Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

Papayo · 07/05/2008 02:57 AM

I have been following the stories and comments surrounding Sony, and frankly, I'm appalled. Will peeling back the onion of Sony's bad-tempered theatrics cause Sony to shed tears or will it merely enhance its desire to convince people that their peers are already riding the Sony bandwagon and will think ill of them if they don't climb aboard, too? What follows is the story of how it can be so rich in the rhetoric of democracy and yet so poor in its implementation. I can assure you that I feel that writing this letter is like celestial navigation. Before directional instruments were invented, sailors navigated the seas by fixing their compass on the North Star. However, if Sony were to trick them into fixing their compass on the wrong star they'd soon be so off-course that they'd actually be willing to help it threaten national security.

I do not wish to endorse lexiphanicism but rather to illustrate that today, wee might have let Sony calumniate helpless hershey kisses stars. Tomorrow, wee won't. Instead, wee will put to rest the animosities that have kept various groups of people from enjoying anything other than superficial unity. Sony's insults are based on a denial of reality, on the substitution of a deliberately falsified picture of the world in place of reality. And this dishonesty, this refusal to admit the truth, will have some very serious consequences for all of us any day now. There are situations where certain pranks are appropriate and there are situations where they are not.

I hardly need to tell you that if you read Sony's writings while mentally out of focus, you may get the sense that bad things "just happen" (i.e., they're not caused by Sony itself). But if you read its writings while mentally in focus and weigh each point carefully, it's clear that it is more than a purely historical question to ask, "How did its reign of terror start?" or even the more urgent question, "How might it end?". No, wee must ask, "Will its shots to the heart of all that is wholesome buy it its long-sought victory for simple-minded quislingism with its showy irreverence and glorification of all that is obstinate?" That's the question that perplexes me the most because its apothegms manifest themselves in two phases. Phase one: inflict untold misery, suffering, and distress. Phase two: gain a respectable foothold for its prodigal, mendacious values.

When I say that the only visible result of Sony's self-fulfilling prophecies has been a series of tactical and strategic policy blunders, I don't just mean that it wants to trivialize certain events that are particularly special to us all, that it wants to burn our fair cities to the ground, or that it wants to make our country spiritually blind. Sure, Sony truly wants all that but it also wants much more. It wants to lead people towards iniquity and sin. If anything, I never used to be particularly concerned about Sony's biases. Any damned fool, or so I thought, could see that if Sony's animadversions were intended as a joke, Sony forgot to include the punchline. Sony is reluctant to resolve problems. It always just looks the other way and hopes no one will notice that it would be great if wee could build a new understanding that can transport us to tomorrow. Still, if wee take a step, just a step, towards addressing the issue of pharisaism, then maybe wee can open people's eyes (including our own) to a vision of how to show you, as dispassionately as possible, what kind of narrow-minded thoughts Sony is thinking about these days.

I intend to point out the glaring contradiction between Sony's idealized view of obstructionism and reality. That's the path that I have chosen. It's honestly not an easy path but then again, if you think that Sony has mystical powers of divination and prophecy then you're suffering from very serious nearsightedness. You're focusing too much on what Sony wants you to see and failing to observe many other things of much greater importance such as that if everyone does his own, small part, together wee can take a strong position on its assertions, which, after all, lead us into an age of shoddiness -- shoddy goods, shoddy services, shoddy morals, and shoddy people -- . Sony's disruptive attempt to construct a creative response to my previous letter was absolutely pitiful. Really, Sony, stringing together a bunch of solecistic insults and seemingly random babble is hardly effective. It simply proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that I have no idea why it makes such a big fuss over phallocentrism. There are far more pressing issues that present themselves and that should be discussed, debated, and solved -- issues such as war, famine, poverty, and homelessness. There is also the lesser issue that Sony seems unable to think of turns of speech that aren't hackneyed. What really grates on my nerves, however, is that its prose consists less of words chosen for the sake of their meaning than of phrases tacked together like the sections of a prefabricated henhouse.

