repetition
10 July, 2007 - 20:18
Last week I passed the 1-year mark on this job.
I've performed my primary task 12,193 times.
I've performed my more time-consuming secondary task 1,093 times.
10 July, 2007 - 20:25
#2
In the last year of work I think I've:
- checked StuffonMyCat.com well over 2,000 times
- tooled around on MySpace at least 2-3 times a day
- spent far too much time arguing on Libcom
- wasted many hours "running errands" (ie, goin for walks in the park)
- and drank enough lunch hour beer to intoxicate a small island population for a week
10 July, 2007 - 20:29
#3
yeah thats cause the churches are just parasites on the workers man
10 July, 2007 - 20:34
#4
MJ wrote:
yeah thats cause the churches are just parasites on the workers man
you don't think that?
I reckon Durruti had it pretty spot on when he said the only church that illuminates is a burning one.
10 July, 2007 - 20:35
#5
ban! ban! ban!
10 July, 2007 - 20:36
#6
Ah yes, openly advocating and pushing for the abolishment of religion. The most surefire way to unite the working class.
10 July, 2007 - 20:38
#7
j.rogue wrote:
Ah yes, openly advocating and pushing for the abolishment of religion. The most surefire way to unite the working class.
well i wouldn't launch a campaign but I think anarchists should see churches as fundamentally parasites on the working class.
10 July, 2007 - 20:41
#8
revol68 wrote:
well i wouldn't launch a campaign but I think anarchists should see churches as fundamentally parasites on the working class.
Do you think we should ban members of church apparatuses from anarchist groups?
10 July, 2007 - 20:44
#9
MJ wrote:
revol68 wrote:
well i wouldn't launch a campaign but I think anarchists should see churches as fundamentally parasites on the working class.Do you think we should ban members of church apparatuses from anarchist groups?
depends on their job, though I'd have thought a principled anarchist wouldn't be able to bring themsevles to work for the churches in the first place.
11 July, 2007 - 01:10
#10
revol68 wrote:
MJ wrote:
revol68 wrote:
well i wouldn't launch a campaign but I think anarchists should see churches as fundamentally parasites on the working class.Do you think we should ban members of church apparatuses from anarchist groups?
depends on their job, though I'd have thought a principled anarchist wouldn't be able to bring themsevles to work for the churches in the first place.
But I also play in a satanic black metal band. I figure it all evens out in the end.
11 July, 2007 - 06:19
#11
MJ wrote:
Do you think we should ban members of church apparatuses from anarchist groups?
What's with this obsession with who is and isn't allowed into anarchist groups? It's not like they're of any real relevance.
I mean, do you think that the revolution will only happen once you get enough people into fucking NEFAC or something?
11 July, 2007 - 07:04
#12
Priests and other assorted peddlers of filth certainly won't be allowed into Organise!, we ain't the IWW, Durruti would have known what to do with Father Hagerty!
11 July, 2007 - 12:09
#13
madashell wrote:
MJ wrote:
Do you think we should ban members of church apparatuses from anarchist groups?What's with this obsession with who is and isn't allowed into anarchist groups? It's not like they're of any real relevance.
I mean, do you think that the revolution will only happen once you get enough people into fucking NEFAC or something?
Um, I'll give you a little hint, I'm joking and it's in reference to Revol's campaign to kick NEFACers out of NEFAC.
11 July, 2007 - 12:18
#14
madashell wrote:
I mean, do you think that the revolution will only happen once you get enough people into fucking NEFAC or something?
And for the record, the answer to this is a resounding no:
NEFAC wrote:
we advocate the radicalization of every struggle
NEFAC wrote:
we want to aid the development of an autonomous class consciousness
NEFAC wrote:
The revolution we want will not be the work of any one organization, even an anarchist one, but of a large class movement
NEFAC wrote:
we do not believe that an organization is a movement in itself
NEFAC wrote:
we do not think we possess THE truth
NEFAC wrote:
we advocate revolutionary pluralism
NEFAC wrote:
We reject the vision of the 'political-party-guide-of-the-masses'
NEFAC wrote:
The anarchist organization is one of the moment within the social struggle
11 July, 2007 - 13:11
#15
You guys are fucking pathetic.
11 July, 2007 - 13:18
#16
makaira wrote:
You guys are fucking pathetic.
You raise some interesting points but I'm not quite sure what you're ultimately getting at. Would you like to expand on this at all?
11 July, 2007 - 13:25
#17
MJ wrote:
Last week I passed the 1-year mark on this job.I've performed my primary task 12,193 times.
I've performed my more time-consuming secondary task 1,093 times.
You must be very proud.
11 July, 2007 - 13:31
#18
Sure, MJ. I'm getting at the fact that I can't even click on a new library submission without having a 75% chance that somewhere in the submission will be some pissfest between NEFAC and [InsertNameHere].
