David Goldschmidt
Since the beginning
Works in San Francisco, California United States of America

Discussions (151) Opportunities (3) Events (0) Jobs (0)
DISCUSSION

Re: mask 2


----- Original Message -----
From: "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <death@zaphod.terminal.org>
To: "David Goldschmidt" <david@personify.tv>
Cc: <list@rhizome.org>; <h3o-o3h@www.god-emil.dk>; <thingist@BBS.THING.NET>
Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 1:22 PM
Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: mask 2

>
> On Tue, 5 Nov 2002, David Goldschmidt wrote:
>
> [+some of the more general statements are applicable to Joseph McElroy as
> well]
>
> > > > there's nothing polite about you
> > >
> > > Quite the opposite; I have been perfectly polite with you.
> > > Your wishful derogatory projections, whose entire intent
> > > is to debase and damage other humans has little to do with
> > > 'my' behavior.
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
>
> Not at all. Not only am I polite,

wrong AGAIN

but I am incredibly gentle
> with you,

thanks ... you're a sweetie

and especially considering the nasty trick you are
> attempting: fucking around with a person's brain mechanisms,

wrong AGAIN. there your "brain mechanisms" ... take responsibility for them

> attempting to unbalance the being,

wrong AGAIN

>drag it away from REALITY

your REALITY

> (which the unconscious brain is apt to do--but then again, 'you'
> do enjoy taking advantage of weaknesses don't you? makes one
> feel so powerful)

wrong AGAIN

by means of SHOUTING and pseudo-logical
> 'arguments', and when the individual is disoriented and
> removed from any base of functioning, attempting to shovel in
> shit and 'punches' that the being would be incapacitated enough to
> deal with.

wrong AGAIN

>
> But then again, the entire reason why you're attempting to 'pick on me'

i'm not picking on you.

> is because you're an idiot psycho-bully

wrong AGAIN

>who thinks it's discovered
> a 'coward'

you are

>--and we all know what should be done to them cowards huh?

try not to generalize

> Forget no fear mudras and the like, beat them assholes up.

wrong AGAIN

>
> And all the meanwhile singing that song about 'i'm myself and nothing
> else, I'm plain and obvious nice logical guy'.

i'm perfectly human ... with both vice and virtue

No, really, you're a nice
> guy.

thanks

Politeness, my dear, hasn't got anything to do with treating you
> like the fantastic human being that you're not.

not fantastic ... perfect (perfectly human). please try and comprehend what
i am writing.

>
> > > You're talking about yourself. Empty labeling is not insightful.
> > > And logic hasn't gota nything to do with 'inspiration'.

your desire to misinterpret is amazing

> >
> > no, i'm talking about you
>
> No, dearest. You are not talking about me

yes, i am

, nor are you capable of
> talking about anything besides yourself

wrong AGAIN

--like it or not.
> And until you deal with your state, the ONLY thing capable
> of talking about will be YOURSELF. And unlike most others,
> who with all of their shortcomings are still capable of recognizing
> this simple fact, you are cowardly enough to not acknowledge
> and realize that.

wrong AGAIN

And your state is that of an ignorant, dumb,
> dense brute.

wrong AGAIN

>
> > > that your problem with conscious wearing of masks is due to
> > > control-freak brain-obsessed murderous impuAlses which cannot
> > > 'accept' anything less than a brutalized, victimized, passive
> > > reflection of a human.
> >
> > wrong AGAIN. your misinterpretations are obvious to all
>
> Direct citations of your words are not interpretations to any degree.

yes, they can be ... i suggest you lookup the term "holistic semantics"

> Secondly, nothing of the sort is 'obvious to all'

yes, it is.

no matter how much
> you delude yourself and stomp your feet.

i do neither

Considering that you're
> incredibly dense, ignorant, and totally swamped over by your ego,

wrong AGAIN

> your claims to be able to 'see' anything would be laughable if they
> weren't so incredulously pathetic and harmful to unsuspecting others.

wrong AGAIN

> Nevermind the 'intimidating' tactic of attempting to pre-empt 'victory'
> by saying it is 'obvious to all'.

a tactic you use repeatedly

>Guess what.

what?

It isn't.

it is

Your wishful
> hallucinations about how the situation is are not_ what the situation
> is,

ok GOD

>and your opinion_ is thoroughly inconsequential.

as is yours

>Take your cheap
> murderous tactics elsewhere.

yes, take your cheap murderous tactics elsewhere.

>
> > > No dearest, there is no filtering here at all.
> >
> > yes, you are.
>
> No, and you can continue frothing, and pretending you can make statements
> of the above, but dearest, you're merely a petty, sub-mediocre idiot.

wrong AGAIN

> You have neither the capacity

yes, i do

>nor the authority to make such statements,

yes, i do

> and to make matters even worse you're degrading yourself to a degree
> at which you are incapable of making any_ statements.

wrong AGAIN

> But then again,
> this impulse of the human to corner itself into sheer idiocy

very weak projection

> is indeed one of the things that interests me in this situation,

what are the others?

> and what's even worse, I_ am not doing it--you're doing it to yourself.

this is your mental masterbation ... not mine

> But thena gain, being so enlightened and aware of the truth, you should
> know that when you attack others, you only attack yourself.

clever spindoctor
is "wrong AGAIN" ad nauseum still a mystery to you?
i doubt it
everyone can see it for what it is ... a defense against your attacks
(delusions)

>
>
> > > Absolutely dearest.
> >
> > clever boy ... clever wordsmith ... clever spindoctor
>
> No 'cleverness' here at all dearest. take your psychotic
> 'patronizing' 'i've figured you out' idiocy elsewhere.

you're just a clever wordsmith ... nothing more.