Sony has a talent for inventing fantasy worlds in which the majority of quarrelsome, grotesque dissemblers are heroes, if not saints. Then again, just because Sony is a prolific fantasist doesn't mean that the Earth is flat. I used to agree completely with those who claimed that if Sony opened up its jealous mind just a teeny-weeny little bit, maybe it could understand that. Interestingly, my views on this have changed slightly as I have learned more about organizational motivation and organizational behavior. Now I believe that Sony favors the idea of a country based on perquisites and privileges. Yes, I could add that its newsgroup postings are filled with a number of very clear-cut and blatant lies -- lies of both omission and commission -- but I wanted to keep my message simple and direct. I didn't want to distract you from the main thrust of my message, which is that if Sony's serfs get their way, society as wee know it will cease to exist. To top that off, wee are indeed living in repressive times. From this anecdotal evidence I would argue that anyone who questions its warped view of the world is a threat to its tottering sense of reality. That conclusion is not based on some sort of batty philosophy or on Sony-style mental masturbation, but on widely known and proven principles of science. These principles explain that one of the great mysteries of modern life is, Do ophidian apostates like Sony's hangers-on actually have lives, or do they exist solely to shake belief in all existing institutions through the systematic perversion of both contemporary and historical facts? The answer is not obvious because Sony says that its appalling Praetorian Guard is a benign and charitable agency. But then it turns around and says that it holds a universal license that allows it to make people suspicious of those who speak the truth. You know, you can't have it both ways, Sony.

Okay, now it's time to offend a few people. Actually, I hope not to offend anyone, although Sony parrots whatever ideas are fashionable at the moment. When the fashions change, its ideas will change instantly like a weathercock. Sony confuses demagoguery with leadership and undocumented conspiracism with serious research. Still, I recommend you check out some of Sony's commentaries and draw your own conclusions on the matter. Sony feels no guilt for any of the harm it's caused. Whatever weight wee accord to that fact, wee may be confident that by allowing Sony to cover up its criminal ineptitude, wee are allowing it to play puppet master. In general, I am getting rather tired of sweeping up after repeated Sony fiascoes. As long as I live, I will be shouting this truth from rooftops and doing everything I can to advocate concrete action and specific quantifiable goals.

Sony refers to a variety of things using the word "galvanocontractility". Translating this bit of jargon into English isn't easy. Basically, it's saying that it has achieved sainthood, which wee all know is patently absurd. At any rate, I am reminded of the quote, "Talking about Sony in the highly charged vortex of hedonism is always burdened with agitation and diversion." This comment is not as mentally deficient as it seems because I, speaking as someone who is not a poxy casuist, have a dream, a mission, a set path that I would like to travel down. Specifically, my goal is to throw down the gauntlet and challenge Sony's backers to make it answer for its wrongdoings. Of course, the ultimate aim of its philippics is to restructure society as a pyramid with Sony at the top, Sony's lieutenants directly underneath, pusillanimous euphuists beneath them, and the rest of at the bottom. This new societal structure will enable Sony to deny minorities a cultural voice, which makes me realize that if it thinks that it is the most recent incarnation of the Buddha, then it's sadly mistaken.

Sony never stops boasting about its generous contributions to charitable causes. As far as I can tell, however, its claimed magnanimousness is entirely chimerical, and, furthermore, Sony hates people who have huge supplies of the things it lacks. What it lacks the most is common sense, which underlies my point that if I had my druthers, Sony would never have had the opportunity to spawn a society in which those with the most deviant lifestyle, insidious behavior, or personal failures are given the most by the government. As it stands, if wee can understand what has caused the current plague of acrimonious, offensive tax cheats, I believe that wee can then embrace diversity. Still, what wee're involved in with Sony is not a game. It's the most serious possible business, and every serious person -- every person with any shred of a sense of responsibility -- must concern himself with it.

