Discussion in 'Φ v.3 The GREAT AWAKENING' started by Rose, Dec 1, 2015.
The Music Zone has been split into two parts for ease of use.
Music Zone ends when Stephen arrived (Page 30).
Music Zone #2 is now located in InPHInet v.1 forum.
The majority of threads from the Atticus/Houdini/Rhiannon era
have been moved to the InPHInet v.1 forum:
The majority of threads beginning with the departure of Atticus
thru July 2016 have been moved to the InPHInet v.2 forum:
Thank you for restructuring the old Music Zone, Tag!
Here's my question.
Have any of the sparse beings that have frequented this site lately noticed...
We have had no, to few, bots present and accounted for since a file was re-rescinded?
Note: The number of robots?
Why did Hillary/DNC/Awan PERMIT Russian Bot Farm access to their servers?
How sloppy was this?
Were they criminally sloppy with CLASSIFIED INFORMATION?
By any stoke of the imagination, should Trump be Blamed?????!!!!!
Been conducting an experiment opening the doors to bots.
"I was feelin' kinda lonesome and blue
I needed somebody to talk to
So I called up the operator of time
Just to hear a voice of some kind
When you hear the beep
It will be three o'clock
She said that for over an hour
And I hung up"
Delete robot.txt for a while...
What time is it botties?
I have heard complaints lately that bots are now shunning and censoring a site...
Less indexing and compiling for Google, etc.
Visibility and viewership shrinking.
Just as a statement to any (lol) who may be concerned about this at InPHInet...
I have had, and currently have, bots blocked for the same reason I never joined Facebook.
Zeus, ϟ..., and I are the only currently participating members...
We are not attempting to indoctrinate or sell anything to the general public.
Bots have, in the past, affected site functionality in an adverse way.
If there ever were a time when I beheld a miracle, cohesive group activities emerged, and publicity warranted...
I would consider removing the bots block and allow them in.
I would also redesign the site to suit those activities.
For now, I like it the way it is.
I recently discovered Zook and Chico were up in arms at United People (in their critique of InPHInet) because, when considering whether or not to shut InPHInet down and make it unavailable entirely forever while I was away most of the year, I removed Zook's "Was Hitler a Sociopath" poll thread from public view (not wanting to be profiled as a distributor of neo-nazi, anti-semitic content). My name is mud in their circle for doing that, censorship/public rights to everything/free speech, and all. Placing the thread in full view in the "Members Only" forum was not an adequate compromise.
I suggested, per the above policy. that Chico move the thread to his United People where it would be better suited and provided an exported word document for that purpose. Ability to download " Was Hitler a Sociopath" now exists within that thread in the "Members Only" forum.
If there happens to be anyone else reading this who desires to have a word document of their own InPHInet thread for download, you may contact me here.
Expressions of consternation posted at another forum regarding my management of this site and lack of adequate abilities to administrate here have led me to create this notice:
I created InPHInet with many weeks of intense labor and have provided constant site maintenance for years. I alone pay for the server and licenses. I have never asked for or accepted a donation from anyone. There have never been any ads on the site bringing in revenue for me. I am not the Administrator of InPHInet. I am the sole owner of InPHInet. So, whether or not anyone believes I should or should not administrate is a moot point. InPHInet is my property.
Participating members are offered a place to gather, communicate, and post pubicly or privately. If a member states to me their intent to leave, they are no longer considered participating members. Previous participating members' names remain in the member roster as a courtesy allowing their authorship to remain on their content, without reverting to guest status, in case they ever desire to return.
InPHInet is NOT A PUBLIC SITE. It is a site where members may publish their content and interact with other members. Members retain copyright to their content. The public have no rights at InPHInet. If a member states to me their intent to leave and not return, or if they have not posted for an extended time, they are no longer considered participating members. At this point they have one right: Access to their content to copy it elsewhere.
Further clauses will be added to include deceptive and deceitful members. Any members who collude behind the scenes and attempt to steal the site will be removed, for instance.
The State of InPhinet ~ Rose's Log InPHINetDate 1/3/2018:
Cig may have returned and a few strange people have joined. The Ghost has apparently approved them. After my extended absence, I attempted to refresh myself on site management protocols long forgotten yesterday....