> Your wishful attempts to misrepresent me

no, you misrepresent me

>as something that
> I am not are merely the impotent kicks of a coward

wrong AGAIN

who is
> afraid to admit his own failures,

wrong AGAIN

>hence needs to project
> the 'problem' as someone else's failure

wrong AGAIN

. (cf. Keef's behavior).
>
> Secondly, you have no capability to discern reality from
> non-reality,

wrong AGAIN

> considering that you exist entirely in the latter,

wrong AGAIN

> so your attempts to make such statements are worthless.

wrong AGAIN

>
> Also, whatever happened to 'free speech' dearest? On multiple
> occasions you've tried to get me to 'shut up'--and this is
> yet another one of those--free speech, but anyone who points
> out David's idiocy is 'clever'.

your desire to misinterpret is amazing

>
> Dearest, I have absolutely no place in my life for idiocies
> such as 'cleverness'

that is what you are ... a clever spindoctor.
you intentinally take things out of context
and then twist them to fit your own personal reality

--which is largely--anda gain--your projecting
> your own motivational impulses onto me.

wrong AGAIN

Moreso, what you're doing
> is looking for inner qualities inside yourself which you 'hate'
> and project them outwardly in some attempt to debase.

another perfect description of your own behavior

>
> And this dearest, is one of the real_ motivations of brute behavior
> (self)-hatred. And it's high-time that it is recognized that
> neither 'warriorship proper' nor self-discipline nor self-control
> nor active_ manifestations are connected to that: rather
> passive idiocy which finds outlets in either brute physical force,
> or brute mental / psychological behavior, and increasingly so this
> is finding place in mediamistic 'expressions' and being attempted
> to be passed on as 'art'. Brutality in the form of words or images
> is brutality, not art.

interesting, i must confess. its too bad your so deluded that
you don't even recognize the brute behavior you exhibit
towards so many others

>
> > > Not at all. And at this point, I do recommend that you get yourself
> > > checked in a mental hospital; considering that this has been
> > > going on (repetition of this idiocy) for over a month,
> >
> > your desire to mis-interpret is amazing
>
> There is no such thing, baby--take your own 'spindoctoring' elsewhere.

wrong AGAIN

> Again, you're doing the only thing you can do--'mirroring' or
> 'shadowing' or 'mimicrying' my behavior and fancying that by this means
> you will achieve the validity of what I do.

wrong AGAIN

> Impotent leech.

i know you are but what am i?

> My behavior is absolutely free of any 'desire' whatsoever.

wrong AGAIN

> Taking theoutward packaging of my words

i've seen you do the same to everyone else. that's what spindoctors do and
that
is all you are. keep spinning the words of others until they fit nicely
into your own
personal reality

>and attempting
> to pass it on as some 'insight' into my behavior is idiotic,
> as well as a cheap trick counting on infantile identification.

"infantile identification"???? very, very weak.

>
> > > I suspect you have a series of serious_ problems, and the last
> > > thing that you are capable of is 'art'.
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
>
> Oh no not wrong at all.

yes, it is

>It's patently obvious

further evidence of your own cheap tactics

>that you're a
> sexually inept, brain-obsessed murderous ape.

i know you are but what am i?

>What a shame that
> the likes of you attempt to present themselves at 'artists'--

wrong AGAIN ... never said i was an artist. i prefer newmedia author or
newmedia editor

> but that's the 'trap' of net.art (and easy access to media) these days:
> every monkey with a computer makes a claim to artistry and dumps
> its psychotic impulses into 'media' without an ounce of responsibility
> of what is being psychically done to 'humanity' overall.

first, humanity is not actionable. you cannot do something/anything to
humanity. it is what it is ...
a reflection of what we are ... for better, for worse, for genius, for
stupidity, for love, for hate

and second, you are a fascist and a censor. you don't
have the right or the qualifications to decide what people do with their
computers

>
> > > But then again, a brief view of your website is quite revealing:
> > > all humans are 'predictable' and 'trapped in hell'.
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
>
> Really? Direct citation again:
>
> Writers and artists
> [of whom David Goldschmid has very_ little_ experience--obviously]

wrong AGAIN

> have been revealing the human experience for thousands of years.
>
> They reveal our humanity ...
> [no they don't--and luckily they don't share your psychotic
> ego-driven obsession]

yes, they do.

>
> and human hell is a very common theme.
> [mr. goldsmidt's interpretation which he is attempting to superimpose
> on 'artists and writers']

not superimposed ... revealed via metaphor.
maybe your not mis-interpreting ... maybe your just stupid

>
> It is a trait that we cannot escape.
> [rather the opposite, and this is what_ writers and artists create]

should probably say "we cannot easily escape".
thanks for the feedback.

>
> Writers and artists are able to express [human hell] because there
> is a certain logic that reveals itself [in the words and actions] of
> someone trapped in hell.
>
> [That is, Mr. Goldschmid is an irresponsible weaking twit, who is unable
> and irresponsible enough to refuse_ dealing with his inner state,
> and as is standard for such behavior will attempt to drag down
> everything with him.

wrong AGAIN

>
> Your own 'personal hell' david is your_ responsibility_.
> Not reflective of 'humanity'.]

