Noah Fence and factvalue

104 posts / 0 new
Last post
Fleur
Offline
Joined: 21-02-12
Oct 6 2016 17:30

OK, I know I said I would never communicate with you again and I really meant it but this is just too fucking good.

Fall Back is not an admin and you would have to be completely fucking clueless about the whole Aufheben gate thing not to know that Samotnaf is at the front of centre of it and is the chief shit stirrer general.

And with that hahahaha, I'm done with you.

Fall Back's picture
Fall Back
Offline
Joined: 22-09-03
Oct 6 2016 17:31

I'm not an admin and haven't poked my nose into anything, but you made it pretty obvious.

Chilli Sauce's picture
Chilli Sauce
Offline
Joined: 5-10-07
Oct 6 2016 17:33

Noah, you need to take a step back man. Seriously, take a deep breath before you post again.

Most people on libcom were happy to see that your ban was over. Why are you squandering that, man?

Noah Fence's picture
Noah Fence
Offline
Joined: 18-12-12
Oct 6 2016 17:51

Ok. Let's get this over with. Ed uses his Rolls Royce to run over peasants, Steven's hipster beard is a stick on, Ramona is a man and Mike Harman married a horse. Everyone on Libcom, especially myself is a complete cunt and anarchism has a boil on its ass.

Now here is an off topic video;

https://youtu.be/3gIdMEAvQk0

Right, that should do it. Now ban me already

Red Marriott's picture
Red Marriott
Offline
Joined: 7-05-06
Oct 6 2016 18:05

Some people appear to have way too much of their self-image, emotions, time, energy and convictions invested in this site - it's just an online forum, FFS. Ironically, mainly those most loyal oppositionists who’re most contemptuous and critical of the site and admins... They generally seem to think that a shorter fuse is greater sign of integrity and passion, deeper caring & radicality etc - but it may be sign of other less impressive features... Disagreement here or ‘winning the argument’ is usually not something that has many real implications beyond the PC screen and the internal ego.

I have my own criticisms of libcom but tend to see it as a semi-public space like a public library; I might not like some librarian decisions or attitudes (and I criticised them over Aufhebengate more than most), or some of the other users, or some of the stock that's carried etc (though the library is uniquely fine) - but it's still a useful resource and sometimes a place where worthwhile discussions, news etc can be found.

The people who constantly butt in and disrupt stuff, then have tantrums about how they've been criticised or how they've been asked to leave till they sober up; well they seem to be only expressing the worst symptoms of the general isolation and impotence all those who feel a need to see radical change are suffering through the social ice age of the present. Are they strategically contributing to improving anything – even in their own lives - except the size of their ego or the self-justification for futile behaviour that only reinforces division and isolation? I don’t think so. Not that I’m against sharp criticism and absolute disagreement but seriously, if getting so angry about stuff on here that you start regularly insulting people and blowing yer top becomes a default setting .. what’s the point? Get a life back in real time & space. Maybe the hopeful glimpse of reducing the personal alienation via libcom becomes cruelly disillusioning and the resentment is then expressed in warped ways. It seems hard for some people to accept criticism and disagreement with their views – to the point where it becomes a personal grudge that must be pursued endlessly, self-obsessively, aggressively and pointlessly.

As for worrying about up/down votes (some of whch probably come from uninformed passing net browsers), I hate that system anyway (though I occasionally use it ‘cos it’s there’ and has sadly become a medium of exchange here,) but it’s seems generally the most aggressive who bother to complain about the anonymous down votes they – unsurprisingly – get.

Auld Bod wrote:
By the same token, in my opinion, ‘Aufheben gate’ is a crock of crap cooked up by politicos with an axe to grind. Some kind of guilt by association bollocks. All this stuff is just scraping the barrel.

