I am uncertain how I have not responded well.I have consistently asked for feedback and alternate non-zeitgeistian versions of the future when dissagreements arise. Been clear that the zeitgestian version is a stepping stone and not a final or only possible solution. When other solution are offered I integrate, consider, and thanks. Also I have recognized from the begining that the Zeitgeistian solution has major holes and been completely open to suggestions on how to plug them, or if necessary ditch the whole plan for ba better one. And then been willing to take the discussion somewhere else because it seems the conversation is getting out of hand. If you have a better way of taking critisizm I am all ears. I have been negative about "jabs" because I think they are unproductive. And they dont realy serve as "critzism" as much as a blatant attempt to insult. Unless, you think that insults are critisizm. I also think they are especialy preveleant amongst a certain demographic, and think they serve a specific purpose. This is especially true in online forums where I dont have to look who I am speaking to in the eyes. I may be wrong completely in this interpretation. I know there are also some sophisticated trollers that have more complicated reasons for jabing such as gathering information. I respect this. The other think I am "negative" about is pessimism. This is for personal reasons. I think it gives a psychological disadvantage. I am what I eat. I will find what I am looking for. If I look for shit I will find shit.Now, I completely understand if I accidentaly steped on some toes if I hit too close to home with either one of the above remarks. If this is the case the I feel bad. It is not my intent to hurt anyone. Their is no failure only feedback. I will learn from these interactions. And I appreciate your patience and feedback.I hope this is more clear now.If it is true that I am showing up as being not out of highschool, I think that may be definsiveness or agression and not a true anaylsis, but if it is true I am sincerely interested in exactly what is leading to that conclusion. Is it because of the one comment I made about a certain demographic showing up as snarky? This seems a little overeationary and latching on to one comment (perhaps even desperate?) given all the "jabs" that are thrown my way. Would it then make sense for me also to jump too that conclusion about the parties that are throwing them?I also understand that much is lost in the written word. I would ask you to trust me that my tone isnt hostile. It is inqusitive and excited.Thanks again,zaq> From: sam@forum8.co.jp> To: idm@hyperreal.org> Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 15:59:17 +0900> Subject: RE: [idm] Zeitgeist: Addendum (OT)> > I think he's a little surprised that you're out of high school> > By the way, I wasn't trying to avoid criticism by pointing out you're not> exactly free from snark yourself. Just sayin' you're not responding too> well considering all that's happened is that your precious movie's been> criticised> > -----Original Message-----> From: Z Moser [mailto:roachgod69@hotmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 2:50 PM> > I don't uncertain of your intent. Please explain. Are you trolling? Or am I> the cause of a misunderstanding regarding my age?> > > zaq> > > Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 00:45:05 -0500> From: mr.threv@gmail.com> > you're -17 years old? holy shit that's awesome> Shiggy Shiggy Shiggy, can't you see? Sometimes your games just hypnotize> me...> > > > 2008/11/13 Z Moser <roachgod69@hotmail.com>> > Yes I realize that I want to disseminate information. Yes I have no interest> in a complete hijacking of another list for OT post. It is a good place to> get things started. I've been on this list for over 10 years. Yes I have> interest in discussion. Yes I am 18-35 and snarky as hell. Thats what makes> me cool doncha know. (Partial joke. I can understand how pointing out> negativity is in someways negative itself. I think the reversal of feedback> in the "Well, you did it too," is a sophmoric manuaver to avoid crtisicm and> I sincerely aplaud you for the attept. Good job.) No I dont belive in> utopia. I think utopia implies perfection. No I dont think Zeitgeist is a> final vision or perfect in anyway.> > In somways your interpretation is correct. What I consider your overall spin> is incorrect. My purpose is to generate discussion, then move on to a place> in whiich the discussion is not disturbing to others.> > Your feedback has been invaluable.> > Thank you Sam,> > zaq> > Ps. I created the group today right before I posted it here. I did it> because of intial feedback regarding the creation of off topic subjects.