"hell" is just one of the states that i examine ... clever spindoctor.
maybe you should ask your buddhist teacher if human hell exists

>
> Additionally CITING_ 'Humans are so damned easy and predictable
> because they are trapped in their condition'.

yes, this is true. what's your point?

>
> And by the way love--pointing out things that you so fervently
> try to HIDE and pretend that are NOT THERE

babbling moron

> in your behavior
> is not 'misinterpretations' (talk about cowardly hiding
> behind your ego).

more babbling

Additionally, trying to convince
> others that you're something you are NOT

which is what?????

>is indeed cowardice,
> and you try to peddle it about as 'sincere' because it's
> 'unconscious.'

??????? you are lost!

However unconscious indeed it may be,
> it's pre-meditated and calculated. I'm Mr. Goldschmidt,
> and I'm honest and flat and myself, really really, please buy it.
> All the while attempting to pretend that the mask that you are wearing
> is not your NARCISSISTIC EGO,

i've said it before and i'll say it again ... you do not read me ... you
only see what you want to see

> but that of a conscious being
> who can perceive others. You sure are.. a Buddha.

you are the one that repeatedly professes enlightenment ... not I

> The compassionate saintly mirror that sees through other humans.

that sees their humanity

> The facts? rather the opposite, a weak spiteful idiot,
> who attempts to project on humans a constricted, weak, flat,
> pigeonholed state,

wrong AGAIN

> because that is the only way you can 'deal'
> with it--ie, by attempting to CONTROL:

wrong AGAIN ... control is an illusion

>
> > Amazing
> > > brute propaganda isn't it?
> >
> > no.
>
> Indeed: your brute propaganda is cheap and submediocre.

yes, your brute propaganda is cheap and submediocre.

>
> > Church is over dearest; nobody is in 'hell'
> >
> > occassionally, everyone is
>
> No dearest, and avoid speaking for 'everyone'.

its my OPINION. unlike you ... who thinks that the voice of GOD re-verbs
from your lips

>You're neither capable
> nor qualified.

neither are you

A far cry from a world leader. Secondly, utilization of
> such large symbolisms as 'hell' to feasibly tamable sensations of anger,
> etc. is psychotic and irresponsible.

wrong AGAIN

Projecting your own impotence
> and inability to deal with these things is one thing, attempting
> to psychologically force identification with such states as the
> 'insecapable status quo'--and attempting to destroy any work
> done in that directions by others is yet another, and moreso
> a violation of a basic human right.

wrong AGAIN

And_ you want this passed on
> as 'free speech'--and you want to abuse the 'constitution' to
> justify your murderous impulses.

wrong AGAIN

> Evenmoreso, you're so dense as to not
> realize that the US constitution applies to the US, and what you're
> doing isa ttempting to 'create hell' for US artists.

wrong AGAIN

>
>
> Lastly, your statement is merely an attempt to drag everyone
> to the 'same level'--'we are all equal, suffering monkeys'.

wrong AGAIN

> The REAL cowardice of an idiot, who cannot stand the idea
> that no 'we are nota ll equal'

[essentially] equal, ya bitch

and that in fact liberation
> from entanglement in such stares (which haven't got anything
> to do with hell) is not only possible, but also a BASIC HUMAN RIGHT.
> Aka dearest 'constitutional freak' the right of LIBERTY.

"freedom from hell" as a basic human right?
and you think my work positions me against this idea?
you are the idiotic, illiterate ape!

> Which you deny, because it's not convinient, and because
> it would reveal you to be the weak irresponsible slug that you are.

wrong AGAIN

>
>
> > > nor predictable.
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
>
> Not at all. And dearest, avoid 'speaking for all'. Humans are (still at
> least) individual entities, with (hopefully) their own voices.

yes, but ... IN GENERAL ... a very predictable voice.

> Have the
> courage and integrity to make something about YOURSELF Monsieur (I'm not
> wearing a mask, really, really, and hence I'm not a coward really
> really). By the way, you've recently admitted to wearing a mask,
> does that make you a coward?

i never said i wasn't wearing a mask ... you did.

> Secondly, fear is present in the majority of humans,
> and only two 'entities' are qualified to deal with it:
> the human itself, or a qualified being. You're neither.

and you say i'm the "murderous brute" ... ??? take a look in the mirror, ya
bitch.

> I suggest you check your 'indignation' towards cowards,
> because you are one,

no, you are

> and so are the majority of humans
> you meet in your life,

arrogant elitist

> and the mark of a 'powerful'
> person is not that of one who threatens to 'beat them up'
> because of their possessing a weakness.

i never said the opposite

> The latter
> is the modus operandi of a psychotic imbecile.

quite true

>
> > Humans are not pitiful weakling-victims trapped
>
> > > anywhere.
> >
> > again, your desire to mis-interpret is amazing
>
> There is no such thing occurring, Mr. Trapped animeau.

yes, you are ... and in very dramatic ways. its quite entertaining

> Your wishful delusions are entirely_ and only_
> existent within your mind and nowhere else.

where else could one's delusions exist?

> My behavior on the other hand is entirely desire-free.

laughable

>
> > Your murderous desire to reduce them to such
> > > is psychotic.
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
> >
>
> Not at all. You are a psycho, and a weak one as well.

i know you are but what am i?