NF has been prompted to bring it up here now as a convenient weapon – when, at the actual time of the controversy he was happy to stay neutral and keep the silence he now criticises others for above. But their closing-ranks defence of Dr J remains to the undying glaring shame of the admins and that’s exactly why it’s an easy weapon to be used by the opportunists. I agree with most of your comments here, AB, but on this I believe you & others are just wrong. “Guilt by association”? Yeh, if you mean collaborating with other academics in work that helps define & refine the cops’ tactics of dealing with public disorder etc – see, eg, my comments below article here; https://libcom.org/library/sic-international-journal-communisation

Noah Fence's picture
Noah Fence
Offline
Joined: 18-12-12
Oct 6 2016 18:13

I wasn't even around when the Aufheben thing came about. Several years ago I asked what it was all about I was told not to bother looking into it. I didn't coz I foolishly trusted just about everyone here. Now I don't and so see it as necessary to look into it. That is all there is to it. You're theory of dissident psychology may be right and if so I'm obviously oblivious to it. If my theory is right then of course you're oblivious to it. I guess that makes us quits, right

ultraviolet's picture
ultraviolet
Offline
Joined: 14-04-11
Oct 6 2016 19:28
Auld-bod wrote:
I don’t think libcom is perfect, nothing is. When posting I’m a guest on someone else’s website. I support the cause of libcom and do not expect ‘perfection’ (from my personal perspective) from the administrators. If I go to someone’s house and they don’t like me farting, I try and respect their space, and treat libcom with a similar deference.

Yes, so would I. But that's not the situation here.

It's more like being a guest in someone's house, and they're having a party so there's a bunch of us there, and we all did some farting, with a significant minority of us doing more of it than others, but only two people get kicked out for it (one permanently and one temporarily) while the rest are left to carry on.

Meanwhile, most of the guests (who had done farting themselves) are cheering to see this person go and talking like he's the only one who stinks.

I don't expect perfection either. That's not what this is about. In fact I have many positive views about the people on libcom, both admin and the regular forum users.

Red Marriott's picture
Red Marriott
Offline
Joined: 7-05-06
Oct 6 2016 19:22

NF; It doesn't matter to me whether you're here or not; but if this or any other site made me as angry as it apparently does you and my contempt for it had grown to your level - and regardless of how justifed I thought my criticisms were - I can't see what the point would be staying on here except as a petty obsessive resentment that ate away at me.

radicalgraffiti
Offline
Joined: 4-11-07
Oct 6 2016 19:38
ultraviolet wrote:
Factvalue was far from innocent in this. He'd make many long posts in long off-topic debates. I like him, and appreciated many of his contributions to the forum, but I found this behavior frustrating. But it takes two to tango and everyone who engaged in this with him is equally guilty. No consequences for them, though, right? Or for the others I've seen derail threads without Factvalue's help.

this is complete bullshit, factvalue has along history of sabotaging threads he don't like, the idea that everyone involved is just the same is liberal crap and you should be ashamed to push it.

ultraviolet wrote:

As for those who say that Factvalue has made anti-Semitic posts, I did not read any of the posts that were mentioned. Clearly, though, the admin do not agree that he's been anti-Semitic or we would have been banned for that long ago. Bigotry is against libcom guidelines and from what I've seen admin are serious about enforcing that.
.

some discussion of if he was actually anti-Semitic along with links to the posts in question can be found here https://libcom.org/forums/general/topic-discussions-began-micro-aggression-thread-20092016
https://libcom.org/forums/general/topic-discussions-began-micro-aggression-thread-20092016

Noah Fence's picture
Noah Fence
Offline
Joined: 18-12-12
Oct 6 2016 21:42
Red Marriott wrote:
NF; It doesn't matter to me whether you're here or not; but if this or any other site made me as angry as it apparently does you and my contempt for it had grown to your level - and regardless of how justifed I thought my criticisms were - I can't see what the point would be staying on here except as a petty obsessive resentment that ate away at me.

Maybe that's coz you're a petty obsessive resentment kind of guy - I remember you jumping up and down and waving your knickers in the air in joyful adandonment when Thatcher died. Now that was an impressively long held resentment.
Also, I'd check that word 'apparently' if I were you. If you don't take it seriously you may well jump to the wrong conclusion. Now if you'd said 'apparently causes you such disappointment' you could have abandoned 'apparently' altogether.
It's all fair though - I making loads of assumptions about you and many others so it's only fair that you are afforded the same luxury. Of course one of us could be right or both of us could be wrong. What I'd really like is for me to have it all backasswards so that I could experience the enjoyment and excitement that I used to enjoy here. Nobody sounds very convincing to me though unfortunately. Now is that another near example of my 'self serving humility' or whatever it was you said. I gotta tell ya, the thought of you being correct about that makes me cringe. Once again though I just don't think you've even come close.
I really can't resist continuing this bullshit, call me weak if you like but that's how it is. Where are those fucking admins when you want them?