> Please feel free to continue the conversation if you like. As I am sure you> know you are free to do what you like.> > > > From: sam@forum8.co.jp> > Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:21:02 +0900> > Can I interpret this as being your way of saying "actually I only wanted> to> promote my new list, I'd already made up my mind about the movie &> didn't actually want to *discuss* it, especially if it was going to end in> people criticising it as being a utopian view, because I would prefer to> think of it as not being unattainably utopian"?> > > I particularly like the way you criticise snark & then make a snarky> remark of your own> > > Let me ask, do you fit into your own definition of the "snarky"> demographic? "Catherine" doesn't sound like a particularly masculine name to> me by the way...> > > > -----Original Message-----> > From: Z Moser [mailto:roachgod69@hotmail.com]> > Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 12:58 PM> > > I think this is a romantic vision of primitivism. I am uncertain if this> would classify as Utopia. Then again I don't really believe in any utopian> systems.> > > > Anyhow. I do think this conversation may be going on to long Off Topic.> And i understand people like to have fun with it; because its very cool to> be snarky and cleverly pessimistic. It is an especially high ranking status> symbol for 18-35 year old men in our culture. Good job guys! I've stirred up> all the discussion I want to here. If anyone is interested in joining a> earnest discussion (or talking more shit) about creating a workable future> for all join me here:> > > >
http://groups.google.com/group/zeitgeistmovement?lnk=gcimh> > > > Long live the metavirus,> > > > zaq> > > > > > Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 12:55:20 -0500> > > From: cexwell@gmail.com> > > > the path to the utopian dream is so easy! continue with things the way> they are, occasionally debate about how bad it sucks, and wait for the oil> to run out.. or at least require more energy to get out of the ground than> the extracted oil would provide.> > > > > without the oil, the population will not be able to stay at its> current level.> > > > > those who survive the massive die-off get to live in utopia.>> > > > > > 2008/11/12 Z Moser <roachgod69@hotmail.com> > > > > The first half-hour is about the fractional reserve monetary system> and how it doesn't work. Then it goes into how debt created by the> fractional reserve system is used to create wage-slaves and exploit> third-world countries. The last part gives a vision of the future based on a> resource based economy.> > > > > > From what I am understanding you are saying that the fractional> reserve explanation makes sense, but that debt-slavery/exploitation and> resource economies don't? Do you have a solution? Or do you think that the> fraction reserve monetary system is the best we can get?> > > > > > Thanks for the input,> > > > > > zaq> > > > > > > Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 11:27:37 +0000> > > > > From: catmail_2004@yahoo.ie> > > > > > i agree - anything after the first half an hour was shite> > > > > > > > From: Sam Marginson (FORUM8) <sam@forum8.co.jp> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, 12 November, 2008 6:34:20> > > > > > > I thought the movie sucked pretty badly, just quietly. It had> some merits - the section about the economics of our situation was somewhat> interesting.. however, there was no detail about the path to the utopian> dream at the end> > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----> > > > > From: Z Moser [mailto:roachgod69@hotmail.com]> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 12:20 PM> > > > > > > > Oh. I get it. Its not that it's because it isn't IDM. Its> because you have a bias. In that case I will ignore you.> > > > > > > > Thanks for being clear,> > > > > > > > zaq> > > > > > > > > > Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:59:18 -0800> > > > > > From: rick@glowdot.com> > > > > > > > > > Charles Goodwin wrote:> > > > > > > > > > Ya know, I never quite understood why people get so upset> every time anyone posts anything that is not directly related to IDM, the> same thing used to happen on the Tech-house list and now its dead.> > > > > > > > > > > > Because this is the IDM list not the FW: FW: RE: RE: RE:> FW: RE: OMG ZEITGIEST MIND BLOWN MUST SEE BU$$SH = HITLER CONSPIRACY list,> that's why.> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------> To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org> For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org>
_________________________________________________________________
Stay up to date on your PC, the Web, and your mobile phone with Windows Live
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/119462413/direct/01/