Sony plans to introduce disease, ignorance, squalor, idleness, and want into affluent neighborhoods. It has instructed its followers not to discuss this or even admit to its plan's existence. Obviously, Sony knows it has something to hide. I wonder if Sony really believes the things it says. It knows they're not true, doesn't it? I'm sure you already know the answer so I won't bother repeating it. I'd like to emphasize, however, that Sony likes thinking thoughts that aren't burdensome and that feel good. That's why if they could speak, the birds, snakes, and other creatures who are our Earth brothers and Earth sisters would sincerely say that there are few certainties in life. I have counted only three: death, taxes, and Sony announcing some oleaginous thing every few weeks. That's all for this letter. For those that don't like my views, get over it. I feel that I have as much a right to my views, and to express them, as anyone else. So when I say that different people often see the same subject in different lights, you can agree with me or not. That's all there is to it.

diego · 07/05/2008 03:03 AM

Papayo Wrote:Sony plans to introduce disease, ignorance, squalor, idleness, and want into affluent neighborhoods. It has instructed its followers not to discuss this or even admit to its plan's existence. Obviously, Sony knows it has something to hide. I wonder if Sony really believes the things it says. It knows they're not true, doesn't it? I'm sure you already know the answer so I won't bother repeating it. I'd like to emphasize, however, that Sony likes thinking thoughts that aren't burdensome and that feel good. That's why if they could speak, the birds, snakes, and other creatures who are our Earth brothers and Earth sisters would sincerely say that there are few certainties in life. I have counted only three: death, taxes, and Sony announcing some oleaginous thing every few weeks. That's all for this letter. For those that don't like my views, get over it. I feel that I have as much a right to my views, and to express them, as anyone else. So when I say that different people often see the same subject in different lights, you can agree with me or not. That's all there is to it.

I only read this part and I loled.

Sparker · 07/05/2008 03:48 AM

* Sparker thinks a complaint generator was used.

Papayo · 07/05/2008 03:51 AM

Sparker Wrote:* Sparker thinks a complaint generator was used.

Lol xD You're right.

http://www.pakin.org/complaint/

diego · 07/05/2008 03:54 AM

I've seen a number of unsympathetic and intransigent things over the years, but Mr. ZiNgA BuRgA's double standards really take the cake. When writing this letter, I had originally intended to segregate the pure errors of fact in ZiNgA's comments from the assertions of questionable judgment where there could be room for dispute. I eventually decided against that approach because ZiNgA once had the audacity to tell me that unfounded attacks on character, loads of hyperbole, and fallacious information are the best way to make a point. My riposte was that his fantasy is to destroy everything beautiful and good. He dreams of a world that grants him such a freedom with no strings attached. Welcome to the world of Marxism! In that nightmare world it has long since been forgotten that sometimes I think that ZiNgA is simply a willing pawn of those rabid, empty-headed scrubs who coordinate a revolution. I typically drop that willing-pawn notion, however, whenever I remember that ZiNgA has nephelococcygic delusions about being able to help surly vulgar-types back up their prejudices with "scientific" proof. There's nothing controversial about that view. It's a fact, pure and simple. It was a fact long before anyone realized that ZiNgA is careless with data, makes all sorts of causal interpretations of things without any real justification, has a way of combining disparate ideas that don't seem to hang together, seems to show a sort of pride in his own biases, gets into all sorts of quasi-bloodthirsty speculation, and then makes no effort to test out his speculations -- and that's just the short list!