In the process of working through the assignment, I pulled forward enough old threads to fill the artistically annoying gap in space that would not allow me to judge the balance of elements on the home page and provide adequate test cases. During the night, I realized that doing so had inadvertently dredged up some sludge from an old forgotten troll pond. This was not my intention.
My last words to my old associates discussed in those threads was: "As Far as I am Concerned, You No Longer Exist!" And, I meant that with every thread of my being. Anyone (was there one of you?) who might have thought the filling of homepage space was anything more than a neurotic artistic need... Be assured that is all it was and the old threads will be removed as soon as replacements become available. Or, not? Whatever.
If I think of something worth saying to others who have always seemed basically from another planet in my scheme of things, I will replace one of the old threads with a new one myself. But they will only remain on the home page for whatisit? 60 days without a post before they drop off as is the limit I have been unable to budge. And, if they all do disappear and I need more test cases, I may have to dredge some of the sludge again. If I am still here. Not that anyone notices or cares. I am not delusional.
On another note, last evening, most likely due to the fact (should I say this?) that we received an interesting New Years gift and someone here decided to exude rhetorically: In our state of belated celebration, I recorded and posted the ahem.. whatever it might be labeled. He listened to it today and requested the removal of that particular "Speaking Out Loud" audio post.
Even so, I began to wonder... what was that I was wondering??
The football was yours, Zook.
I had no interest in playing that game.
Alas, poor Zook. I knew him well.
You Don't Have Nixon To Kick Around Anymore
We've come far, Zook. You know I love you (in a cautious kind of way), and I am grateful for all you have taught me. Muchas gracias!
As Chico might say, you are accusing me of your own malfeasances again, Zook.
I notice you like to throw your "experience" around and seem to be very proud of it. Allthough I don't always bring it up, I have had my own experience with staff positions at successful forums such as Atticus1 and created InPHInet V1, Zook. And, along with the negatives, I learned some important lessons working closely with Stephen over the last several years and as associates here for nine months. Although others dispute the fact, he started as a DJ was, indeed, an executive at Sony.
Although I now find myself in this current position here, by choice, I do not accept your power play of superiority. You impress me as one of those people who attempts to pigeonhole others into positions lower than your own to make yourself superior. I have seen this done by the very best in corporate situations. It will not work here, Zook. I have my own opinions about how things should be done and nothing you might say will change them. So, the choice is yours whether you have an interest in participating here, or not, and you seem to be making that choice quite clear to everyone.
Do you feel your were disrupted in your thread? If so, why didn't you speak to me about it?
As I recall Brook had quite a negative comment in your thread, but you don't seem to be railing against her.
It seems to me, both you and Shezbeth had an ax to grind with Chico. I took my time and observed and have come to my current conclusion. I will also refer to my above comment regarding training myself to be keenly aware of how people, places, and things feel to me. It was an intuitive perception that caused me to invite Chico in the first place. I place value on my intuitive perceptions. I thought I made it perfectly clear to Brook that I had invited Chico, wanted him here, and hoped their differences would be worked through. In my opinion, she did not make any attempt to do so. She charged forward with assumed authority in his thread.
Brook was an A1 co-staff member who seemed to relish bashing individuals deemed to be a "troll". Sam Hunter has recently made great comments about his opinion of this practice in Cockney Translater and I agree with his statements. What happened here with Brook was an instant replay of Atticus1. She wanted me to vote Bashi out and I refused to do so. I hold no grudges against her still, and would welcome her back. But if Chico must go for her to stay, that is not going to happen. He is not the type of member to insist another member be removed for him to stay. That is a power play, plain and simple.
Again, I formulate my own opinions. You will not browbeat me into changing them.
You embellished upon my analogy to create your own. The sequence was not logical. If I misunderstood and Brook was not asking for Chico's removal, she might have alerted me to my misconception instead of disappearing? Nothing is written in stone and I am always happy to reverse if I find I have misinterpreted the meaning of anyone's words.
I assure you there is more to it than that, Zook. But, I would prefer not to feel my participation here turn into a dismal chore, like visiting my aunt. I understand you have much better things to do. Much more interesting places to be. More important people to see. But, it isn't really necessary to come over just to rain on our parade, is it? You are always welcome here, but you don't seem to like us very much. As a matter of fact, I think the only comments I have ever heard from you are anti-something comments.
