It is currently Thu Jul 31, 2014 4:39 pm

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: OAC/WRS is out of bandwidth--sabotage or accident?
PostPosted: Tue Aug 23, 2005 9:46 am 
Offline
Lots to Say
Lots to Say

Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 2:15 pm
Posts: 34
Location: San Diego
The OAC/WRS forum often does run out of bandwith and POAC has to buy more. But this time it seems worse and has been down for a while.

A few days back POAC had posted something about the bandwidth problem and one of the regulars there gave him some technical advice. The person who gave the technical advice seemed pretty knowledgeable. He is a die-hard Democrat and frequently posts Democratic Party propaganda and attacks anyone who critizices the Democrats.

I'm one of those people who feels I have a right to criticize the Democrats, so whenever he'd post their propaganda, I'd respond, he'd attack me, etc., etc.

This weekend we really got into it. Several threads, what seemed like about a hundred posts--he kept repeating Democratic Party talking points and I'd keep refuting them.

Him: The Republicans are worse--we have to support the Democrats because it is the only way to get rid of the Republicans.

Me: A lesser evil is still evil. If the Democrats win and they continue the war and the rest of the Republican agenda, what have we won?

Him: We've got to elect Democrats--then if they don't do what needs to be done, we can not vote for them in the next election.

Me: I don't particularly want to vote for someone who might continue the war for another few years until I can vote for someone else--I'd rather vote for someone who would try to stop the war now, or else just not vote. If I vote for a warmonger, I've got blood on my hands too.

Well, that's just paraphrasing how it went all weekend. You've all seen that stuff before and can probably respond to it better than I can.

Anyway, I kept my cool, he ended up making a complete ass of himself:

Him: You blanketly blank blank!

Me: There you go, polite, constructive and on topic as always. :D

Finally he said he was taking a time out.

And a day later the site went down for lack of bandwidth.

He appears to have had the motive, means, and opportunity to sabotage the site. He was angry. He knows a lot of technical stuff. And he never could refute my argument--all he could do was repeat nonsensical talking points or make personal attacks.

So am I being paranoid?

At first I thought OAC/WRS should buy more bandwidth, but then I thought what if I'm not really paranoid? What if the Democratic Party with all its resources only allowed the site to exist for as long as their operatives were permitted to post party propaganda and shout down anyone who tried to refute it?

This guy said things like:

"If I post something from or about the Democratic Party, just ignore it and don't respond."

"I am the Democratic Party--me and millions of others."

And he'd also respond to my criticisms of Democratuc Party support for the war and for the PNAC agenda of globalization and corporate dominance by saying that if I criticized Dems, I must be a Bush supporter or a conservative.

So I'm concerned. I hope the site comes back up, but I don't want the Democratic Party to bankrupt it either. I hope OAC/WRS finds a way to conserve bandwidth and maybe trace and block the bandwidth-drains.

I'm really feeling guilty. I'm worried that if I'd just let the Democratic propaganda alone the way their operative suggested, and not bothered to respond to it, he'd be able to control the forum the way Bush controls his town hall meetings, and the site would still be up.

But maybe it is just a coincidence. Maybe there's another reason for the bandwidth drain. Maybe it isn't deliberate. Maybe this is the very first time in my life that the Democrats are going to actually oppose Republicans instead of doing their usual job of trying to control progressives. And because I've never seen them do anything different before, I'm just paranoid for thinking that they're doing it again. :?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Return to anarchy
PostPosted: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:21 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:19 pm
Posts: 2533
Wow, we are all getting paranoid, as there are so many unusual happenings on the web lately. Since it was started by the military who knows what shenanigans they can get up to. Pays to be cautious so keep being suspicious. Not enough to take it seriously though. Don't they have better things to worry about, like Iraq and how to keep Bush from opening his mouth and becoming too offensive?