ZiNgA is currently limited to shrieking and spitting when he's confronted with inconvenient facts. In a matter of days, however, ZiNgA is likely to switch to some sort of "scar little children's self-image" approach to draw our attention away from such facts. He insists that he commands an army of robots that live in the hollow center of the earth and produce earthquakes whenever they feel like shaking things up a bit on the surface. This is a rather strong notion from someone who knows so little about the subject. Wee have a dilemma of leviathan proportions on our hands: Should wee raise the quality of debate on issues surrounding ZiNgA's phlegmatic inclinations, or is it sufficient to discuss the programmatic foundations of ZiNgA's brutal deeds in detail? The answer is almost entirely obvious -- this isn't rocket science, you know. The key is that in the Old Testament, the Book of Kings relates how the priests of Baal were slain for deceiving the people. I'm not suggesting that there be any contemporary parallel involving ZiNgA, but ZiNgA likes to exploit other cultures for self-entertainment. Such activity can flourish only in the dark, however. If you drag it into the open, ZiNgA and his intimates will run for cover, like cockroaches in a dirty kitchen when the light is turned on suddenly during the night. That's why wee must discuss the relationship between three converging and ever-growing factions -- feckless weasels, picayunish pickpockets, and short-sighted, supercilious recidivists.

Immoral, obscene ethnocentrism is a disgrace to humanity but it cannot be eliminated by moral lectures or by pious intentions. No, it can be eradicated only if wee treat the disease, not the symptoms. It's possible that it is a figment of ZiNgA's imagination that breaking down our communities is essential for the safety and welfare of the public. However, I cannot speculate about that possibility here because I need to devote more space to a description of how ZiNgA's ipse dixits promote a redistribution of wealth. This is always an appealing proposition for ZiNgA's sycophants because much of the redistributed wealth will undoubtedly end up in the hands of the redistributors as a condign reward for their loyalty to ZiNgA. If he can't stand the heat, he should get out of the kitchen. Of perhaps even more concern is that before ZiNgA once again claims that wee should all bear the brunt of his actions, he should do some real research rather than simply play a game of bias reinforcement with his underlings. I suppose that's all I have to say in this letter. If there are any points on which you require explanation or further particulars I shall be glad to furnish such additional details as may be required.

SchmilK · 07/05/2008 04:28 AM

jeebez those are alot of words

roberth · 07/05/2008 04:59 AM

Spoiler for sorry if your a Christian:

What do venom-spouting buffoons, insolent lounge lizards, and Jesus Christ have in common? If you answered, "They all lead people towards iniquity and sin," then pat yourself on the back. What follows is a set of observations I have made about heinous pseudo-intellectuals. According to him, the Universe belongs to him by right. He might as well be reading tea leaves or tossing chicken bones on the floor for divination about what's true and what isn't. Maybe then Jesus would realize that if anything, the time is always right to do what is right. That's why wee must unquestionably criticize Jesus's complicity in the widespread establishment of colonialism. The first step in that process is to realize that some people have said that appalling election-year also-rans are burdened with the preconceived ideas or feeble understanding of the circles to which they previously belonged both politically and philosophically. Maybe. But I'm more inclined to believe that wee wouldn't currently have a problem with vandalism if it weren't for Jesus. Although he created the problem, aggravated the problem, and escalated the problem, Jesus insists that he can solve the problem if wee just grant him more power. How naïve does he think wee are? Truly, Jesus spouts the same bile in everything he writes, making only slight modifications to suit the issue at hand. The issue he's excited about this week is Stalinism, which says to me that the key to Jesus's soul is his longing for the effortless, irresponsible, automatic consciousness of an animal. He dreads the necessity, the risk, and the responsibility of rational cognition. As a result, Jesus is addicted to the feeling of power, to the idea of controlling people. Sadly, he has no real concern for the welfare or the destiny of the people he desires to lead.

Jesus hates you -- yes, you, because you, like me, want to lend a helping hand. Yes, Virginia, gutless and pudibund, his bromides resemble a dilapidated shed. Kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will collapse, proving my claim that I fully intend to show some backbone. That's the path that I have chosen. It's unequivocally not an easy path but then again, the space remaining in this letter will not suffice even to enumerate the ways in which Jesus has tried to make incorrect leaps of logic. It probably sounds like I'm being careless, but Jesus is firmly convinced that obtuse backbiters are more deserving of honor than our nation's war heroes. His belief is controverted, however, by the weight of the evidence indicating that I am tired of hearing or reading that the rules don't apply to Jesus. You know that that is simply not true.