Red Marriott's picture
Red Marriott
Offline
Joined: 7-05-06
Oct 6 2016 22:31
NF wrote:
Maybe that's coz you're a petty obsessive resentment kind of guy - I remember you jumping up and down and waving your knickers in the air in joyful adandonment when Thatcher died. Now that was an impressively long held resentment.

I don't remember anything like that - but I checked the threads on Thatcher's death and all I found was from 2013 me posting a video; http://libcom.org/forums/news/thatcher-dead-08042013?page=1#comment-513179
- and then you being a grumpy bollox and being told so. Unless I missed something somwehere, nothing at all like me "jumping up and down and waving your knickers in the air in joyful adandonment".

NF wrote:
'self serving humility' or whatever it was you said. I gotta tell ya, the thought of you being correct about that makes me cringe. Once again though I just don't think you've even come close.

No, I haven't, it was Jef said that.

Noah Fence's picture
Noah Fence
Offline
Joined: 18-12-12
Oct 7 2016 00:11

Haha! Oops, now I'm starting to sound like a fruitloop even to myself! The drowning man! Sorry for the slurs and hats off for the backbone displayed on the link you posted of an Aufheben conversation. I wonder if others on this thread reckon you're a knob for not just going along with the under the carpet sweeping or if 'you're better than that'.

Edit: I just read through that Thatcher thread and think I comported myself very well. And Jesus, that song in the video really was fucking dreadful.

Noah Fence's picture
Noah Fence
Offline
Joined: 18-12-12
Oct 7 2016 03:22
Fall Back wrote:
I'm not an admin and haven't poked my nose into anything, but you made it pretty obvious.

Really? Well you make it obvious you can't be trusted - liking the Clash is bad enough but using their album cover as your profile picture? Holy shit man, those fuckers were bigger phonies than a thousand Libcommers.

Noah Fence's picture
Noah Fence
Offline
Joined: 18-12-12
Oct 7 2016 04:13

I still stand by most of what I've said, my opinions haven't changed at all and my experience here has been as I described it. However, I have to admit, I've been acting like a real fucking dick at times here in the last day or so. It's pretty embarrassing. My actions aren't those of someone that doesn't give a shit, it's precisely coz I do care that I'm pissed off and ready to weigh in with my customary pisstaking. Anyway, I've still committed a banning offence, I still want out and I still want out by way of a permanent ban. Come on admins, you warned me, I didn't heed the warning and if you leave me with posting rights you'll probably get more of the same. So do your work and put me out of my misery.
I genuinely feel sooo disappointed with Libcom and I admit I've recently become bitter. I read through that Thatcher thread and found I was challenging the concensus opinion but still having a good laugh. There was no bitterness there. I still have a good laugh posting and I'm still always honest but through my disappointment a bitterness has crept in which does me no favours. It's a damned fucking shame and I'm better off out of it.

Chilli Sauce's picture
Chilli Sauce
Offline
Joined: 5-10-07
Oct 7 2016 04:19
Noah Fence wrote:
Fall Back wrote:
I'm not an admin and haven't poked my nose into anything, but you made it pretty obvious.

Really? Well you make it obvious you can't be trusted - liking the Clash is bad enough but using their album cover as your profile picture? Holy shit man, those fuckers were bigger phonies than a thousand Libcommers.

If you take a closer look at FB's profile pic, I think you'll find you'll be even more disappointed.

Noah, I'm still not sure though in what ways you see yourself (and FV, I guess?) as particularly challenging the libcom orthodoxy?

Noah Fence's picture
Noah Fence
Offline
Joined: 18-12-12
Oct 7 2016 04:38
Chilli Sauce wrote:
Noah Fence wrote:
Fall Back wrote:
I'm not an admin and haven't poked my nose into anything, but you made it pretty obvious.

Really? Well you make it obvious you can't be trusted - liking the Clash is bad enough but using their album cover as your profile picture? Holy shit man, those fuckers were bigger phonies than a thousand Libcommers.

If you take a closer look at FB's profile pic, I think you'll find you'll be even more disappointed.

Noah, I'm still not sure though in what ways you see yourself (and FV, I guess?) as particularly challenging the libcom orthodoxy?

Maybe you're blind to it? Maybe I'm full of shit? I think it's the former. There's no point talking about it any longer. As I've said, I just want out. It'll do us all a favour.

