Guest guest Posted January 24, 2001 Report Share Posted January 24, 2001 > > Hi All, > > > > So what's wrong with Ayn Rand? > > Libertarian let-them-eat-caker from hell! Ayn Rand is the discoverer of Objectivism as revealed in the following article: Is Objectivism an external authority? No. It is a philosophy for living on Earth. It offers principles you can use to guide your life (e.g., reason, honesty, and independence). It does not dictate anything to anyone. Is Objectivism a cult? It is according to Jeff , author of The Ayn Rand Cult (Open Court, 1999). published a 400-page treatise arguing that Ayn Rand, her close associates, and her philosophy of Objectivism is both a cult and harmful. He explicitly and repeatedly attacks Rand, Branden, Peikoff, Schwartz, and other long-time Objectivists. Using a plethora of ad hominem attacks, attempts to invalidate the entire Objectivist movement. does provide some interesting aspects from the early days of Objectivism. For instance, he describes the expulsion of Libertarian philosopher Murray Rothbard from Rand's inner circle. Rothbard, explains , was ostracized from orthodox Objectivism due to allegations of plagiarism. Rothbard allegedly plagiarized portions of Atlas Shrugged in an article he wrote. Other people who were purged from Objectivism's inner circle include iel Branden, Barbara Branden, the Blumenthals, the s, Kelley, Reisman, Edith Packer, and more. Some authors have written tomes attempting to discredit Ayn Rand, her philosophy, and her students. These books desperately try to undermine the validity of Ayn Rand and Objectivism by linking it to religion or a cult or asserting that Objectivism is " obviously fallacious " . But people who read books that attack Ayn Rand and Objectivism should realize that without Ayn Rand, her attackers would be unknown ciphers. Everyone who attacks Ayn Rand needs her work to rise to fame if not fortune, albeit by attempting to smear Rand and undermine her intellectual achievement. Also important to note is that without Ayn Rand, most of her associates and benefactors would be unknown throughout the world. Without Ayn Rand, most people would not know iel Branden, Barbara Branden, Alan Greenspan, Kay Nolte , Leonard Peikoff, , and so on. In fact, there would be no Objectivism. This means that there would be no Neo-Tech, which in turn means there would be no Local Group. And L. Hunter would be an unknown gardener in Europe or America. Finally, millions today might be living in the USSA: the United Socialist States of America run by politicos exemplified by Nazi-sympathizer Pat Buchanan. True, Rand was not a perfect human being; she had some personal faults. But who is perfect? Who has no personal shortcomings? The last person who allegedly was perfect found himself nailed to the cross 2000 years ago. The bottom line to all this is laissez-faire Objectivism: leave Objectivism alone! Critiquing a valuable person is fine, but spending years or a lifetime to undermine a valuable person or achievement is a tremendous waste. The fact is Ayn Rand's intellectual achievement is monumental: it has benefited millions of people and will continue to do so, possibly forever. Does this make Ayn Rand a legitimate higher authority? No. She is the developer of Objectivism. People can learn from her work and profit intellectually -- even be inspired by her life. Nevertheless all real- and-imagined higher authorities must be boiled including Ms. Rand and her Objectivist philosophy in order to continue growing and advancing in life. One can properly apply the principles of Objectivism to one's specific situations for permanent benefits. But individual consciousness is the only valid authority for one's life. This means using one's mind to (1) understand reality and (2) formulate actions based on that understanding. One might make mistakes if one relies on one's mind, but those mistakes can be corrected if one is honest. The biggest mistake of all, however, would be to use the thinking of external authorities as the basis for one's actions. In that mode, one transforms oneself into a non-person, a non-entity -- a zero who is unable to genuinely think, feel, or love. And that, more than attacking greatness, is the ultimate tragedy and waste of life. Hunter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 24, 2001 Report Share Posted January 24, 2001 > > Hi All, > > > > So what's wrong with Ayn Rand? > > Libertarian let-them-eat-caker from hell! Ayn Rand is the discoverer of Objectivism as revealed in the following article: Is Objectivism an external authority? No. It is a philosophy for living on Earth. It offers principles you can use to guide your life (e.g., reason, honesty, and independence). It does not dictate anything to anyone. Is Objectivism a cult? It is according to Jeff , author of The Ayn Rand Cult (Open Court, 1999). published a 400-page treatise arguing that Ayn Rand, her close associates, and her philosophy of Objectivism is both a cult and harmful. He explicitly and repeatedly attacks Rand, Branden, Peikoff, Schwartz, and other long-time Objectivists. Using a plethora of ad hominem attacks, attempts to invalidate the entire Objectivist movement. does provide some interesting aspects from