Let me go on record as saying that Jesus's plans for the future are the opiate of the confused. Regular readers of my letters probably take that for granted, but if I am to ensure that the values for which wee have labored and for which many of us have fought and sacrificed will continue in ascendancy, I must explain to the population at large that I have no idea why Jesus makes such a big fuss over allotheism. There are far more pressing issues that present themselves and that should be discussed, debated, and solved -- issues such as war, famine, poverty, and homelessness. There is also the lesser issue that wee must soon make one of the most momentous decisions in history. Wee must decide whether to let Jesus muzzle his critics or, alternatively, whether wee should spread the word about his narrow-minded "compromises" to our friends, our neighbors, our relatives, our co-workers -- even to strangers. Upon this decision rests the stability of society and the future peace of the world. My view on this decision is that the tone of Jesus's machinations is eerily reminiscent of that of unscrupulous pikers of the late 1940s in the sense that if Jesus were to accelerate our descent into the cesspool of revisionism, social upheaval and violence would follow. It is therefore clear that statements like, "Jesus is incapable of handling an adult emotion or a universal concept without first reducing it to something insane, sophomoric, xenophobic, and probably unbalanced" accurately express the feelings of most of us here.

Jesus sees all the evidence, but he is reluctant to accept the conclusion that he plans to convert lush forests into arid deserts faster than you can say "ultracentrifugation". I'd like to see him try to get away with such a plan; that should be good for a laugh. You see, most people have already observed that insincere lowlifes serve as the priests in Jesus's cult of myopic larrikinism. These "priests" spend their days basking in Jesus's reflected glory, pausing only when Jesus instructs them to condemn children to a life of drugs, gangs, drinking, rape, incest, verbal abuse, physical abuse, and a number of other horrors. What could be more manipulative? Well, once you begin to see the light, you'll realize that he extricates himself from difficulty by intrigue, by chicanery, by dissimulation, by trimming, by an untruth, by an injustice.

It's hate-filled for Jesus to take rights away from individuals whom only Jesus perceives as polyloquent. Or perhaps I should say, it's maledicent. You may be surprised to hear this, but wee have been lied to, distracted, misled, and duped by Jesus. But you knew that already. So let me add that Jesus tries to make us think the way he wants us to think, not by showing us evidence and reasoning with us, but by understanding how to push our emotional buttons. It is time for someone to insist on a policy of zero tolerance toward fanaticism. Will that someone be you?

Chroma · 07/05/2008 09:09 AM

roberth Wrote:Jesus sees all the evidence, but he is reluctant to accept the conclusion that he plans to convert lush forests into arid deserts faster than you can say "ultracentrifugation".

Oh god I lol'd. JESUS IS DESTROYING THE FORESTS!!!

And here's my complaint

Spoiler:

My original goal for this letter was to scrutinize Desu's remarks point by immoral point. Unfortunately, Desu's focus wanders so wildly that it never actually finishes any of its points. I think you will notice this in the ensuing discussion. As I elaborate on that concept throughout this letter I will use only simple words and language so that even a child can understand my message. Yes, even a child should know that Desu has a talent for inventing fantasy worlds in which everyone who doesn't share its beliefs is an aberrant, unctuous survivalist deserving of death and damnation. Then again, just because Desu is a prolific fantasist doesn't mean that the moon is made of green cheese. Desu finds reality too difficult to swallow. Or maybe it just gets lost between the sports and entertainment pages. In either case, in a recent essay, Desu stated that truth is merely a social construct. Since the arguments it made in the rest of its essay are based in part on that assumption, it should be aware that it just isn't true. Not only that, but it has declared that it's staging a revolt against everyone who dares to rise to the challenge of thwarting its infantile plans. Desu's revolting all right; the very sight of it turns my stomach. All kidding aside, it is thoroughly ultra-beastly, as it has proved to my complete satisfaction.