I'm glad to see you have an understanding of the 2 party system. When ones not partying the other one is. Lately I've been reading up more on the very foundation of the American revolution- Anarchy. Without opposition to tyranny we become apathetic and stagnate into a pool of individual cells that knows not or cares not for our neighbour virus. Whatever bugs them is their problem, so keep your disease to yourself. Thus is the state of existence in a capitalist society where big business interests and bankers greed dictates the terms of existance and participation of its single cell citizens. Funny, that anarchy doesn't mean society without rules, but does mean society without rulers(greek translation). Our two party system is designed to divide us and anarchy is designed to build community, based with small cells of individuals discussing the needs of their community, challenging the greed of individuality and organizing to discuss with other cells to form a general consensus of agreement, on the large scale where each areas concerns are worked on and discussed as to the best solution based approach. The people decide even the punishment that members who step outside boundaries must face. They also contribute to the fair distribution of goods that even the chances for survival of each member. Based more on the American Natives societal structure than a Eurocentric ideation.

Compared to the divisive nature of our politics today and we see a picture of partisanship and name calling that tends to divide and categorize people(othering- one of us or one of them) on our inability to come to terms about certain controversial issues which seem to be placed as points of contention that divide us. Abortion, gay marriage, statist/non statist, drug use, police, prisons, gOD and country, race, sex, immigrant, welfare recipient, tax payer, rich, poor, homeless...etc. This defines us not as thinking people , but along party lines and so we remain at odds with each other, instead of just resolving these issues and getting on with the real problems of our neighbourhoods, states, countries, world issues. Things that really matter and not our petty wants, hatreds and prejudices. The root causes of problems. The capitalst greed structure.

We have to get over it and see the bigger picture, otherwise we get caught up in the fear and paranoia of lifes idiosyncracies. You are an expression of the frustration of existence and our unwillingness to bend to accomodate others views. It can't be helped- it has been designed that way to keep us divided and at odds with each other. Makes us easier to control and manipulate when we can't get together and agree on issues.

That's another fine mess they've gotten us into. We've got to relearn how to get it together again. Accept the fear of change and move on to a trust of each other, would be a first step. Then get rid of the contentious leaders we have and put power back where it belongs- in the community of people.

Whether sabotage or accident, the message is clear. We need compromise- red and blue when mixed becomes purple. A royal decision would be to blend and mix our differences into a common colour. People could do it if they only could talk to each other. Don't expect answers to come from our political structure- they never have before. Reps. and Dems. won't change unless we force them to. Status quo is too strong.

Dialogue and not debate is called the way to discussion. We need a new dialogue in this country if we want peace and understanding. I know the people can do it because we're smarter than our leaders. We've just been led to believe there are no solutions. Anarchy is not a bad word- only our leaders paint it so- red and blue X's and O's.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Return to anarchy
PostPosted: Tue Aug 23, 2005 5:30 pm 
Offline
Lots to Say
Lots to Say

Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 2:15 pm
Posts: 34
Location: San Diego
DO.g's wrote:
Pays to be cautious so keep being suspicious. Not enough to take it seriously though.

POAC thinks it is just normal growth and this is quite likely. But I will stay suspicious. :wink:
Quote:
I'm glad to see you have an understanding of the 2 party system.

Gained the hard way, unfortunately. I got suckered in and consider myself lucky to have gotten out with a few brain cells left intact, the major damage having been to my wallet and my pride.
Quote:
Funny, that anarchy doesn't mean society without rules, but does mean society without rulers(greek translation). Our two party system is designed to divide us and anarchy is designed to build community....

I've been learning about anarchy also. A government "of the people, by the people, and for the people," is anarchy. And corporate rule appears to be the reason it perished here, just as Abraham Lincoln had feared it would.
Quote:
You are an expression of the frustration of existence and our unwillingness to bend to accomodate others views. It can't be helped- it has been designed that way to keep us divided and at odds with each other. Makes us easier to control and manipulate when we can't get together and agree on issues.

That seems like a good analysis to me. Funny, whenever this guy posts his own views, I tend to agree with him. The problem only occurs when I post anything critical of the Democrats, or when he posts something from or about the Democratic Party and I respond. Then he's all over me. I'm supposed to either say something nice about the Dems or say nothing at all, and that's not very productive from my point of view.
Quote:
Accept the fear of change and move on to a trust of each other, would be a first step. Then get rid of the contentious leaders we have and put power back where it belongs- in the community of people.

I agree with you completely. And I do trust this guy when he isn't posting stuff from the Dems or spouting Dem talking points. His own personal opinions seem sound and valid to me. But he seems to think it his mission in life to promote and defend the Democratic Party. If that's what I wanted, I'd post at DU.
Quote:
Whether sabotage or accident, the message is clear. We need compromise- red and blue when mixed becomes purple. A royal decision would be to blend and mix our differences into a common colour. People could do it if they only could talk to each other.

