Libcom Admin Managerialism

175 posts / 0 new
Last post
factvalue
Offline
Joined: 29-03-11
Jun 23 2016 22:38
Libcom Admin Managerialism

Over on the Anti-Zionist thread you can read the following curious little insight into the minds of those administering this site:

factvalue wrote:
Serge Forward wrote:
However, factvalue has talked shite on numerous occasions in this thread.

My original reply to this was [Admin: SEXIST INSULT AND RESPONSE DELETED]. What was 'libcom's' reason for removing this tiny piece of harmless banter in an otherwise heavy and turgid thread? What are you allowing yourselves to become?

The reference by 'admin'/management to a 'sexist insult' refers to a quotation taken from a work by a 17th century American alchemist which employed alchemical terminology that 'admin'/management were obviously entirely ignorant of and took to be sexist. The quotation had been selected to deliberately sound like nonsense in response to the preceding comment from Serge Forward. The full quotation was then referenced as evidence (minus the supposedly offending term) of lack of sexist intent but this has also now been removed, so that, instead of admitting their mistake and lack of interpretive ability, whichever of the managers has perpetrated this has effectively smeared only the residue of a diffuse, sexist allegation into my post, where it remains.

Given that the thread in question was one in which at least one admin had not quite gotten things all their own way, is this not abusive, and a form of managerialism which should have no place on a supposedly 'libertarian communist' site?

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Jun 23 2016 22:50

I haven't got the foggiest idea what you're talking about, as I haven't with half the nonsensical posts you make over this site.

However, if you post something which appears sexist, we're going to remove it. We have no idea of your intent, and we have been reading your posts for years (certainly you saying something sexist or abusive doesn't seem at all out of character), so I don't know how you would expect casual readers to be able to tell the difference.

jef costello's picture
jef costello
Offline
Joined: 9-02-06
Jun 23 2016 23:02
Quote:
I deliberately picked an obscure reference that would sound sexist and am now complaining that I have been pulled up for sexism.

It must take a special effort to be that pointless.

Complaining about censorship even though you're allowed to post about said censorship etc etc
I believe the next step is to either call the admins cops or ask to ban revol.

factvalue
Offline
Joined: 29-03-11
Jun 23 2016 23:03
Steven. wrote:
I haven't got the foggiest idea what you're talking about

You now know what I intended, which the full quotation I posted should really have cleared up, wouldn't you agree? So appearance is more important to you than reality, what appears to be sexist is definitely sexist, in other words you/'we' decide/dictate what is sexist, now and in the past? Is that all you have?

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Jun 23 2016 23:06
factvalue wrote:
Steven. wrote:
I haven't got the foggiest idea what you're talking about

You now know what I intended, which the full quotation I posted should really have cleared up, wouldn't you agree? So appearance is more important to you than reality, what appears to be sexist is definitely sexist, in other words you/'we' decide/dictate what is sexist, now and in the past? Is that all you have?

I have no idea what you're talking about because I haven't even looked at that thread. Another admin must have done that. And unless other users have an issue with what was done then I am not going to waste my time with any more of your rubbish.

factvalue
Offline
Joined: 29-03-11
Jun 23 2016 23:10

O goody, jef's arrived and is making up his own quotations again, how lovely. Hi jef! Did I (and I'm quoting now) 'pick an obscure reference that would sound sexist'? How do you know that? Sorry in case you thought that I was calling you a liar, I really wasn't calling you a liar, I know you can be a bit touchy about that, sorry.

Noah Fence's picture
Noah Fence
Offline
Joined: 18-12-12
Jun 23 2016 23:12

Just because you don't understand something somebody else says it doesn't make it nonsensical. I've shown people the Libcom introductory guides and many can't understand them at all, does that mean that they're nonsense? Nope, it just means they lack the capacity to understand something. Snap right here then, k?
If you think someone is an asshole then call them a asshole already, don't hide it behind unestablished and arbitrary conclusions such as you post nonsense. If you UNDERSTAND a post and think it's nonsense then go right ahead and kick some ass but if you don't understand and so assume it's nonsense based on elevated ideas of your own intellect then put a fucking sock in it.

factvalue
Offline
Joined: 29-03-11
Jun 23 2016 23:12
Steven. wrote:
I have no idea what you're talking about because I haven't even looked at that thread.

Then why have you stuck your nose in, wtf? Take me to your leader!!

Noah Fence's picture
Noah Fence
Offline
Joined: 18-12-12
Jun 23 2016 23:21

Also ref another thread - a ban threat for posting nonsense? Hahahahahahaha! Fair application of that rule would be to ban practically every fucker on the site. You can put me at the top of the list if you like.

jef costello's picture
jef costello
Offline
Joined: 9-02-06
Jun 23 2016 23:37
factvalue wrote:
O goody, jef's arrived and is making up his own quotations again, how lovely. Hi jef! Did I (and I'm quoting now) 'pick an obscure reference that would sound sexist'? How do you know that? Sorry in case you thought that I was calling you a liar, I really wasn't calling you a liar, I know you can be a bit touchy about that, sorry.