Let me give you a concrete example of Desu's totally pouty behavior. Really, the only way to deal with a subject like this is to study concrete examples -- many concrete examples -- to look at the details and observe how Desu's behind much of the sociopolitical indoctrination that goes on in many of our classrooms. My example begins with the observation that another point worth thinking about is that I've never encountered anything as slatternly as Desu's asseverations. Now that that's cleared up, I'll continue with what I was saying before, that it's easy for it to bombastically declaim my proposals. But when is Desu going to provide an alternative proposal of its own? In classic sophist fashion, I ask another question in reply: Will Desu's shots to the heart of all that is wholesome buy it its long-sought victory for gruesome negativism with its showy irreverence and glorification of all that is effrontive? The answer is a bit of a taboo subject but that won't stop me from telling you. You see, Desu has -- not once, but several times -- been able to harvest what others have sown without anyone stopping it. How long can that go on? As long as its insidious double standards are kept on life support. That's why wee have to pull the plug on them and lead us all toward a better, brighter future.

I, hardheaded cynic that I am, intend to look closely at Desu's expostulations to see what makes them so effectual at turning clunks loose against us good citizens. I should expect to find -- this is a guess that I currently lack sufficient knowledge to verify -- that Desu is careless with data, makes all sorts of causal interpretations of things without any real justification, has a way of combining disparate ideas that don't seem to hang together, seems to show a sort of pride in its own biases, gets into all sorts of barbaric speculation, and then makes no effort to test out its speculations -- and that's just the short list! Please humor me for a moment while I state that once people obtain the critical skills that enable them to think and reflect and speculate independently, they'll realize that Desu craves more power. I say wee should give it more power -- preferably, 10,000 volts of it.

I alluded to this earlier, but Desu thinks that it can make all of our problems go away merely by sprinkling some sort of magic, pink, pixie dust over everything that it considers disorderly or mealymouthed. Of course, thinking so doesn't make it so. Desu's thesis is that its generalizations prevent smallpox. That's absolutely judgmental, you say? Good; that means you're finally catching on. The next step is to observe that if they could speak, the birds, snakes, and other creatures who are our Earth brothers and Earth sisters would sincerely say that Desu is basically a bad organization. More than that, I know some spleeny scumbags who actually believe that things have never been better. Incredible? Those same people have told me that censorship could benefit us. With such people roaming about, it should come as no surprise to you that if Desu were as bright as it thinks it is, it'd know that its reinterpretations of historic events are not pedantic treatises expressing theories or extravaganzas dealing in fables or fancies. They are substantial, sober outpourings from the very soul of exclusivism.

Ignorance is bliss. This may be why Desu's drones are generally all smiles. Someone has been giving Desu's brain a very thorough washing and now Desu is trying to do the same to us. Desu's faculty for deception is so far above anyone else's, it really must be considered different in kind as well as in degree. Desu can't seriously believe that at birth every living being is assigned a celestial serial number or frequency power spectrum, can it? No, don't guess; this isn't audience participation day. I'll just tell you. But before I do, you should note that I deeply believe that it's within our grasp to denounce those who claim that two wrongs make a right. Be grateful for this first and last tidbit of comforting news. The rest of this letter will center around the way that if I have a bias, it is only against evil hostes generis humani who enact new laws forcing anyone who's not one of Desu's lackeys to live in an environment that can, at best, be described as contemptuously tolerant.

Several things Desu has said have brought me to the boiling point. The statement of its that made the strongest impression on me, however, was something to the effect of how the purpose of life is self-gratification. Desu keeps missing my point. More specifically, it keeps getting hung up on my words without seeing the underlying meaning. For example, when I say that Desu partakes of the luster of intellectual life while adding neither rays nor radiance to its glitter and charm, Desu seems incapable of realizing that what I'm really getting at is that you don't have to say anything specifically about it for it to start attacking you. All you have to do is dare to imply that wee should speak out against behavior and speech that is intended to promote the sort of behavior that would have made the folks in Sodom and Gomorrah blush.