>
>
> > > Nevertheless, you're a perfect example
> >
> > of a human being
>
> No, of a weak and mediocre asshole.

i know you are but what am i?

> Don't attempt to exert
> justification for your abrogation of responsibility with beating
> yourself across the chest about your 'humanity'. Being you aren't
> even close to.

wrong AGAIN

>
> And avoid attempting to 'dissect' my sentences in order to push your
> ego-driven agenda.

hahahahahahhahahahahahahahahhahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahaha
hahahhahahahahahahahhahahahahahahah
ahahahahhahahahahahahahhahahahahah
ahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahaha
hahahahahhahahahahahhaha

again, look in the mirror, ya bitch

> You are an example of what i WROTE,

then what do i say about you?

> not of what you
> wish to sing & dance convince-misrepresent yourself as.

then all of you comments about me are really
about yourself ... which, of course, is what i have
been saying all along.

>
> > of what I refer to in terms of
> > > the necessity for humans to realize that this kind of behvaior is
not
> > > 'imaginary' and does cause actual_ damage to humans overall--
> > > the absolute basest forms of psychick damage--and this does_ exist
> > > (targetted at rhizome + thingist).
> >
> > you just described yourself and your actions perfectly
>
> No dearest, I didn't. I described YOUR actions.

see ABOVE

> Your mediocre childish finger-pointing is not insight.

nor is yours

> And this is in fact a part of the underlying basis of your
> we are all 'weak' psychotism as well as self-professed
> problem with the appearance of 'athority'. Wouldn't
> it be nice if all humans were trapped asleep weaklings?

many are frequently [asleep] ...
some are occassionlly [awake] ...
and a few are frequently [awake]

> Then you could get away with your idiocy and nobody would
> be able to truthfully to point out what you are doing and hold
> you responsible.

lucky for humanity you caught me in time

>
>
> > >
> > > Apparently Mr. david here lives in his own 'personal hell'
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
>
> Oh quite the opposite.

wrong AGAIN

> Your 'mental state' is on display.

which one ... i have many

> Not mine.

because you have no mental state?

And trust me dearest, it's a real possibility.
> You and I are not equal, and i_ am not trapped in self-reflective
> slumber.

yes, you are. and more frequently than most others i have met.
your words reflect two overriding mental states: hell and anger

>
>
> > > which s largely his psychotic overblown ego,
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
>
> Not at all. And no amount of psychotic hammer-head behavior on your part
> will make me 'wrong'.

wrong AGAIN

>
> > accompanied
> > > by self-loathing and hate towards humans,
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
>
> As above.

wrong AGAIN

>
> > and he wants to
> > > lash out
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
>
> Your actions speak for themselves.

you mis-interpret my actions

>
> > at others 'freely'. Because this is what free speech
> > > is about.
> >
> > free speech is more important than property.
>
> It would seem that the writers of the constitution--
> genuinely superior men with rgards to you, are not
> in agreement.

apparently so ... but i stand by my statement

Moreso, what you want is NOT free speech,

wrong AGAIN

> you want the right to irresponsibly mouth off and lash out,

wrong AGAIN

> and this is not free speech. You also_ want whatever you
> say to be accepted as 'word of the law',

wrong AGAIN

just as in the
> the above attmpt at attempting to pass as a fact something
> which isn't,

which of course you were able to recognize
becasue its something you do every time you type a word

and lastly, what you want is the freedom
> to APPROPRIATE other people's 'intellectual' and otherwise
> 'intangible' property--and specifically images.
> Images are the result of the essence-capability, work,
> and effort of individuals--and you have absolutely no
> RIGHTS to the results of other humans work unless
> they choose to, of their own volition to delegate
> such rights to you.

false ... if its put into the public sphere then i have a right to use it.
i have the right to challenge the message and the messanger --
as long as i don't try to sell (aquire fiscal profit) from the effort

just because ordinary citizens don't have millions of dollars to produce
and market their message ... should not inhibit their right to challenge
the messages that are being thrown at them

>
> And that applies to physical property, intellectual
> property, and all other 'intangible' ascpects of the human
> including masks, which area natural_ and necessary_

coward

> quite admirable ascpects of the human and other Beings.

deluded being

>
> > >
> > > How about the personal threats you made towards my physical being?

> >
> > liar. i said that you were a coward living in fear because you
> > intentionally hide behind a mask when you go out in public.
>
> Oh no dearest, I do_ nothing of the sort. I USE masks.

detached, deluded being

> I do not HIDE behind masks. Your attempts at insisting that
> your own programmatic association of HIDING and MASKING is
> an actuality is thoroughly psychotic.

your constant use of the word "psychotic" is very amusing. i get this image
of you
(a tiny little coward of a man) riding around on a bus (scared out of you
mind) and
constantly thinking that everyone you see is psychotic. your a very angry
little man.

> Moreso, this is the impulse of a passively voyeristic and
> crude asshole

wrong AGAIN ... detached, deluded being

who has no capability of understanding and respecting
> the idea of privacy as well as that you have no 'rights'
> to other humans at all. None whatsoever.

wrong AGAIN

>
> > then i said
> > that i thought that it was a good idea because if you ever revealed your
> > [true] self to someone ... they would probable beat the fuck out of you.
>
> No dearest, you said that YOU would 'beat the fuck out of me'.

liar ... (either give the date and subject
heading of the thread where i said that or
forever be known for the liar that you are)

> Don't attempt to change your words.

i'm not

Nevermind the psychotic
> bullyism of attempting to force the 'self' out of its
> natural + conscious veiling by brute threats.

false projection

> The true self of all_ humans is veiled for a reason.

which is ... oh enlightened one ????