I'd forgotten about that, I thought it was one of the other pointless posters.
But yes, you did call me a liar and then you were dishonest about it. I didn't attribute the paraphrase to you and I think it's pretty obvious that that's what it is.
Honestly I think you picked that phrase because you mistakenly thought it would make you seem clever when you justified it, because you're interested in point-scoring rather than actual debate and responding to you is genuinely a waste of time and I really should know better.

factvalue
Offline
Joined: 29-03-11
Jun 23 2016 23:46

It wounds me that you think that. Even though your interpretation says more about you than me, mean-spirited poltroonery always depresses me. 'Actual debate' involving people changing positions when logic dictates, like you always do you mean? O. K.

Noah Fence's picture
Noah Fence
Offline
Joined: 18-12-12
Jun 23 2016 23:57
jef costello wrote:
factvalue wrote:
O goody, jef's arrived and is making up his own quotations again, how lovely. Hi jef! Did I (and I'm quoting now) 'pick an obscure reference that would sound sexist'? How do you know that? Sorry in case you thought that I was calling you a liar, I really wasn't calling you a liar, I know you can be a bit touchy about that, sorry.

I'd forgotten about that, I thought it was one of the other pointless posters.
But yes, you did call me a liar and then you were dishonest about it. I didn't attribute the paraphrase to you and I think it's pretty obvious that that's what it is.
Honestly I think you picked that phrase because you mistakenly thought it would make you seem clever when you justified it, because you're interested in point-scoring rather than actual debate and responding to you is genuinely a waste of time and I really should know better.

Ok, let's assume FV is point scoring(if so, he's scoring more points then you are Jeff, you need some more practice mate), is it any worse than all the other self righteous and disingenuous fucking horse manure that you and a few others are pumping out of your keyboard mouths just lately?
So, how many points do I get for that?

factvalue
Offline
Joined: 29-03-11
Jun 24 2016 00:02

.. an' ano'er thing j-jef,..when I called you a liar that time I fucking stood by it, asking if you were somehow exempt because you were some sort of saintly figure that i hadn't been aware of previously,.. ah yes, such good old days, yes....

S. Artesian
Offline
Joined: 5-02-09
Jun 24 2016 00:05
Steven. wrote:
I haven't got the foggiest idea what you're talking about, as I haven't with half the nonsensical posts you make over this site.

However, if you post something which appears sexist, we're going to remove it. We have no idea of your intent, and we have been reading your posts for years (certainly you saying something sexist or abusive doesn't seem at all out of character), so I don't know how you would expect casual readers to be able to tell the difference.

Keep that in mind the next time you or one of your mates uses the term "cunt."

Khawaga's picture
Khawaga
Offline
Joined: 7-08-06
Jun 24 2016 00:06

Fwiw, I don't think factvalue always posts nonsense, it's just that they take quite a bit of parsing. If anything, I charge him with being coy.

factvalue
Offline
Joined: 29-03-11
Jun 24 2016 00:12
Khawaga wrote:
Fwiw, I don't think factvalue always posts nonsense, it's just that they take quite a bit of parsing. If anything, I charge him with being coy.

I've always relied on the kindness of strangers..

Noah Fence's picture
Noah Fence
Offline
Joined: 18-12-12
Jun 24 2016 00:16
Khawaga wrote:
Fwiw, I don't think factvalue always posts nonsense, it's just that they take quite a bit of parsing.

That's more like it. This duh, me no understand/so nonsense attitude reminds me of the time my mate injected lignocaine in his cock just before I gave him a blow job. He then concluded that coz he couldn't feel anything I was shit at blowjobs. Hardly fair, right? He didn't rate my hand shandies any higher until I started tickling his nuts. That perked him up alright!

factvalue
Offline
Joined: 29-03-11
Jun 24 2016 00:23

I'm sorry, I really don't get what the fuck you're saying so you're chattin' shit mann!!

Chilli Sauce's picture
Chilli Sauce
Offline
Joined: 5-10-07
Jun 24 2016 04:38

So, I sort of feel like libcom has recently been building to this thread. So far, I'm not dissapointed.

Noah Fence's picture
Noah Fence
Offline
Joined: 18-12-12
Jun 24 2016 04:42
Chilli Sauce wrote:
So, I sort of feel like libcom has recently been building to this thread. So far, I'm not dissapointed.

Can you expand on that old boy?