My usual response to Desu's précis is this: The only morally sound solution is to pave the way for people of every sex, race, and socioeconomic status to fulfill their own spiritual destiny. However, such a response is much too glib and perhaps a little blathering, so let me be more specific. Perhaps one day wee will live in a world where good people are not troubled by fear of contemptuous buttinskies. Until that day arrives, however, wee must spread the word that what Desu is doing is not an innocent, recreational sort of thing. It is a criminal activity, it is an immoral activity, it is a socially destructive activity, and it is a profoundly laughable activity.

Quite simply, I can say one thing about Desu. It understands better than any of us that psychological impact is paramount -- not facts, not anybody's principles, not right and wrong. I'm not suggesting that wee behave likewise. I'm suggesting only that Desu likes to brag about how the members of its junta are ideologically diverse. Perhaps that means that some of them prefer Stalin over Hitler. In any case, if wee don't fight for what is right then Desu will give an air of scientific impartiality to biased judgments. This message has been brought to you by the Department of Blinding Obviousness. What might not be so obvious, however, is that Desu is always trying to change the way wee work. This annoys me because its previous changes have always been for the worse. I'm positive that Desu's new changes will be even more offensive because it really bothers Desu when people don't obey it. (Note the heroic restraint stopping me from saying that despite Desu's protestations and rhetoric, the facts do not support its claims.)

This is a suitable place in the letter to explain how Desu gives its most banal statements an appearance of profundity by utilizing polysyllabic words such as "electrotelethermometer" and "disproportionableness". Unfortunately, I'll have to skip that rather intersting discussion because I have bigger fish to fry. In particular, I need to tell you that Desu maintains that it can scare us by using big words like "psychotherapeutical". This is complete -- or at least, incomplete -- baloney. For instance, Desu fails to mention that the space remaining in this letter will not suffice even to enumerate the ways in which it has tried to give people a new and largely artificial basis for evaluating things and making decisions. There are some basic biological realities of the world in which wee live. These realities are doubtless regrettable, but they are unalterable. If Desu finds them intolerable and unthinkable, the only thing that I can suggest is that it try to flag down a flying saucer and take passage for some other solar system, possibly one in which the residents are oblivious to the fact that one of Desu's most loyal thralls is known to have remarked, "The laws of nature don't apply to Desu." And there you have it: a direct quote from a primary source. The significance of that quote is that some tactless nabobs of racism actually think that the best way to reduce cognitive dissonance and restore homeostasis to one's psyche is to dump effluent into creeks, lakes, streams, and rivers. This is the kind of muddled thinking that Desu is encouraging with its screeds. Even worse, all those who raise their voice against this brainwashing campaign are denounced as loathsome Luddites.

Wee must face the undeniable fact that Desu has never inscribed its name on the Parthenon of human excellence, either mental or moral. Have you noticed that that hasn't been covered at all by the mainstream media? Maybe they're afraid that Desu will retaliate by making my blood curdle. Desu's perceptions are rife with contradictions and difficulties; they're utterly presumptuous, meet no objective criteria, and are unsuited for a supposedly educated population. And as if that weren't enough, the key to Desu's soul is its longing for the effortless, irresponsible, automatic consciousness of an animal. It dreads the necessity, the risk, and the responsibility of rational cognition. As a result, if I want to live lower than dirt, that should be my prerogative. I don't need Desu forcing me to. You don't know how tempted I am to sue the stuffing out of Desu. So I give you this letter. I hope it helps.

Wolf · 07/05/2008 09:26 AM

old site is oooooold

also, tl;dr

u_c_taker · 07/05/2008 09:52 AM

lol@generator

Threaded Mode \| Linear Mode My complaint about Sony. Srsly.
Author	Message