jerk.” The only thing I can say against Al is that actually calling him a jerk is rather unproductive. It would have been better had he actually explained what Ben said that makes him a jerk, and it is quite a lengthy list to choose from. On the other hand, I’m not too inclined at the moment to particularly care whether Ben’s feelings were hurt.

I love the loyalty at this site.

You want to talk about loyalty? All right. Let’s talk about your loyalty. The access you were given to post on this site came with a trust. A trust that says you don’t use that access to post material that makes us all look like a bunch of unfeeling robots, and you don’t use it to make threats against other people. You broke that trust. So guess what? You haven’t earned any loyalty from me.

Mike. Al was the first person on that thread to mention the crash at all. No one else was talking about it or mentioned it. Go read the post this time, and the responses.

Oh, really? Because I actually did read it, and the first mention of collapse I see is in the first God damn line where Mirandroid here says, “Well, come on already, Collapse Already!!!” So if people not reading the whole thread really annoys you that much, maybe you should try reading it yourself.

By: Benjamin Shender

Benjamin Shender — Mon, 10 Apr 2006 02:15:23 +0000

Mike. Al was the first person on that thread to mention the crash at all. No one else was talking about it or mentioned it. Go read the post this time, and the responses. Until Al decided to take a jab at a strawman no one said a word about the crash at all. The entire conversation was about the world post-collapse. If you can’t be troubled to read the article than you can’t be troubled to state your opinion on it. I think that’s the part that annoys me the most about all this. Not the pointless ad hominums. Not the hyposcrasy of the responses. Not the lies. Not diseet. Not the continuation of an argument long past the point of usefulness. I’m annoyed that Miranda and I are still being taken to ask about something we never said, don’t believe, and don’t understand where it came from. Read the article, both of you. And then come back and we can all practice some of this compassion that you claim to be your overriding ethical principle and defintion of humanity.