>
> Additionally, don't attempt to make it seem like
> your brute impulses belong to 'just anyone' and 'are normal'.
> Most humans in fact don't share your psychotic idiocy.

that's your opinion

>
> > > Hmm.. right.
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
>
> Ever get the feeling that you're shooting blanks?

no

> Because you should be, by now.

wrong AGAIN

>
> > > > > Only in your deluded brain.
>
> > yes, you are
>
> I am not you, ape.

i know you are but what am i?

>
> > >
> > > > > These are no interpretations, nor are they weak.
> > > > > These are your own words.
> > > >
> > > > liar
> > >
> > > No, I am not a liar. Amazing how you won't stop at anything
> > > to brutalize another isn't it?
> >
> > again, you describe yourself perfectly
>
> No dearest. I am not describing myself,

yes, you are

> I am describing you,

no, your not

> and you're not getting away with
> nya nya childish finger pointing.

"nya nya" ???????? laughing

>
> > > > > There have been no lies nor misinterpretations.
> > > >
> > > > yes, you have
> > >
> > > I have what?
> >
> > nothing to offer
>
> Absolutely nothing.

thief. stop stealing from easter philosophy

> Humans are not created to 'offer'
> things to other humans. Nor are they capable of
> offering anything, seeing as all that they have
> has been given and granted anyways.

idiot

> The obsession
> with 'giving and receiving' is a childish-stuck
> in-your-arse energetically vampiric feeding
> mechanism.

amusing

> Nobody on the entire planet owes you anything,
> and the entire meaning of 'giving' proper is functioning
> at one's BEST at all times.

something you know NOTHING about

> C'est tout.

bless you

> There is no 'giving' no 'feeding' no 'someone doing things
> for' etc.

psychotic rantings BLAH, BLAH, BLAH

You're not a baby. And natural_ cooperation
> is the cooperation resulting from independent
> and 'free' individuals co-existing.

that smells like Ayn Rand. are you stealing again?

> The true_ meaning of 'giving'

somethng you know NOTHING about

is cultivation and
> development of personal ability to DO.

not ... to DO ... to BE (DOBE ... or ... doobie ... get it?).
you should ... you really need to relax.

> Not energetic
> leeching,

wrong AGAIN

and NOT taking from others what is not yours,
> and certainly NOT attempting to bash over the head those who
> are ahead of you,

well then you have nothing to worry about because you are the most
retarded person i have ever met

and NOT attempting to 'steal' their
> personal power as you are attempting to do
> HERE,

wrong AGAIN ... you have no power to steal

and with your idiotic insistence on appropriating
> the results of such efforts.
>
> I have absolutely no intentions of 'giving' you anything,
> and especially so considering the worthless scum that you are.

i know you are but what am i?

>
> Things are given in accordance with internal merit, and yours
> is zero.

and what goes around comes around ... KARMA is coming you evil fuck

>
>
> > > You are responsible for your own behavior however,
> > > and direct citation of your words are not 'misinterpretations'.
> >
> > they are when you change the context and/or project incorrect intent
>
> Nobody has changed the context or projected 'incorrect intent'.

yes, you have

> Neither do you know what intent is,

yes, i do

>nor how it works.

yes, i do

> It's a word that you saw me use and now are monkeying around.

you're arrogant enough to believe that crap

> First: you attempted to 'run away' from the original conversation

wrong AGAIN

> by attempting to 'divorce' the conversation from its original
> by screaming 'no' at everything said,

wrong AGAIN. i'm stating "no" because you are an idiot and i disagree
with most of what you say

> and now attempting to say
> the context is changed.

keep spinning doc

> It isn't.

at times, you have used my words out of context

> And your cheap trick was
> predictable from mile away.

you are responsible for your own actions

>
> Secondly, there is no such tning as 'correct' or 'incorrect'
> intent.

yes, there is ... the interpretation of malice in one's words when there was
no malice in the heart

> Thirdly, intent lacks the quality of being projected.

wrong AGAIN

> Again you're simply mimicrying

wrong AGAIN

> words that you see me use
> in attempt to APPROPRIATE the APPEARANCE of someone
> who KNOWS WHAT THEY MEAN nad POSSESSES UNDERSTANDING of
> such matters

becasue you are the only one that understands the meaning of these really
really big words

> (just like you want to POSE as an ARTIST).

wrong AGAIN

>
> Lastly, your DRIVEL is not motivated by INTENT.

"intent" exists because most forms of communication are limited and
impercise.
unles, of course, you are a detaced, deluded fool that has his own
meaning for every single word

> You have none.

yes, i do

You're a brain obsessed raggedy doll, whom anyone /
> anything can and does kick around freely.

wrong AGAIN

INTENT my dearest
> is an internal quality of facing one's true fate, and among
> other things it implies the fully conscious awareness of one's
> initial worthlessness, masks, and lack of power.

wrong AGAIN

>
>
> > > > wrong AGAIN
> > >
> > > No.
> >
> > yes
>
> Impotent noises from an ape.

i know you are but what am i?