He says that a lot also. That we should be purple.
Quote:
Don't expect answers to come from our political structure- they never have before. Reps. and Dems. won't change unless we force them to. Status quo is too strong.

Exactly. And he thinks that the way we should get the Dems to change is by supporting them and electing them. No matter how many times I point out that doing so only reinforces the status quo, he won't budge an inch.
Quote:
Dialogue and not debate is called the way to discussion. We need a new dialogue in this country if we want peace and understanding.

I agree. But is is difficult to have a dialogue with this guy. When I state my opinion, he states the Democratic Party's position. He claims, and apparently believes, that he is the Democratic Party (along with millions of people like him). So he thinks their talking points are his opinion, the same way people from the other arm of the ruling corporate party do. Every time I refute a talking point or ask a question that refutes the talking point, he changes the subject, attacks me, and returns to the same talking points. It takes two to dialogue. I'm not talking to another person here, I'm talking to a corporate party sound machine. It is probably good for lurkers to read, so it can be useful, the same way that it is sometimes useful to take the time to refute trolls before banning them, but it is indeed frustrating. And it does make me suspicious. 8)

An example is Camp Casey. He supports Camp Casey. But he doesn't see it as a viable alternative. He believes that only a strong political machine like the Democratic Party can be effective. When I point out that Camp Casey has achieved more American unity in 2 weeks than the Democrats have in 5 years, he becomes irate. To him, Camp Casey is good, but irrelevant to politics. To me Camp Casey is an example of the type of self-rule this country was founded on and sorely needs. If our leaders won't do anything, we have to do it ourselves. So I take the opposite view: that Camp Casey is effective and the Democratic Party, by failing, as a party, to oppose the war and support Camp Casey, is irrelevant. I support every Democrat who opposes the war and supports Camp Casey, but I also support every Green, Republican, Libertarian, anarchist, or otherwise affiliated or unaffiliated individual who opposes the war and supports Camp Casey. He supports Camp Casey, he supports the Democrats who also support Camp Casey, but he thinks that anyone who supports Camp Casey but doesn't support the Democratic Party is misguided, if not treacherous. He has gone so far as to say that he would vote for a pro-war Democrat so that the Democrats could win, and worry about the war later, perhaps at a subsequent election. I don't see how anyone who supports Camp Casey could vote for a pro-war candidate. It just doesn't make sense to me.

The problem with the win at all costs strategy is that it is the same strategy the Republicans have. I'd rather stand on principle and lose, than violate my principles in order to win. But when someone has made it clear that their sole goal is winning, it is a good time to watch out for them to attack by any means, fair or foul. That's why I'm still paranoid. :?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 23, 2005 6:02 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:19 pm
Posts: 2533
I agree with you, especially about camp Casey. I would be there too if I was allowed in your country, but such is paranoia of outside influences. You know we can't make progress when we can't get something as basic as trust in our dialogue.

This guy sounds like a typical Aholewipe, and his manoeuvering to change subjects is a diversionary tactic when someone reaches a stonewall or topic too sensitive to defend, like a parent who doesn't want to understand why their child is spoiled when you point out that you can't buy someones love. The topic gets changed quickly, or a glance up and walk away comes to mind. I've seen it from those that try to hang onto their children, as a child and don't want them to grow up and become independant.

He sounds rather childish so you're doing the right thing in treating him like one. It's his element. You are being the adult here so understand this goes on throughout your life with just about anyone who fails to see a bigger picture, especially outside the box.

The reality is that we should elect those that are honest, and trustworthy who speak about unity and not status quo. Anyone who loves the environment and the family of man would be better than and do a better job than the tools we have now. This is the basic problem with our present leaders. Too wishy washy and paid to make decisions, not to stand by principles.

There's a post here somewhere about the pensions our politicians get. They aren't part of the Social Security net and get full pay until they die. Bribery to keep quiet. Thieves.

Until then just remain basically cautious and explain to people why we need to change our attitude towards things, and get back to the basics of truth and honesty, without the greed factor . What's in it for me, should become What's in it for US. All of us.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Blue Moon by Trent © 2007
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group