I train myself to be very attuned to how people, things, and places make me feel. I use this data as another sense and balance with logic. To be perfectly honest, your energy has always given me a headache. It is my practice to observe for quite a while before reaching conclusions and making decisions. I analyzed the headaches. But, nearly always, they are indication of a person who is not on my side. The words may be right, the person may be beneficial in ways, but the energy behind them is not. This ability serves me well most of the time. Because I have never been interested in popularity, but in having true friends, I find I am seldom in a crowd.
You try both, of course. You explained why quite clearly:
That is the sociopath's standard attack -- they accuse their opponents of their own malfeasance.
It was your analogy. I merely developed logical consequences from it.
In any event, did Brooke really ask Chico to be removed from the store? Or from her aisle in the store? View counts don't mean a thing. Patrons often visit threads just because there is attending drama in it, not necessarily because of the factual content.
Chico is indeed a drunk. His favorite drink is sociopathy. His drunken stagger is that he keeps knocking people down (people with whom he's had run-ins with the past for sundry reasons) with the tarbrush and shibboleth of "Sociopath!". Virtually all the threads that Chico participates in (no matter who creates them) eventually end up reeking of his favorite alcohol. I don't remember creating many threads on this forum, indeed, the only one that comes to mind is "Was Hitler a sociopath?"
The following is the link address to the last post on that thread:
No surprise here. Chico scuttles the thread and in his last post he abuses the thread creator (yours truly) with yet another unprovoked jibe.
So it would appear that you have a blind spot for Chico's mischief ... and blurry vision when any of Chico's targets attempt to defend themselves against his blatant slander.
I'm a comedian by nature and you're his wife by law. Laughter was inevitable.
As I have not done anything other than defend myself against Chico's slander ... indeed, I usually don't post on this forum for days on end because there is not enough here to hold my interest ... I find it curious that anyone would see me as owning the football or taking it home with me. I did not make any demands. I offered my experience from other forums where I had been a moderator, and had argued in general terms regarding the merits of moderating functions. If you interpreted that as my demanding that "either Chico be removed or I'm gone" ... then that is your burden to bear. If you are that quick to misrepresent my arguments (in favor of moderating functions) as an ultimatum, then I'm left to wonder whether Brooke and Shezbeth are being equally misrepresented when you allege that they demanded Chico be removed.
You're imagining things. Where did I remark that I disliked the appearance of this site in "nearly my first comment". I remember asking whether there was a better visual theme because I had trouble reading with the dark background theme. You accommodated me by pointing to one such theme. I think you are trying to find mountains in molehills here. I also clearly indicated that my main reason for participating in this forum was to defend my good name against unsubstantiated attacks by a fifth column troll. Chico initiated an attack against me. I was obliged to respond.
Secondly, you had indicated that you felt Chico was an expert on sociopathy. Having thoroughly exposed the shallow depth of his knowledgebase (on the subject matter) at United People, specifically in the thread, "Sociopaths ... Who Knew":
... having shredded his arguments over there, I wanted to engage in a discussion on this forum on the topic of sociopathy. I wanted to discover what others had to say on the subject matter, and possibly learn things myself about sociopathy, a coinage that appears to have arrived out of nowhere in the realpolitik of things. For me, sociopaths have always existed ... and had been identified since the dawn of human time as bad seeds, black sheep, and what not. Why a new coinage for an old condition? Social engineering??
To that extent, the topic interests me. Is the coinage "sociopath" being promoted widely by the corrupted system to attack truthseekers and others resisting the system?
You know, like the derogatory coinage "conspiracy theorist"is being promoted widely to scuttle debate and research on actual conspiracies? Or the coinage "antiSemitism" is widely promoted to attack those who simply want to know the truth about sentinel events like the (purported) Holocaust; or who want to expose the Khazarian conspiracy?
As for the tupperware comment. It was poetic license. A forewarning from a member who's had plenty of experience as a moderator and a participant at four or five community forums; a member who has seen forums fail and teh reasons for their failure. You are being very thin-skinned. Use criticism as a learning tool and not as a two-by-four to whack the critic with ... and you'll be pleasantly charmed by the results.