>
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Come on, do the 'wrong AGAIN' trick :)
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > only when you are
> > >
> > >
> > > Ah no. You do it for other 'reasons'.
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
>
> Absolutely correct with regards to your bhavior.

wrong AGAIN

>
> > > You are_ responsible for your own behavior.
> > > Don't attempt to abrogate the responsibility
> > > for your murderous brute behavior and psychotic
> > > verbiage to me.
> >
> > you are the murderous neanderthal
>
> You're talking about yourself baby.

no, i'm talking about you

> Repeating what I wrote about you is impotence.

original words from a detached, deluded fool

>
> > >
> > > NOBODY besides you is responsible for what you post.
> >
> > communication is a two person sport.
>
> No it isn't. Communication is not a sport either.

yes, it is. and "sport" was just a metaphor ... ya moron

>
> > you're not reading me.
>
> I am reading_ you quite correctly.

wrong AGAIN

> Your problem is that I'm not buying your facade.

your not a problem ... your quite amusing and a little interesting

>
> > you only see what you want to see.
>
> I 'want' to see nothing dearest.

wrong AGAIN

> I SEE exactly what you are doing as_ you are doing it.

i'm that predictable eh?

> what you want to pass on as 'conversation' is my passively
> accepting, reflecting, and nodding to the pretty icon
> of yourself that you fancy you are.

then ... i guess i should thank you for your time. do you charge by the
hour?

You also want
> your psychotic ignorant 'statements' to be passively
> accepted as true.

wrong AGAIN ... i'm looking for a challenge and instead
all i get is a deluded fool with a mesiah complex.
Seriously, i can get you the number of a good therapist ...
all you have to do is ask. of course, the first step is admitting
that you have a problem ... are you capable of that?

Conversation dearest, is not something
> you're either attempting or capable of.

wrong AGAIN

>
> Only myopic narking derived from your brain,
> attempting to mirror the little bit that is 'perceived'.

very good stuff. is it copyrighted :)

>
> `, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42
>
>

DISCUSSION

Re: 'feedback loop of 'consciousness'


>
> > > > yes, you are
> > >
> > > Facile finger pointing.
> >
> > and you
>
> No, sorry. I am not the wishful projections inside your brain.

wrong AGAIN

> Not at all.
>
> > > No, I am not 'disappointed'. Your wishful projections
> > > are meaningless. And there was no compliment.
> >
> > yes you are ...
>
>
> Sorry, I am not the dlusions inside your brain.

yes, you are sorry

>
> > and yes there was ... and again, thanks for the compliment
>
> There was no compliment. Debase yourself again?

yes there was, and again ... thanks

>
> > >
> > > > liar
> > >
> > > As above: calling me a 'liar' isn't going to get you out of
> > > responsibility.
> >
> > you lied ...
>
> No, I didn't lie. Your e-mails are available to read.
> Citing your own words, if you_ don't like somebody
> or some entity (corporation) you should have a right to
> appropriate and abuse their property (such as logos, trademarks, etc.)
> Additionally, according to your ignorant self, any image that enters
> public domain is public property--ie, you wish to freeload on other
> humans work.

whacked logic from a clever spindoctor and liar -- take your filter off.
here is the original post with my reply:

--K wrote--
> Furthermore, you expressed an incessant desire to see that
> that violation of basic human rights, brutality, ignorance,
> and debasement and devaluation of humans be passed on as
> governmentally enforced laws.

--David replied--
liar"

>
> > > So, care to explain why you fancy that violation of basic human
> > > rights should be passed on as a governmentally supported function?
> >
> > care to explain why you favor the violation of basic human rights?
>
> I don't favor violation of basic human rights, dearest.

yes, you do

> Rather the opposite, which is why I am not letting you off the hook with
> your idiocy.

more twisted logic from a twisted [online persona]

>
>
> > >
> > > > in EVERY way
> > >
> > > More impotent knee-jerks.
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
>
> No, sorry. I have never been 'wrong' with regards to you

yes you have ... you've NEVER been right

in particular,
> nor will I be

yes ... you always will be

, no matter how much you stomp your feets and froth at the
> mouth. You are an ignorant,

wrong AGAIN

>weak imbecile,

wrong AGAIN

who wants to enforce
> his imbecility on the world by means of brute force.

wrong AGAIN

Whatever David
> doesn't LIKE, david has a right to abuse, and the US constitution will
> support that. Not likely.

wrong AGAIN. your interpretations are sooo weak.

>
> > >
> > > > > can you do something besides self-debase and scream?
> > > >
> > > > thanks for asking
> > >
> > > Evidence is : no.
>
> > > I'm not sure in what delusional bubble you live in, but what impulse
> > > drives your 'artistic posturing' is quite evident. You want to
destroy
> > > and misuse that which
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
> >
> > a. has more power than you
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
> >
> > b. you have no ability
> > > to understand
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
> >
> > c. cannot create
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
> >
> > d.threatens your ego.
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
> >
> > >
> > > And even worse, you fancy this self-debasory behavior 'victorious'.
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Rather to the opposite: you're revealing yourself to be the
ignorant,
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
> >
> > > immature brain obsessed ape who is spastically hung up on
> > > 'controlling' and 'murdering'.
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
> >
> >
> > >
> > > so entertain us all and say it again: wrong AGAIN.
> >
> > ibid
>
> Right. You did it so many times, yet I am still not wrong.

yes, you are

>
> So entertain us all, and say it again, you know you want to.

wrong AGAIN. i'm just relpying to your lies and misinterpretations.
i keep my replies short and to-the-point so you don't get too confused.