11 July, 2007 - 14:22
#19
makaira wrote:
Sure, MJ. I'm getting at the fact that I can't even click on a new library submission without having a 75% chance that somewhere in the submission will be some pissfest between NEFAC and [InsertNameHere].
Yes, it's frustrating for us too, especially since we aren't picking most of these pissfests and most of us are on here to see if there's anything we can learn.
John. wrote:
MJ wrote:
Last week I passed the 1-year mark on this job.I've performed my primary task 12,193 times.
I've performed my more time-consuming secondary task 1,093 times.You must be very proud.
Yeah proud, in a wanting to either kill myself or quit my job and become a dumpster diving crusty sort of way. 
11 July, 2007 - 14:31
#20
MJ wrote:
makaira wrote:
Sure, MJ. I'm getting at the fact that I can't even click on a new library submission without having a 75% chance that somewhere in the submission will be some pissfest between NEFAC and [InsertNameHere].Yes, it's frustrating for us too, especially since we aren't picking most of these pissfests and most of us are on here to see if there's anything we can learn.
John. wrote:
MJ wrote:
Last week I passed the 1-year mark on this job.I've performed my primary task 12,193 times.
I've performed my more time-consuming secondary task 1,093 times.You must be very proud.
Yeah proud, in a wanting to either kill myself or quit my job and become a dumpster diving crusty sort of way. :(
Look what libcom did to MJ!
11 July, 2007 - 14:45
#21
I'm not going to view that image right now, since I'm at work and from the context it sounds like it must be both pornographic and violent.
11 July, 2007 - 14:59
#22
MJ wrote:
I'm not going to view that image right now, since I'm at work and from the context it sounds like it must be both pornographic and violent.
It's blocked from my work...
j.rogue wrote:
MJ wrote:
makaira wrote:
Sure, MJ. I'm getting at the fact that I can't even click on a new library submission without having a 75% chance that somewhere in the submission will be some pissfest between NEFAC and [InsertNameHere].Yes, it's frustrating for us too, especially since we aren't picking most of these pissfests and most of us are on here to see if there's anything we can learn.
John. wrote:
MJ wrote:
Last week I passed the 1-year mark on this job.I've performed my primary task 12,193 times.
I've performed my more time-consuming secondary task 1,093 times.You must be very proud.
Yeah proud, in a wanting to either kill myself or quit my job and become a dumpster diving crusty sort of way. :(
Look what libcom did to MJ!
Yeah for the tough guys of american anarchism they aren't half a bunch of whiney bitches.
11 July, 2007 - 15:03
#23
Yeah next thing you know we'll be complaining about "alienation"!
11 July, 2007 - 15:11
#24
MJ wrote:
I'm not going to view that image right now, since I'm at work and from the context it sounds like it must be both pornographic and violent.
I'm confused, you can't see the graphic in the post?
11 July, 2007 - 15:27
#25
makaira wrote:
Sure, MJ. I'm getting at the fact that I can't even click on a new library submission without having a 75% chance that somewhere in the submission will be some pissfest between NEFAC and [InsertNameHere].
Talk to Revol. The boy is obsessed.
(personally, I think it is something a angsty schoolboy crush where he feels like he needs to kick mud puddles our way in order to be noticed... he'll probably work it out of his system sooner or later, just give it time)
11 July, 2007 - 15:40
#26
j.rogue wrote:
I'm confused, you can't see the graphic in the post?
Nah I have images blocked on my work browser
11 July, 2007 - 16:26
#27
MJ wrote:
j.rogue wrote:
I'm confused, you can't see the graphic in the post?Nah I have images blocked on my work browser
Oh, gotcha, that sucks. Eh, it's just some kid with his legs sticking out of a dumpster. Not very clever.
11 July, 2007 - 18:17
#28
j.rogue wrote:
MJ wrote:
j.rogue wrote:
I'm confused, you can't see the graphic in the post?Nah I have images blocked on my work browser
Oh, gotcha, that sucks. Eh, it's just some kid with his legs sticking out of a dumpster. Not very clever.
i think it's a "her," as the fellow's wearing a skirt.
it's always possible the person's dead, though 
11 July, 2007 - 18:20
#29
Feighnt wrote:
j.rogue wrote:
MJ wrote:
j.rogue wrote:
I'm confused, you can't see the graphic in the post?Nah I have images blocked on my work browser
Oh, gotcha, that sucks. Eh, it's just some kid with his legs sticking out of a dumpster. Not very clever.
i think it's a "her," as the fellow's wearing a skirt.
it's always possible the person's dead, though
Huh, looks like shorts to me....
I mean, stop policing gender presentation!
11 July, 2007 - 18:37
#30
j.rogue wrote:
Huh, looks like shorts to me....
I mean, stop policing gender presentation!
aw crap, you're right... took a closer look, they're shorts. that's too bad, i thought the skirt looked better.
still holding out on the idea that s/he's a corpse, though 
Ah christ, if an admin wants to correct the spelling in my subject line they can feel free.