the early days of Objectivism. For instance, he describes the expulsion of Libertarian philosopher Murray Rothbard from Rand's inner circle. Rothbard, explains , was ostracized from orthodox Objectivism due to allegations of plagiarism. Rothbard allegedly plagiarized portions of Atlas Shrugged in an article he wrote. Other people who were purged from Objectivism's inner circle include iel Branden, Barbara Branden, the Blumenthals, the s, Kelley, Reisman, Edith Packer, and more. Some authors have written tomes attempting to discredit Ayn Rand, her philosophy, and her students. These books desperately try to undermine the validity of Ayn Rand and Objectivism by linking it to religion or a cult or asserting that Objectivism is " obviously fallacious " . But people who read books that attack Ayn Rand and Objectivism should realize that without Ayn Rand, her attackers would be unknown ciphers. Everyone who attacks Ayn Rand needs her work to rise to fame if not fortune, albeit by attempting to smear Rand and undermine her intellectual achievement. Also important to note is that without Ayn Rand, most of her associates and benefactors would be unknown throughout the world. Without Ayn Rand, most people would not know iel Branden, Barbara Branden, Alan Greenspan, Kay Nolte , Leonard Peikoff, , and so on. In fact, there would be no Objectivism. This means that there would be no Neo-Tech, which in turn means there would be no Local Group. And L. Hunter would be an unknown gardener in Europe or America. Finally, millions today might be living in the USSA: the United Socialist States of America run by politicos exemplified by Nazi-sympathizer Pat Buchanan. True, Rand was not a perfect human being; she had some personal faults. But who is perfect? Who has no personal shortcomings? The last person who allegedly was perfect found himself nailed to the cross 2000 years ago. The bottom line to all this is laissez-faire Objectivism: leave Objectivism alone! Critiquing a valuable person is fine, but spending years or a lifetime to undermine a valuable person or achievement is a tremendous waste. The fact is Ayn Rand's intellectual achievement is monumental: it has benefited millions of people and will continue to do so, possibly forever. Does this make Ayn Rand a legitimate higher authority? No. She is the developer of Objectivism. People can learn from her work and profit intellectually -- even be inspired by her life. Nevertheless all real- and-imagined higher authorities must be boiled including Ms. Rand and her Objectivist philosophy in order to continue growing and advancing in life. One can properly apply the principles of Objectivism to one's specific situations for permanent benefits. But individual consciousness is the only valid authority for one's life. This means using one's mind to (1) understand reality and (2) formulate actions based on that understanding. One might make mistakes if one relies on one's mind, but those mistakes can be corrected if one is honest. The biggest mistake of all, however, would be to use the thinking of external authorities as the basis for one's actions. In that mode, one transforms oneself into a non-person, a non-entity -- a zero who is unable to genuinely think, feel, or love. And that, more than attacking greatness, is the ultimate tragedy and waste of life. Hunter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 24, 2001 Report Share Posted January 24, 2001 True, Rand was not a perfect human being; she had some personal faults. But who is perfect? Who has no personal shortcomings? The last person who allegedly was perfect found himself nailed to the cross 2000 years ago. If there had been a perfect person since J.C. he would by definiton be perfectly smart. Wouldn't a person this smart have learned to keep his perfection below the radar in order to avoid J.C.'s fate? Sorry to jump off your post. This touched on a pet idea I return to now and again; that those individuals who have reached the highest possible level of human development don't broadcast it or call attention to themselves. If this is true then you can easily spot the frauds out there. They're the ones claiming to be the real thing. Nate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2001 Report Share Posted January 25, 2001 > Ayn Rand is the discoverer of Objectivism as revealed in the > following article: " Discoverer " implies finding an existing reality. She *invented* Objectivism. > > But people who read books that attack Ayn Rand and > Objectivism should realize that without Ayn Rand, her attackers >would be unknown ciphers. Everyone who attacks Ayn Rand needs her >work to rise to fame if not fortune, albeit by attempting to smear >Rand and undermine her intellectual achievement. Well historians of Hitler and Nazism need him and it for their achievements too. Does that make him and it superior? Also I doubt any Rand critic's sole achievement concerns attacking her. Even the Branden's have done their exposures of Rand. > This > means that there would be no Neo-Tech, which in turn means there > would be no Local Group. Sounds like she has a lot to answer for. > And L. Hunter would be an unknown > gardener in Europe or America. You are an unknown anyway, arent you? > Finally, millions today might be > living in the USSA: the United Socialist States of America run by > politicos exemplified by Nazi-sympathizer Pat Buchanan. And if it werent for me Grinch might have stolen Xmas. American democracy seems to have managed for a couple of hundred years or so before this Russian hack showed up. What this egomaniac had the chutzpah to call " Objectivism " involves kidergarten morality and economics and an equally pre-adolescent belief that her political and economic views were somehow rational imperatives. As it is, I think her naive and revolting political views would create a corporate fascist dystopia of baroque proportions. Ken, do we have to put up with this guy who appears to just want to promote his thing Neuro-Tic or whatever? P. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2001 Report Share Posted January 25, 2001 P., I'm not sorry that you do not percieve that my inquisitive existance merits your acknowledgment. Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2001 Report Share Posted January 25, 2001 P., I'm not sorry that you do not percieve that my inquisitive existance merits your acknowledgment. Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2001 Report Share Posted January 25, 2001 P., I'm not sorry that you do not percieve that my inquisitive existance merits your acknowledgment. Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2001 Report Share Posted January 25, 2001 Like I said, "So what's wrong with Ayn Rand?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2001 Report Share Posted January 25, 2001 > > > True, Rand was not a perfect human being; she had some personal > faults. But who is perfect? Who has no personal shortcomings? The > last person who allegedly was perfect found himself nailed to the > cross 2000 years ago. > > If there had been a perfect person since J.C. he would by definiton be perfectly smart. > Wouldn't a person this smart have learned to keep his perfection below the radar in order to avoid J.C.'s fate? > > Sorry to jump off your post. This touched on a pet idea I return to now and again; that those individuals who have reached the highest possible level of human development don't broadcast it or call attention to themselves. If this is true then you can easily spot the frauds out there. They're the ones claiming to be the real thing. > > Nate Right. To become invisible, visit http://www.neo-tech.com/djourney/invisible.php Hunter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2001 Report Share Posted January 25, 2001 > > > True, Rand was not a perfect human being; she had some personal > faults. But who is perfect? Who has no personal shortcomings? The > last person who allegedly was perfect found himself nailed to the > cross 2000 years ago. > > If there had been a perfect person since J.C. he would by definiton be perfectly smart. > Wouldn't a person this smart have learned to keep his perfection below the radar in order to avoid J.C.'s fate? > > Sorry to jump off your post. This touched on a pet idea I return to now and again; that those individuals who have reached the highest possible level of human development don't broadcast it or call attention to themselves. If this is true then you can easily spot the frauds out there. They're the ones claiming to be the real thing. > > Nate Right. To become invisible, visit http://www.neo-tech.com/djourney/invisible.php Hunter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2001 Report Share Posted January 25, 2001 > > But people who read books that attack Ayn Rand and > > Objectivism should realize that without Ayn Rand, her attackers > >would be unknown ciphers. Everyone who attacks Ayn Rand needs her > >work to rise to fame if not fortune, albeit by attempting to smear > >Rand and undermine her intellectual achievement. > > Well historians of Hitler and Nazism need him and it for their > achievements too. Does that make him and it superior? Hitler did not produce any rational achievements. He was a mass- murderer who killed 9,000,000 Jews and other people for personal glory. > > And L. Hunter would be an unknown > > gardener in Europe or America. > > You are an unknown anyway, arent you? Right. No one in the anti-civilization has ever met L. Hunter. > What this egomaniac had the > chutzpah to call " Objectivism " involves kidergarten morality and > economics... Objectivist Ethics = Rational Self-Interest Objectivist Politics = Laissez-Faire Capitalism Do you think self-sacrifice & communism are 'more intellectual'? > As it is, I think > her naive and revolting political views would create a corporate > fascist dystopia of baroque proportions. You have your right to think what you want. I will add that if her views prevail, we will all be living in a world where unbridled business delivers escalating values at falling prices to everyone as is happening in the unregulated computer industry. Hunter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2001 Report Share Posted January 25, 2001 > > But people who read books that attack Ayn Rand and > > Objectivism should realize that without Ayn Rand, her attackers > >would be unknown ciphers. Everyone who attacks Ayn Rand needs her > >work to rise to fame if not fortune, albeit by