>
> + be me
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>

DISCUSSION

Re: mask 2


>
> > > No, sorry. I am not the wishful projections inside your brain.
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
>
> The man who shot himself in the foot by screaming 'wrong AGAIN'.
> There have been more pitiful ends.
>
> > > Sorry, I am not the dlusions inside your brain.
> >
> > yes, you are sorry
>
> It's a matter of polite speech, dearest. That's all.

there's nothing polite about you

>
> > >
> > > > and yes there was ... and again, thanks for the compliment
> > >
> > > There was no compliment. Debase yourself again?
> >
> > yes there was, and again ... thanks
>
> No dearest, there was no compliment.
> But I can see how you can be so starved that you hallucinate them.

wrong AGAIN

>
> > whacked logic
>
>
> No logic dearest.

uninspired twit

>
> > from a clever spindoctor and liar
>
> There is no 'spindoctoring' or 'lying'.
> Keep your myopic projections to yourself.

yes, you are

>
> > -- take your filter off.
>
> Nor filtering.

yes, you are

> > here is the original post with my reply:
> >
> > --K wrote--
> > > Furthermore, you expressed an incessant desire to see that
> > > that violation of basic human rights, brutality, ignorance,
> > > and debasement and devaluation of humans be passed on as
> > > governmentally enforced laws.
> >
> > --David replied--
> > liar"
>
> No this was not the original post; however it's quite obvious who is
> trying to be a 'spin doctor'.

yes, it is

>
> > > I don't favor violation of basic human rights, dearest.
> >
> > yes, you do
>
> Only in your deluded wishful soastic impotence.

wrong AGAIN

>
> > > Rather the opposite, which is why I am not letting you off the hook
with
> > > your idiocy.
> >
> > more twisted logic from a twisted [online persona]
>
> There is no 'twisted' logic nor 'twisted' personas.

yes, there is ... and yours is the twistedist

>
>
> > > No, sorry. I have never been 'wrong' with regards to you
> >
> > yes you have ... you've NEVER been right
>
> Au contraire.

yes, you are a contrarian

>
> > in particular,
> > > nor will I be
> >
> > yes ... you always will be
>
> Only in your deluded brain.

wrong AGAIN

>
> > , no matter how much you stomp your feets and froth at the
> > > mouth. You are an ignorant,
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
> >
> > >weak imbecile,
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
> >
> > who wants to enforce
> > > his imbecility on the world by means of brute force.
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
> >
> > Whatever David
> > > doesn't LIKE, david has a right to abuse, and the US constitution
will
> > > support that. Not likely.
> >
> > wrong AGAIN. your interpretations are sooo weak.
>
> These are no interpretations, nor are they weak.
> These are your own words.

liar

>
>
> > > So entertain us all, and say it again, you know you want to.
> >
> > wrong AGAIN. i'm just relpying to your lies and misinterpretations.
>
> No dearest. You're simply in denial.

wrong AGAIN

> There have been no lies nor misinterpretations.

yes, you have

> You made a bunch of ignorant idiot statements,

wrong AGAIN

> now have the courage to take the responsibility for them.

i am not responsible for your mis-interpretations

>
> > i keep my replies short and to-the-point so you don't get too confused.
>
> No dearest, you simply 'deny' anything.

wrong AGAIN

>
> Come on, do the 'wrong AGAIN' trick :)
>

only when you are

>

DISCUSSION

Re: mask 2


>
> > > It's a matter of polite speech, dearest. That's all.
> >
> > there's nothing polite about you
>
> Quite the opposite; I have been perfectly polite with you.
> Your wishful derogatory projections, whose entire intent
> is to debase and damage other humans has little to do with
> 'my' behavior.

wrong AGAIN

>
> > > No dearest, there was no compliment.
> > > But I can see how you can be so starved that you hallucinate them.
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
>
> Not at all.
>
> > >
> > > > whacked logic
> > >
> > >
> > > No logic dearest.
> >
> > uninspired twit
>
> You're talking about yourself. Empty labeling is not insightful.
> And logic hasn't gota nything to do with 'inspiration'.

no, i'm talking about you

>
>
> > >
> > > > from a clever spindoctor and liar
> > >
> > > There is no 'spindoctoring' or 'lying'.
> > > Keep your myopic projections to yourself.
> >
> > yes, you are
>
> No, sorry. Your brutish attempts to force an
> incorrect image are simply supportive what I have written about you:
> that your problem with conscious wearing of masks is due to
> control-freak brain-obsessed murderous impulses which cannot
> 'accept' anything less than a brutalized, victimized, passive
> reflection of a human.

wrong AGAIN. your misinterpretations are obvious to all

>
> > >
> > > > -- take your filter off.
> > >
> > > Nor filtering.
> >
> > yes, you are
>
> No dearest, there is no filtering here at all.

yes, you are.