Fair enough. If the forum was created simply for your enjoyment ... then have at it. Hard truths often interfere with enjoyment and I don't want to ruin your enjoyment. All the best. Oops ... almost forgot ... here's your football. Send me a postcard and tell me how it all ends. Cheers.
From one side of mouth, Chico argues that I'm setting myself up for redressal by the poobahs on this forum.
From the other side, he argues that I'm gunning for a moderator position so that I can exercise power and control over the membership.
So what is it, Chico ... am I irritating the poobahs? Or ingratiating myself to them?
The problem with fifth column trolls is that they throw everything at the wall in the hope that something will stick. Facts be damned.
Factual integrity and logical process are way down the list of priorities here at inphinet forum, and the founders appear in no great hurry to raise the level of discourse at this fledgling forum. So be it. It is what it is.
This analogy makes no sense to me.
Who is rearranging books and tossing them on the floor? Where is the disorder? When Brook felt the ambiance of her thread was being disrupted, Chico's posts were moved to a sidebar thread of his own. She controlled her entire aisle including the privilege of removing items herself. But, this was not enough for her. She insisted Chico and all of his books be banned from the store! I feel I was completely accommodating to her and her thread, but this was not enough. She insisted on running the store. Some patrons happen to like Chico's aisles. Take a look at the views counts.
This analogy also makes no sense to me.
I am assuming you are saying Chico has had too much to drink and is barging in on conversations abusing people? Most of Chico's coversations are in his own threads, so it might be you who was doing the barging in. If not, and you, or anyone, feel anyone is disrupting the ambiance of your thread I will be happy to offer you the same solution I offered Brook. The option was offered to Shezbeth and he declined. In my mind, this indicates thin skin and an agenda other than the subject of his thread.
Although you have boasted of having thick skin, yours seems quite thin to me. A Horse with no Name laughed out loud when I read him your post with your thick skin comment. He also felt taking your football home because you couldn't be quarterback was exactly what you (and Brook, and Shezbeth) were doing.
As I have said before, I do not believe a comment expressing belief that someone is displaying sociopathic traits is slander. I do believe you might be the disrupter here. Nearly the first comment you made was an expression of dislike for the appearance of the site and lately you seem to come here just to post digs at this forum. Now, in another thread, you have state it is a akin to a tuperware party. You remind me of my aunt who always had some type of negative comment about me each time I saw her.
I will reiterate, I am not that concerned with the popularity of this forum. I am concerned with whether I am enjoying it, or not. But, even at the height of it's popularity, we had very few participants. So you shouldn't be concerned about members in the list who do not post. Most never did.[/QUOTE]
Come on, Zook. facepalm
You get to slander me to your heart's content at both Inphinet and United People. You're arguing here for your own "redressing", which frankly I don't want to see. I find your posts are punishment enough since they reveal your true nature. Your slandering others serves a valuable purpose -- it convinces us that your discernment is not to be trusted. And without trust, a con-artist cannot succeed with his scams.
I know you're gunning for a moderator position so that you can exercise power and control over the membership (and me), as you have done at nearly every other forum you have participated in, but don't you realize this pattern just confirms your sociopathic nature?
Not sure I agree with you. In a book store, the books are not strewn all over the place. Every measure is taken by the store owner to ensure that the books are properly categorized and placed; and if potential buyers disrupt this categorization/organization by rearranging books or tossing them on the floor without care or concern for other potential buyers, there will be functions in place to restore the order. Most of the time, these functions are unnecessary; because most potential buyers usually respect the consumer space of other potential buyers. But when one yahoo starts disrupting the ambience of the book store, then it is expected that the owner respond in some fashion to this disruption. The alternative is eventual bookstore bankruptcy.
As for the party metaphor, when some yahoo has had too much to drink, is it responsible for the bartender to continue supplying drinks? Secondly, when the drunkard
barges in on the conversations of a group within the party - uninvited and then unwanted - should the drunk be allowed to continue abusing the group with their intoxicated manner?
" Freedom's just another word for nothin' left to lose. " - Kris Kristofferson.
