Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

AlexL

Regulars
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    752

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    44

 Content Type 

Posts posted by AlexL

  3. Selfish Christians Citing Ayn Rand

    in Psychology and Self Improvement

    Posted · Edited by AlexL

    14 hours ago, EC said:
    On 4/4/2024 at 1:10 AM, AlexL said:

    There is no reason for them ALL to wish you harm. Follow their advice. Especially if all of them have the same advice.

    Why does nobody care about a massive terrorist threat to the United States and against my own life?

    Follow your mother's advice. Use your intelligence: you have nothing to lose. She certainly wishes you the best. She is not participating in the conspiracy. Neither am I or @Boydstun 

     

  8. Selfish Christians Citing Ayn Rand

    in Psychology and Self Improvement

    Posted

    13 minutes ago, EC said:
    3 hours ago, AlexL said:

    I thought I was clear: I did not recommend that you contact the police to solve the problem, but to direct you the the appropriate competent authorities/organisms.

    I've contacted all those people myself, and nobody will respond.

    My point was precisely for you to let the police determine which is the appropriate organism you should contact for help, and not for you to decide this.

    Quote

    my friends and family ... won't help protect me

    How do they explain this refusal?

  12. About the Russian aggression of Ukraine

    in International Politics

    Posted · Edited by AlexL

    46 minutes ago, tadmjones said:

    Allegedly ? An objective reading would see that comment as an unsolicited 'off topic' remark. lol face

    Would see? Certainly not, maybe only suspect...

    And nothing, of course, about the fact that it was you who unsolicitedly brought the 'off topic' subject😁 of a poll, a subject that you called "arbitrary claptrap" when I followed up.

    Not to mention other evasions...

  13. About the Russian aggression of Ukraine

    in International Politics

    Posted · Edited by AlexL
    Clarity

    8 hours ago, tadmjones said:
    8 hours ago, AlexL said:

    I wasn't implying that you were implying this.

    Besides, there was a lot more in my comment...

    The more was arbitrary claptrap as there will be no election , as ordered by Z.

    1. Missing are your apologies for putting words in my mouth - about what I was allegedly implying.

    2. My "arbitrary claptrap" was a comment to your claims about poll results in case of - purely hypothetical - elections. 

    3. It was not Zelensky who ordered "no-elections". But you have no means of knowing it, because facts ("intricacies") are not your thing.

    Quote

    Ukrainian constitutional law is a little fuzzy for me

    This explains that.

    Quote

    I view the situation as more of a Slavic civil war spurned on by those bent on weakening Russia.

    This does not make it so. Even Putin repeating it incessantly doesn't make it so.

  15. About the Russian aggression of Ukraine

    in International Politics

    Posted · Edited by AlexL

    3 hours ago, tadmjones said:

    The numbers on wiki are from SOCIS

    Thank you for the Wiki link.

    My numbers are from a popularity/trust poll by the KIIS Institute "conducted during the period of Zaluzhnyi’s dismissal saga: from Feb. 5 to 10". Quote:

    "for the period of Feb. 5-10, 64% trusted Mr. Zelenskyy, but at the end of this period, the figure was 60%" [these were the numbers of which I said they are more than twice as big as yours (23.7%)]

    OTOH, the poll you are quoting, by SOCIS, conducted between February 22 to March 1, is a quite different one - it is a much broader one, including for (simulated) presidential elections. Your number - 23.7% - measures the distribution of votes for the first round of presidential elections with 10+ candidates.

    6 hours ago, tadmjones said:

    So for now polling really isn't a 'thing' , yeah ?

    No, there is no way to hold any kind of elections during war/martial law. For details see Martial law in Ukraine. Besides, the respective legislation was adopted long before Zelensky became president.😁

    The SOCIS poll shows that about 66% are against holding presidential elections during this war. 

    According to the KIIS poll, "only 15% of respondents believe a presidential election should go forward".

  16. About the Russian aggression of Ukraine

    in International Politics

    Posted · Edited by AlexL

    2 hours ago, tadmjones said:

    What follows is Zelenskyy is currently president for life...

    This does not follow.

    2 hours ago, tadmjones said:

    ... or for as long as martial law is not rescinded.

    Yes, this does follow.

    2 hours ago, tadmjones said:

    A wikipedia entry shows a current poll with Zelenskyy at 23.7%

    Can you please post the link? And verify the Wiki's references for this number? I found recent poll numbers which are more than double of yours. 

    I found your number - 23.7% - in these somewhat peculiar publications : Sputnik Afrique, TASS, Iran Front Page, RT International.

    2 hours ago, tadmjones said:

    I inferred from Stephen's post [...] Trump [...] Biden [...]

    Off topic.

  21. Closing of the topic "Remembering the CG Computer-Generated Pandemic Tyranny"

    in Website Policy and Announcements

    Posted · Edited by AlexL
    Clarity

    15 minutes ago, necrovore said:
    1 hour ago, AlexL said:

    You are free to create such a forum, but you cannot expect that a given forum owner, for example of this one, will tolerate on his premises the broadcasting of views he abhors. [...]

    I don't know if I want to try to run an open forum, because [...]

    😁My remark above was not an invitation for you to open a forum.😁 Rather, it was to make a point of principle.

  22. Closing of the topic "Remembering the CG Computer-Generated Pandemic Tyranny"

    in Website Policy and Announcements

    Posted · Edited by AlexL

    4 hours ago, necrovore said:

    What I propose is an open forum, where any ideas can be discussed.

    You are free to create such a forum, but you cannot expect that a given forum owner, for example of this one, will tolerate on his premises the broadcasting of views he abhors. Or tolerate irrational behavior in a debate, for example when a person refuses to justify his claims, the concept of evidence-based debate etc.

    4 hours ago, necrovore said:

    It should be sufficient to require that the ideas have something to do with Objectivism.

    This requirement will stop nothing: any idea may be found to have something to do with Objectivism😁

    4 hours ago, necrovore said:
    5 hours ago, AlexL said:

    Harmed is that owner who does not want his property to be used in ways he does not desire, for example to spread ideas he hates.

    I am not proposing to initiate force against anyone.

    Not sure what you mean... In any case: force is not the only form of harm.

  23. Closing of the topic "Remembering the CG Computer-Generated Pandemic Tyranny"

    in Website Policy and Announcements

    Posted · Edited by AlexL
    form --> forum

    2 hours ago, necrovore said:

    If you exercise editorial control, it ceases to be a "forum" at all, and becomes a "magazine" or a "journal." That's my point.

    A forum is a space for discussions/debates. What you are describing is an unmoderated forum (= zero control over content). The owner defines what, who and how. It is not "pretty much true by definition" that a forum is unmoderated.

    2 hours ago, necrovore said:

    I will agree with @Boydstun that there are a lot of choices as to how to exercise one's free speech

    My understanding is that @Boydstun described various choices as to how to moderate a forum, not choices as to how to exercise one's free speech. One does not have an a priori freedom of speech on a private forum. It is implicit in the attributes of private property. The non-owners are guest and are subjected to the rules of the house.

    2 hours ago, necrovore said:

    So in that sense there shouldn't be any harm in allowing people to speak their minds [...] setting up forum rules to ban the discussion of certain ideas only serves to create the impression that Objectivism cannot withstand those ideas

    Harmed is that owner who does not want his property to be used in ways he does not desire, for example to spread ideas he hates.

×
×
  • Create New...