Noah Fence's picture
Noah Fence
Offline
Joined: 18-12-12
Oct 7 2016 04:42

Oh Christ, I just took a closer look. Says it all really. That's one of the lamest pictures I've ever seen. Just looking at it gave me physical pain.

jesuithitsquad's picture
jesuithitsquad
Offline
Joined: 11-10-08
Oct 7 2016 04:46

That's a great question Chili. I'd really like it if NF or UV would give it a go.

Serge Forward's picture
Serge Forward
Offline
Joined: 14-01-04
Oct 7 2016 08:43

You don't really, do you? I mean, I like Noah Fence but do we actually need another of his "all about me" rants berating the admins and the Libcom orthodoxy for the umpteenth time? Or him begging the admins to permanently ban him in some sort of dramatic "big I am" flounce rather than him just stop posting here?

Noah mate, I think you're reading into things a bit too much and always end up opting for whatever negative option there is. Please knock the cringeworthy car crash posting on the head and try and chill the fuck out for a bit.

Noah Fence's picture
Noah Fence
Offline
Joined: 18-12-12
Oct 7 2016 09:33

All fair Serge as your opinion but what's not open to opinion is my reason for wanting to get banned. I honestly can't resist posting here. I've tried and failed, I always get drawn in. I guess that sounds a bit pathetic and maybe it is but it's the truth nonetheless.
I've got things I want to do with my time while I'm still able, a political project in particular so I want out of here. I get on everyone's tits and most get on mine. What's the point?

the button's picture
the button
Offline
Joined: 7-07-04
Oct 7 2016 12:43
Fall Back wrote:
Best thing about this thread is knowing that 5 years later, Samotnaf is still lurking around the site sending private messages to people telling them libcom is bad.

So you admit that the admins access private messages, then?

Edit: I see others have made this point earlier on the thread, except they clearly weren't taking the piss.

As you were.

petey
Offline
Joined: 13-10-05
Oct 7 2016 12:50
the button wrote:
So you admit that the admins access private messages, then?

i never imagined that. i hope i'm right.
btw samotnaf recently flounced from the ICC boards. so it's not just us.

Jim
Offline
Joined: 30-04-06
Oct 7 2016 13:18

Admins with server access (two of us) could technically read private messages if we wanted as they're stored in plain text in the database. However neither of us have the time or interest to actually do that so you can rest assured that your messages to other users aren't being read by the admins. But, if you think that they are a secure way to communicate online I would suggest you start using other services which use end-to-end encryption etc. Even then, that is unlikely to protect you from a well resourced state actor, the advice "don't put anything on the internet you don't want read out in court" is still relevant.

Noah Fence's picture
Noah Fence
Offline
Joined: 18-12-12
Oct 7 2016 13:25

I did receive an email from this chap about Aufheben plus a bunch of other people. I was already looking into it though - nobody instigated anything.
I'll take his word I guess but I found his comment that 'I made it obvious' a little peculiar as I can see nothing I posted that makes it in the least obvious. I think my assumption was fair enough considering that Fall Back used to be an admin and that some non admins are granted some degree of control over the site as recently demonstrated by Kwhaga who moved my post from where I particularly wanted it placed to another thread where I didn't.
Why, as a number of people seem to think, I should just ignore this without looking into it at all seems bizzare regardless of whether there's any truth in the accusations. Anyone care to explain?

jef costello's picture
jef costello
Offline
Joined: 9-02-06
Oct 7 2016 14:40
Noah Fence wrote:
I think my assumption was fair enough considering that Fall Back used to be an admin and that some non admins are granted some degree of control over the site as recently demonstrated by Kwhaga who moved my post from where I particularly wanted it placed to another thread where I didn't.

I think he actually copied an unpublished post to start a new thread.

Non-admins have forum tools, posts can be deleted / unpublished / edited etc. In general, like Khawaga said, those powers are mainly used for deleting spam.

Quote:
Why, as a number of people seem to think, I should just ignore this without looking into it at all seems bizzare regardless of whether there's any truth in the accusations. Anyone care to explain?

No one said don't look into it. Fall back explained that he wasn't an admin and hadn't looked, then Jim explained how PMs work and who has access.

Noah Fence's picture
Noah Fence
Offline
Joined: 18-12-12
Oct 7 2016 15:09

No, he transferred it to a thread started by Seahorse.