And if Inphinet forum wants that kind of freedom, e.g. where anyone can slander anyone for any reason and not be redressed for it ... then it is welcome to it.
Did you nottice your post here was #67, "The Stephen Number" lol, Phil.? popcorn9
It was a complex forum portal page, unique and well done. It is unfortunate your time was wasted on such a grandiose structure when, in reality, even a handful of people,, then or sense, do not seem to be able to co-exist in even a simple forum. I quite liked the compass thingee.
So, everything up until this time was done on Skype.? As I recall, Whitehaze had just got the Ventrilo room functional when he gave me an account sometime in April 2011. Icecold wasn't even there yet when I showed up. I don't think the Rulers of the World interview was published until January 2011. Stephen told me his initial plan was to proceed at Avalon and facilitate Bill. As I remember, mention of the 18 at Avalon did not occur until later. You say Rhi in August. Dale in Novemeber, you January and Whitehaze considered yourself 18 then?
Whatever happened to Whitehaze?
How do you recall the situation when he and Torz were asked to resign? Was it purely because he sided against Rhi on the preferential treatment issue?
I remember Rhi was different then promoting an air of mystical spiritual superiority.
Paula also did.
Both faux, in my opinion.
Some of us did have talents for the structure and should have been treated with more consideration. I wanted to talk to anyone who wasn't too uppity to talk to me to try to figure out what was going on then. We were told basically nothing, not given any background information, and treated like second class citizens. That group was cliquish, ageist, and cut throat in my opinion. Rhiannon went about everything displaying those characteristics in my opinion.
Naturally. It's the sociopathic way.
And, they were so dishonest they spun those actions as having happened for another reason entirely.
Sociopaths really do expose themselves if only you know what to look for.
That is true. And, they were so dishonest they spun those removals as having happened for another reason entirely, fraternizing with former members. Icecold gave me a hinted warning about being removed shortly after my comments in the Purple Room poll.
It is the blatant dishonesty that was so insidious. The truth of was actually what was going on was that they conned Bill into using Avalon members as a pool of indidviduals to choose from for free help to build their website, just as they used InPHInet to locate and interview candidates for their current outside projects. In addition, Stephen often seemed to be functioning as a headhunter for his friends. But, in order for this to work, he always added in some type of fictional humanitarian purpose for a project so people would be willing to work to participate for free.
You can see in the "Bilderberg Group" thread (Stephen wanted moved to members only), he began an attempt to spin a construction business as combating the evil concrete people? He ultimately decided against doing so for some reason.
Ouch. You must wonder if it is some kind of karmic punishment.
That's an interesting observation which I have also noticed in other people. You know how sociopaths mimic normal behavior but often get it slightly wrong? I think that's what is happening with the humor here. Without empathy, the sociopaths don't realize when they have crossed the line into vulgarity and tastelessness.
Stephen has a more charming manner, which most people find attractive. Stephen is probably a more refined actor, which I think he demonstrated quite adequately at Avalon. That makes him a better chameleon, i.e. a better mimic. This means he can fool people better than Rhiannon.
Sociopaths have to mimic emotions that rely on empathy, but emotions that don't, like anger or vengeance, can be expressed by sociopaths more honestly. Of course, the most skilled sociopaths will suppress these honest emotions as well. Everything is a game to them, and deception is used wherever the game-player feels it is beneficial.
That's really all you need to know right there (about Stephen).
Thanks - I always hated it tbh but that's just me.
Never liked the format or structure. Mostly I hated that damned compass thingy. That's what I got for finally sleeping a few hours! Wake up, everyone's decided we're doing this stupid compass and I've got 2 days to do it to fit with the fibonacci sequence delivery of content that everyone wanted. I didn't sleep and it took me 36 hours straight to make and code all the logic and animations for it. I then had to go straight into work and continue.
Mainly that's what I remember about those days - constant demands and no sleep lol
I can understand that.
Maybe I am too harsh with Rhiannon.
I am certain she did have an extremely difficult position to keep up with.
I will consider if the ill intent I blame upon her could have been lack of concentration and attention to those particular matters.
And my sincere commendation to you, Phil.
Atticus1 was a beautiful site.
I am aware of all the hours and intensive work you put into building it.