Chilli Sauce's picture
Chilli Sauce
Offline
Joined: 5-10-07
Jun 24 2016 04:54
Noah Fence wrote:
Chilli Sauce wrote:
So, I sort of feel like libcom has recently been building to this thread. So far, I'm not dissapointed.

Can you expand on that old boy?

I'm just waiting for S. Artesian to get involved, get hung up on one word someone posted pages back, and then accuse everyone of putting their self-interest before that of the working class by being complicit in EU crimes. Oh, and bring back that Czech-American landlord so him and Gulai Poloi can figure how, as revolutionaries, we can maintain capitalist social relations now and after the revolution.

After all that, I can have a go at someone for making strawman arguments and you and I can make puns for a while.

Basically, I just think libcom has gone a bit weird lately and a thread on "libcom admin managerialism" just really sums it up.

Noah Fence's picture
Noah Fence
Offline
Joined: 18-12-12
Jun 24 2016 05:06

I clearly haven't been reading some significant threads coz I don't understand your first paragraph. I'm well up for the punning though -.im sure we can 'manage' that. It s a certified 'fact' that we'll get some good comedy 'value' out of it.

One element you appear to have missed is that I will make a number of snarky, humorous and possibly rather rude comments and then roll aroun the floor laughing considering myself the funniest man that ever existed whilst almost everybody else let's out a resigned sigh apart from a handful that will proceed to leap up and down with fury. My post #17 is perhaps a case in point.

boozemonarchy's picture
boozemonarchy
Offline
Joined: 28-12-06
Jun 24 2016 05:14

Ahhhh, the perennial "the admins aren't communist on this communist website" thread. Don't mind if I do. . .

Why do I need a password to access my account? What kind of ivory tower gate keeping bullshit operation do you have running here?

The fuck is with that authoritarian penguin always jumping down my throat? I've seen more libcomish penguins hanging out at Trump Tower for fuck sakes. Try harder.

And finally, "ban revol". Fuck that, you ban revol, you ban yourself. Go fucking join the sparts admin scum.

boozemonarchy's picture
boozemonarchy
Offline
Joined: 28-12-06
Jun 24 2016 05:16

dp

Noah Fence's picture
Noah Fence
Offline
Joined: 18-12-12
Jun 24 2016 05:25

Boozey baby! I know what you mean and generally I hate that shit too but I don't think it's quite accurate here. FV is accused of posting nonsense with nothing to back it up other than that a lot of people don't understand him. That really sucks quite hard. It does rather suggest that there is a stream of conservatism and the positioning of anarchism as a static ideology.
I get the sense that there are unexpressed thoughts towards FV of 'aaagghhh, why can't you just be normal?!!!'. If I'm right that's a pretty awful concept on a libertarian website.

Serge Forward's picture
Serge Forward
Offline
Joined: 14-01-04
Jun 24 2016 07:04

As I'm mentioned in the original message, can I just say that I didn't read factvalue's deleted post as sexist, though I can understand why it could be perceived as sexist. As for factvalue's accusations of "managerialism", looks like he's talking shite again wink

Noah Fence's picture
Noah Fence
Offline
Joined: 18-12-12
Jun 24 2016 09:35

Or maybe you don't understand what the indecipherable one means. He clearly needs to get lessons in the language of quasi intellectual no straying from the path anarcho-conservativism with a sprinkling of colloquial prole speak.

factvalue
Offline
Joined: 29-03-11
Jun 24 2016 07:26
Serge Forward wrote:
As for factvalue's accusations of "managerialism", looks like he's talking shite again ;)

Don't make me get mediaeval on your ass (did everyone notice the scholarly spelling, what about THAT then eh, you see?!).

boozemonarchy's picture
boozemonarchy
Offline
Joined: 28-12-06
Jun 24 2016 11:32
Noah Fence wrote:
Boozey baby! I know what you mean and generally I hate that shit too but I don't think it's quite accurate here. FV is accused of posting nonsense with nothing to back it up other than that a lot of people don't understand him. That really sucks quite hard. It does rather suggest that there is a stream of conservatism and the positioning of anarchism as a static ideology.
I get the sense that there are unexpressed thoughts towards FV of 'aaagghhh, why can't you just be normal?!!!'. If I'm right that's a pretty awful concept on a libertarian website.

Oh Noah - I know the thread is to do with FV and such, but I was just using it to put the admin on BLAST for their many crimes.

factvalue
Offline
Joined: 29-03-11
Jun 24 2016 12:17

Don't apologise booze, there's no such thing a 'derail' if it's interesting and entertaining, or in general, why can't people follow several overlapping themes, 'music' anyone ffs?

Noah Fence's picture
Noah Fence
Offline
Joined: 18-12-12
Jun 24 2016 12:58

Ok, I wonder what music the Libcom bosses like.? Wagner?

Booze - I totally misread your post. Duh.