attempting to smear > >Rand and undermine her intellectual achievement. > > Well historians of Hitler and Nazism need him and it for their > achievements too. Does that make him and it superior? Hitler did not produce any rational achievements. He was a mass- murderer who killed 9,000,000 Jews and other people for personal glory. > > And L. Hunter would be an unknown > > gardener in Europe or America. > > You are an unknown anyway, arent you? Right. No one in the anti-civilization has ever met L. Hunter. > What this egomaniac had the > chutzpah to call " Objectivism " involves kidergarten morality and > economics... Objectivist Ethics = Rational Self-Interest Objectivist Politics = Laissez-Faire Capitalism Do you think self-sacrifice & communism are 'more intellectual'? > As it is, I think > her naive and revolting political views would create a corporate > fascist dystopia of baroque proportions. You have your right to think what you want. I will add that if her views prevail, we will all be living in a world where unbridled business delivers escalating values at falling prices to everyone as is happening in the unregulated computer industry. Hunter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2001 Report Share Posted January 25, 2001 > > But people who read books that attack Ayn Rand and > > Objectivism should realize that without Ayn Rand, her attackers > >would be unknown ciphers. Everyone who attacks Ayn Rand needs her > >work to rise to fame if not fortune, albeit by attempting to smear > >Rand and undermine her intellectual achievement. > > Well historians of Hitler and Nazism need him and it for their > achievements too. Does that make him and it superior? Hitler did not produce any rational achievements. He was a mass- murderer who killed 9,000,000 Jews and other people for personal glory. > > And L. Hunter would be an unknown > > gardener in Europe or America. > > You are an unknown anyway, arent you? Right. No one in the anti-civilization has ever met L. Hunter. > What this egomaniac had the > chutzpah to call " Objectivism " involves kidergarten morality and > economics... Objectivist Ethics = Rational Self-Interest Objectivist Politics = Laissez-Faire Capitalism Do you think self-sacrifice & communism are 'more intellectual'? > As it is, I think > her naive and revolting political views would create a corporate > fascist dystopia of baroque proportions. You have your right to think what you want. I will add that if her views prevail, we will all be living in a world where unbridled business delivers escalating values at falling prices to everyone as is happening in the unregulated computer industry. Hunter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2001 Report Share Posted January 25, 2001 Friday, January 26, 2001, 1:02:56 AM, you wrote: > Right. To become invisible, visit > http://www.neo-tech.com/djourney/invisible.php > Hunter I took a look and found this paragraph, which I will reproduce here since it is surely a remarkable piece of writing; > Seven Phases > in becoming an > Invisible Illuminatus > > Unleashing zon-like power from an invisible illuminatus is somewhat > like unleashing sun-like power from a hydrogen bomb. The trigger for > both is an atomic/digital explosion: The hydrogen bomb requires an > atomic-fission-bomb explosion to trigger its fusion power. The > Neo-Tech/Illuminati bomb requires a digital-brain-mind explosion to > trigger its faustian power. Through mc2=E (new-energy-release > explosion), the hydrogen bomb vanishes nuclear matter to unleash > physical power -- thermonuclear power. Through re-digitizing the > brain with fully integrated honesty (FIH) and wide-scope accounting > (WSA), through FIH+WSA=E' (new-color-release explosion), the > illuminati bomb vanishes anticivilization non-matter to unleash > conscious power -- zonpower. > > Zonpower yields the freedom, prosperity, and motivation needed to > cure aging and death. Below are the original Seven Phases through > which the first illuminatus evolved to unleash zonpower on planet > Earth: And it is all like this. Much as I eschew labelling, sometimes it is helpful, so I'll do it. You're a nut, aren't you. Joe B. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2001 Report Share Posted January 25, 2001 Friday, January 26, 2001, 1:02:56 AM, you wrote: > Right. To become invisible, visit > http://www.neo-tech.com/djourney/invisible.php > Hunter I took a look and found this paragraph, which I will reproduce here since it is surely a remarkable piece of writing; > Seven Phases > in becoming an > Invisible Illuminatus > > Unleashing zon-like power from an invisible illuminatus is somewhat > like unleashing sun-like power from a hydrogen bomb. The trigger for > both is an atomic/digital explosion: The hydrogen bomb requires an > atomic-fission-bomb explosion to trigger its fusion power. The > Neo-Tech/Illuminati bomb requires a digital-brain-mind explosion to > trigger its faustian power. Through mc2=E (new-energy-release > explosion), the hydrogen bomb vanishes nuclear matter to unleash > physical power -- thermonuclear power. Through re-digitizing the > brain with fully integrated honesty (FIH) and wide-scope accounting > (WSA), through FIH+WSA=E' (new-color-release explosion), the > illuminati bomb vanishes anticivilization non-matter to unleash > conscious power -- zonpower. > > Zonpower yields the freedom, prosperity, and motivation needed to > cure aging and death. Below are the original Seven Phases through > which the first illuminatus evolved to unleash zonpower on planet > Earth: And it is all like this. Much as I eschew labelling, sometimes it is helpful, so I'll do it. You're a nut, aren't you. Joe B. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2001 Report Share Posted January 25, 2001 Friday, January 26, 2001, 1:02:56 AM, you wrote: > Right. To become invisible, visit > http://www.neo-tech.com/djourney/invisible.php > Hunter I took a look and found this paragraph, which I will reproduce here since it is surely a remarkable piece of writing; > Seven Phases > in becoming an > Invisible Illuminatus > > Unleashing zon-like power from an invisible illuminatus is somewhat > like unleashing sun-like power from a hydrogen bomb. The trigger for > both is an atomic/digital explosion: The hydrogen bomb requires an > atomic-fission-bomb explosion to trigger its fusion power. The > Neo-Tech/Illuminati bomb requires a digital-brain-mind explosion to > trigger its faustian power. Through mc2=E (new-energy-release > explosion), the hydrogen bomb vanishes nuclear matter to unleash > physical power -- thermonuclear power. Through re-digitizing the > brain with fully integrated honesty (FIH) and wide-scope accounting > (WSA), through FIH+WSA=E' (new-color-release explosion), the > illuminati bomb vanishes anticivilization non-matter to unleash > conscious power -- zonpower. > > Zonpower yields the freedom, prosperity, and motivation needed to > cure aging and death. Below are the original Seven Phases through > which the first illuminatus evolved to unleash zonpower on planet > Earth: And it is all like this. Much as I eschew labelling, sometimes it is helpful, so I'll do it. You're a nut, aren't you. Joe B. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2001 Report Share Posted January 25, 2001 On the contrary Stuart, The level of my answers has been extremely generous in comparison to the level of your questions, unless you asked me something I missed. > P., > I'm not sorry that you do not percieve that my inquisitive existance merits > your acknowledgment. > > Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2001 Report Share Posted January 25, 2001 On the contrary Stuart, The level of my answers has been extremely generous in comparison to the level of your questions, unless you asked me something I missed. > P., > I'm not sorry that you do not percieve that my inquisitive existance merits > your acknowledgment. > > Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2001 Report Share Posted January 25, 2001 Hunter- Whatever it is you're selling, I'm not buying it. I will not read any of your posts until you provide an explanation for why you're here. Ordinarily it would be out of line to request this, but you're not making much sense and that "become invisible" site of yours is the stuff Unabomber Manifestos are made of. Nate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2001 Report Share Posted January 25, 2001 [fatuous, non-argument snipped] > You have your right to think what you want. I will add that if her > views prevail, we will all be living in a world where unbridled > business delivers escalating values at falling prices to everyone as > is happening in the unregulated computer industry. You mean like IBM and Microsoft do with their bullboy business practices????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2001 Report Share Posted January 25, 2001 Joe, If only this guy *could* become invisible! P. > > > Right. To become invisible, visit > > http://www.neo-tech.com/djourney/invisible.php > > > Hunter > > > I took a look and found this paragraph, which I will reproduce here > since it is surely a remarkable piece of writing; > > > Seven Phases > > in becoming an > > Invisible Illuminatus > > > > Unleashing zon-like power from an invisible illuminatus is somewhat > > like unleashing sun-like power from a hydrogen bomb. The trigger for > > both is an atomic/digital explosion: The hydrogen bomb requires an > > atomic-fission-bomb explosion to trigger its fusion power. The > > Neo-Tech/Illuminati bomb requires a digital-brain-mind explosion to > > trigger its faustian power. Through mc2=E (new-energy-release > > explosion), the hydrogen bomb vanishes nuclear matter to unleash > > physical power -- thermonuclear power. Through re-digitizing the > > brain with fully integrated honesty (FIH) and wide-scope accounting > > (WSA), through FIH+WSA=E' (new-color-release explosion), the > > illuminati bomb vanishes anticivilization non-matter to unleash > > conscious power -- zonpower. > > > > Zonpower yields the freedom, prosperity, and motivation needed to > > cure aging and death. Below are the original Seven Phases through > > which the first illuminatus evolved to unleash zonpower on planet > > Earth: > > And it is all like this. Much as I eschew labelling, sometimes it is > helpful, so I'll do it. You're a nut, aren't you. > > Joe B. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2001 Report Share Posted January 25, 2001 > Like I said, " So what's wrong with Ayn Rand? " Non-Libertarian let-them-eat-caker from hell! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2001 Report Share Posted January 25, 2001 Hi This is a classic! You dont realize it, but you have sort of linked my two web passions, 12-step-free (well addiction, but I like 12sf most) and poker. Anyone looking at my browser cache would see me mostly bouncing between these two themes. Did you check out the review? Two 1's and one 5 star from an anonmyous guy whose probably desperate to sell his copy. Are you a poker player? Fancy a game over the web sometime? P. > [snip of much goofiness] > >And it is all like this. Much as I eschew labelling, sometimes it is > >helpful, so I'll do it. You're a nut, aren't you. > > The guy who invented this particular brand of insanity, > Wallace, began his writing career with a book about > how to win at poker. I read his poker book once upon > a time. > > http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0911752226/qid=980478178/sr=1-2 9/ref=sc_b_4/107-6045183-5458943 > > It was quite sound statistically, but even that book > was a little strange in places (talking about hypnotizing > the other players by swirling your finger around in the > pot, for instance). > > You can still see his origins as a flaky card sharper in > the way the ranting refers to bad people as " neocheaters. " > Cheating at poker would be a sign of a bad player, > after all. > > Interestingly, he seems to have written a book which > is pro-neocheating: > > http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0911752293/qid=980478178/sr=1-2 6/ref=sc_b_1/107-6045183-5458943 > > That must have been during some kind of transition phase from > slightly-flaky poker theorist to full-blown loon and/or fraud. > > I got some junk mail once from these guys which said they > wouldn't sell you their products unless you signed a statement > that you were neither a politician nor a priest. Apparently > those professions are both filled with neocheaters. Whatever > neocheaters are. > > I think this stuff is related to the " Speed Seduction " junk too, > which is some kind of lame how-to-get-laid scam. Those guys > also talk about zonpower and neocheating. They created > their own alt.* newsgroup at one point, four or five years ago. > I never saw anyone do anything but mock the idea, but they > went ahead anyway. > > These guys have been around quite a while, and they're really > a hoot. In a weird way I feel almost like I know them, since I've > encountered the stuff in so many different guises over the years. > > Go zonpower! :-) > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 26, 2001 Report Share Posted January 26, 2001 Friday, January 26, 2001, 3:41:28 AM, you wrote: > Joe, > If only this guy *could* become invisible! > P. I think we could ask for a demonstration, don't you.... Joe B. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 26, 2001 Report Share Posted January 26, 2001 Here are R. Wallace's poker manuals: 1. Poker: A Guaranteed Income for Life http://www.neo-tech.com/poker/ 2. Neocheating: The Rising Menace http://www.neo-tech.com/neocheating/ > [snip of much goofiness] > >And it is all like this. Much as I eschew labelling, sometimes it is > >helpful, so I'll do it. You're a nut, aren't you. > > The guy who invented this particular brand of insanity, > Wallace, began his writing career with a book about > how to win at poker. I read his poker book once upon > a time. > > http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0911752226/qid=980478178/sr=1- 29/ref=sc_b_4/107-6045183-5458943 > > It was quite sound statistically, but even that book > was a little strange in places (talking about hypnotizing > the other players by swirling your finger around in the > pot, for instance). > > You can still see his origins as a flaky card sharper in > the way the ranting refers to bad people as " neocheaters. " > Cheating at poker would be a sign of a bad player, > after all. > > Interestingly, he seems to have written a book which > is pro-neocheating: > > http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0911752293/qid=980478178/sr=1- 26/ref=sc_b_1/107-6045183-5458943 > > That must have been during some kind of transition phase from > slightly-flaky poker theorist to full-blown loon and/or fraud. > > I got some junk mail once from these guys which said they > wouldn't sell you their products unless you signed a statement > that you were neither a politician nor a priest. Apparently > those professions are both filled with neocheaters. Whatever > neocheaters are. > > I think this stuff is related to the " Speed Seduction " junk too, > which is some kind of lame how-to-get-laid scam. Those guys > also talk about zonpower and neocheating. They created > their own alt.* newsgroup at one point, four or five years ago. > I never saw anyone do anything but mock the idea, but they > went ahead anyway. > > These guys have been around quite a while, and they're really > a hoot. In a weird way I feel almost like I know them, since I've > encountered the stuff in so many different guises over the years. > > Go zonpower! :-) > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.