Chilli pretty much said it directly. When I first heard of it several years ago a few people said it was all bollocks and that its not worth looking at. I think one was Chilli but I've no recollection of who else. I acted on that advice in my enthusiastic but naive belief that I could trust all Libcommers implicitly. From what I know so far the most generous I could be would be to say I guess it depends on how much importance one puts on what a friend does for a living. For me though JD is a considerable distance on the wrong side of the line.

Noah Fence's picture
Noah Fence
Offline
Joined: 18-12-12
Oct 7 2016 15:13
Jim wrote:
Admins with server access (two of us) could technically read private messages if we wanted as they're stored in plain text in the database. However neither of us have the time or interest to actually do that so you can rest assured that your messages to other users aren't being read by the admins. But, if you think that they are a secure way to communicate online I would suggest you start using other services which use end-to-end encryption etc. Even then, that is unlikely to protect you from a well resourced state actor, the advice "don't put anything on the internet you don't want read out in court" is still relevant.

Ok, understood.
Can you tell me, as an admin, why you haven't kicked me off the site? I've clearly thumbed my nose at your warning yet I'm still here when others aren't.

Chilli Sauce's picture
Chilli Sauce
Offline
Joined: 5-10-07
Oct 7 2016 15:15
Noah Fence wrote:
I'll take his word I guess but I found his comment that 'I made it obvious' a little peculiar as I can see nothing I posted that makes it in the least obvious. I think my assumption was fair enough considering that Fall Back used to be an admin and that some non admins are granted some degree of control over the site as recently demonstrated by Kwhaga who moved my post from where I particularly wanted it placed to another thread where I didn't.
Why, as a number of people seem to think, I should just ignore this without looking into it at all seems bizzare regardless of whether there's any truth in the accusations. Anyone care to explain?

I'll explain (although it's already been covered). There's one person on libcom - Samotanoff - who's been pushing the Aufheben scandal for literally years now. You've never mentioned Aufheben before so it didn't exactly take a Sherlock Holmes to figure out who'd you been talking to - especially given how you'd been talking about all these enlightening PMs you'd been receiving.

Fall Back, then, was being a smart ass and made what was clearly a smart ass joke based on the what, unsurprisingly, later turned out to be true. Everyone else understood it to be a joke. I mean, you don't think all the other people on this thread would be livid if they thought the admins had been reading anyone's private messages?

As for why Aufhaben-gate is a non-starter, I already addressed that on this thread and you made no effort to respond.

So, now I've cared to explain. Do you care to explain what anarcho-groupthink you and FV are being penalized for challenging?

jesuithitsquad's picture
jesuithitsquad
Offline
Joined: 11-10-08
Oct 7 2016 15:37
Quote:
I guess it depends on how much importance one puts on what a friend does for a living

If you'd bothered to read more than what samatof told you to, you'd know several memebers of the libcom group have categorically stated they have never even met the man, Dr. J.

And just fyi, samatof also asked to be banned. He's been waiting 3 years or so at this point. Settle in for the long-haul. In fact, that's how he was able to fill you in on the 'scandal.'

Please answer chilli's question above. Honestly, I'm interested in what you have to say.

Noah Fence's picture
Noah Fence
Offline
Joined: 18-12-12
Oct 7 2016 16:26

1. I already stated I was taking a look at this before I received an email from someon I think is the samantoff that people are so fixated on. He sent me a link to a article on Indymedia and a link to a Libcom thread both of which I'd already read. The rest of the emails I got were saying what a pisstake it was that we had been banned(don't forget mate that you were the author of one of them) or hats off for saying what you think. Only one other person mentioned Aufheben. So get to fuck with your 'all these enlightening emails'. On the thread there were a number of people criticising the admins position.

2. I didn't respond to your comments coz they were patronising as fuck.

3. As I've already stated I have mentioned Aufheben before. I just didn't follow it up.

4. No, I wouldn't care to explain. Ive made it clear in threads I've started and posts on others. I'll give you some clues though. Ethics and morality covers some of it. Double standards and inconsistency. Gang like behaviour in response to unpopular posters. Deference and ass kissing of certain members regardless of what they say or do.
There is a certain unwillingness to step outside of the norms of debate which is fair enough but to sabotage those conversations isn't. Maybe when your stuck in it you're blind to it but others aren't and when they say so they are lambasted if they are not so well liked or ignored if they are. And of course some stop posting or abandon the site altogether.
If you're really interested then fill in the blanks by looking through some threads.