>
> > > > here is the original post with my reply:
> > > >
> > > > --K wrote--
> > > > > Furthermore, you expressed an incessant desire to see that
> > > > > that violation of basic human rights, brutality, ignorance,
> > > > > and debasement and devaluation of humans be passed on as
> > > > > governmentally enforced laws.
> > > >
> > > > --David replied--
> > > > liar"
> > >
> > > No this was not the original post; however it's quite obvious who is
> > > trying to be a 'spin doctor'.
> >
> > yes, it is
>
> Absolutely dearest.

clever boy ... clever wordsmith ... clever spindoctor

>
> > >
> > > > > I don't favor violation of basic human rights, dearest.
> > > >
> > > > yes, you do
> > >
> > > Only in your deluded wishful soastic impotence.
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
>
> Not at all. And at this point, I do recommend that you get yourself
> checked in a mental hospital; considering that this has been
> going on (repetition of this idiocy) for over a month,

your desire to mis-interpret is amazing

> I suspect you have a series of serious_ problems, and the last
> thing that you are capable of is 'art'.

wrong AGAIN

>
> But then again, a brief view of your website is quite revealing:
> all humans are 'predictable' and 'trapped in hell'.

wrong AGAIN

Amazing
> brute propaganda isn't it?

no.

Church is over dearest; nobody is in 'hell'

occassionally, everyone is

> nor predictable.

wrong AGAIN

Humans are not pitiful weakling-victims trapped
> anywhere.

again, your desire to mis-interpret is amazing

Your murderous desire to reduce them to such
> is psychotic.

wrong AGAIN

>
> Nevertheless, you're a perfect example

of a human being

of what I refer to in terms of
> the necessity for humans to realize that this kind of behvaior is not
> 'imaginary' and does cause actual_ damage to humans overall--
> the absolute basest forms of psychick damage--and this does_ exist
> (targetted at rhizome + thingist).

you just described yourself and your actions perfectly

>
> Apparently Mr. david here lives in his own 'personal hell'

wrong AGAIN

> which s largely his psychotic overblown ego,

wrong AGAIN

accompanied
> by self-loathing and hate towards humans,

wrong AGAIN

and he wants to
> lash out

wrong AGAIN

at others 'freely'. Because this is what free speech
> is about.

free speech is more important than property

>
> How about the personal threats you made towards my physical being?

liar. i said that you were a coward living in fear because you
intentionally hide behind a mask when you go out in public. then i said
that i thought that it was a good idea because if you ever revealed your
[true] self to someone ... they would probable beat the fuck out of you.

>
> Hmm.. right.

wrong AGAIN

>
>
> > > There is no 'twisted' logic nor 'twisted' personas.
> >
> > yes, there is ... and yours is the twistedist
>
> No dearest, I am not emplying any logic at all.
> Your idiotic debasory projections are entirely your problem.
> And that applies not only to 'me' but to others as well.
>
> > yes, you are a contrarian
>
> A contrarian. Ahem.
>

hmmmmmmmm

> > >
> > > > in particular,
> > > > > nor will I be
> > > >
> > > > yes ... you always will be
> > >
> > > Only in your deluded brain.
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
>
> Not at all.

yes, you are

>
> > > These are no interpretations, nor are they weak.
> > > These are your own words.
> >
> > liar
>
> No, I am not a liar. Amazing how you won't stop at anything
> to brutalize another isn't it?

again, you describe yourself perfectly

>
> > >
> > >
> > > > > So entertain us all, and say it again, you know you want to.
> > > >
> > > > wrong AGAIN. i'm just relpying to your lies and misinterpretations.
> > >
> > > No dearest. You're simply in denial.
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
>
> No.

yes

>
> > > There have been no lies nor misinterpretations.
> >
> > yes, you have
>
> I have what?

nothing to offer

>
> > > You made a bunch of ignorant idiot statements,
> >
> > wrong AGAIN
>
> No.

yes

>
> > > now have the courage to take the responsibility for them.
> >
> > i am not responsible for your mis-interpretations
>
> You are responsible for your own behavior however,
> and direct citation of your words are not 'misinterpretations'.

they are when you change the context and/or project incorrect intent

>
> > wrong AGAIN
>
> No.

yes

>
> > >
> > > Come on, do the 'wrong AGAIN' trick :)
> > >
> >
> > only when you are
>
>
> Ah no. You do it for other 'reasons'.

wrong AGAIN

> You are_ responsible for your own behavior.
> Don't attempt to abrogate the responsibility
> for your murderous brute behavior and psychotic
> verbiage to me.

you are the murderous neanderthal

>
> NOBODY besides you is responsible for what you post.

communication is a two person sport. you're not reading me. you only see
what you want to see.

>
>
>

DISCUSSION

"mediated instructional activities" -- new Copyright Law


very cool. but the instructors still have to
figure out how to get past the encryption
technologies in order to use specific elements within the content.

david goldschmidt

New Copyright Law Frees Educators to Use Copyrighted Works Online

Washington -- The U.S. Copyright Office announced on Tuesday that
President Bush on Saturday signed into law the 21st Century Department of
Justice Appropriations Authorization Act (H.R. 2215), which includes the
Technology, Education, and Copyright Harmonization (TEACH) Act. Of
importance is the new law's amendment to the Copyright Act, which provides
increased flexibility for accredited, nonprofit educational institutions
to use the Internet to provide copyrighted materials to students enrolled
in distance education programs. The amendment allows professors to use
online music, movies and other copyrighted materials for "mediated
instructional activities," without permission from or payment to copyright
holders. It also re-establishes this particular "fair use" of a
copyrighted work -- still preserved for non-digital copyrights -- that was
made illegal under 1998's Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c107:1:./temp/~c107xLyiw9:e484010: