Confidence
There's been a bit of a ruckus in the Gulch recently regarding who should and shouldn't be here, and what they should and should not be posting.
We hear you.
And, we actually have a new tool on the way that we think is going to add a whole new level of "Confidence" to the goings-on in the Gulch. But, before we talk about that...
First, let's just summarize the recent banning of a long-time Gulch member - let's call him "MemberR."
1. MemberR was vocally anti-Rand.
2. Because MemberR was anti-Rand, MemberR's request to be a Gulch Producer was denied.
3. In retaliation, MemberR spammed the Gulch with numerous cloned comments claiming religious discrimination.
4. We banned MemberR for attacking Gulch moderators publicly via spam and false assertion.
Now, on to another troubled member, let's call him "MemberC" - who is a bit of different case.
We're going to have members with all levels of understanding. On a scale of 1 - 10, MemberC is a 1. Not a 0, a 1. He's read the books, likes them, but has yet to take the ideas to their logical conclusions.
On the road to Objectivist enlightenment, some are going to require a little help in their personal journey. MemberC is a prime example. MemberC is ignorant, inarticulate, contradictory and groping. MemberC is the "doesn't get it" poster boy. But, he is not anti-Rand. He's just stuck in a fog that has not yet been lifted.
We're either going to kick him to the curb, essentially saying, "We're glad you enjoyed the books. Too bad it didn't take. Now, how about you go f**k yourself.", or we're going to say, "We understand that it's harder for some to fully grasp the ideas than it is for others. Welcome to the Gulch. We're glad you made it this far. We're going to now show you the pieces you're missing... Dagny."
C'mon now. I got you there. You know I did. No, I'm not comparing MemberC to Dagny. But, Dagny entered the Gulch with half-knowledge at best. And, not a single Gulch resident turned their back on her. They were overjoyed that she made it that far. And they were all more than willing to spend their time helping to complete her education. Do I have to draw the analogy any more explicitly?
Before you go into attack mode, again no, I am not comparing MemberC to Dagny. I know that Dagny was well on her way to understanding already. I know who Dagny was. I know Atlas. I'm just trying to make a point. You get it and you need to shut up and give me this one.
So, here's the thing - disagreeing on the issue of politics is not grounds for banning. Politics is a corollary - a conclusion. Stated more clearly, disagreeing on conclusions is not grounds for banning. Objectivism is not about checking conclusions - it's about checking premises. If it was a requirement here in the Gulch that we all agree on our conclusions, we'd have no members.
Guys, let's all take a breath. If nothing else, our job in and out of the Gulch is to spread the word and educate. We've got a war to win. It's a war of ideas and we're not going to win if we can't articulate them consistently, without tiring.
MemberC, get your shit together already. You're a walking contradiction, and everyone's patience has worn thin. No, you can not sign up as a Producer. Producers are advocates of Ayn Rand's ideas - which you have not yet fully grasped. We do however hope to have you in the ranks eventually.
Now, to the new tool. Another one from Producer Eudaimonia, the "Confidence" meter. Only Producers get to vote on "Confidence." And, a member's "Confidence" level rises or falls on those votes - publicly. That's all I'm going to say about it for now. We're still a couple of weeks away.
P.S. If any of you are contemplating attacking me for anything I said in this post, make sure there's some meat on those bones. Some of you newbies with the "Atlas Shrugged is not about self-sacrifice! I'm more Objectivisty than you!" crap is just... no.
- - - - -
"If you are seriously interested in fighting for a better world, begin by identifying the nature of the problem. The battle is primarily intellectual (philosophical), not political. Politics is the last consequence, the practical implementation, of the fundamental (metaphysical-epistemological-ethical) ideas that dominate a given nation’s culture. You cannot fight or change the consequences without fighting and changing the cause; nor can you attempt any practical implementation without knowing what you want to implement.
"Speak on any scale open to you, large or small— to your friends, your associates, your professional organizations, or any legitimate public forum. You can never tell when your words will reach the right mind at the right time. You will see no immediate results—but it is of such activities that public opinion is made."
- Ayn Rand
Philosophy: Who needs it? "What can one do?"
We hear you.
And, we actually have a new tool on the way that we think is going to add a whole new level of "Confidence" to the goings-on in the Gulch. But, before we talk about that...
First, let's just summarize the recent banning of a long-time Gulch member - let's call him "MemberR."
1. MemberR was vocally anti-Rand.
2. Because MemberR was anti-Rand, MemberR's request to be a Gulch Producer was denied.
3. In retaliation, MemberR spammed the Gulch with numerous cloned comments claiming religious discrimination.
4. We banned MemberR for attacking Gulch moderators publicly via spam and false assertion.
Now, on to another troubled member, let's call him "MemberC" - who is a bit of different case.
We're going to have members with all levels of understanding. On a scale of 1 - 10, MemberC is a 1. Not a 0, a 1. He's read the books, likes them, but has yet to take the ideas to their logical conclusions.
On the road to Objectivist enlightenment, some are going to require a little help in their personal journey. MemberC is a prime example. MemberC is ignorant, inarticulate, contradictory and groping. MemberC is the "doesn't get it" poster boy. But, he is not anti-Rand. He's just stuck in a fog that has not yet been lifted.
We're either going to kick him to the curb, essentially saying, "We're glad you enjoyed the books. Too bad it didn't take. Now, how about you go f**k yourself.", or we're going to say, "We understand that it's harder for some to fully grasp the ideas than it is for others. Welcome to the Gulch. We're glad you made it this far. We're going to now show you the pieces you're missing... Dagny."
C'mon now. I got you there. You know I did. No, I'm not comparing MemberC to Dagny. But, Dagny entered the Gulch with half-knowledge at best. And, not a single Gulch resident turned their back on her. They were overjoyed that she made it that far. And they were all more than willing to spend their time helping to complete her education. Do I have to draw the analogy any more explicitly?
Before you go into attack mode, again no, I am not comparing MemberC to Dagny. I know that Dagny was well on her way to understanding already. I know who Dagny was. I know Atlas. I'm just trying to make a point. You get it and you need to shut up and give me this one.
So, here's the thing - disagreeing on the issue of politics is not grounds for banning. Politics is a corollary - a conclusion. Stated more clearly, disagreeing on conclusions is not grounds for banning. Objectivism is not about checking conclusions - it's about checking premises. If it was a requirement here in the Gulch that we all agree on our conclusions, we'd have no members.
Guys, let's all take a breath. If nothing else, our job in and out of the Gulch is to spread the word and educate. We've got a war to win. It's a war of ideas and we're not going to win if we can't articulate them consistently, without tiring.
MemberC, get your shit together already. You're a walking contradiction, and everyone's patience has worn thin. No, you can not sign up as a Producer. Producers are advocates of Ayn Rand's ideas - which you have not yet fully grasped. We do however hope to have you in the ranks eventually.
Now, to the new tool. Another one from Producer Eudaimonia, the "Confidence" meter. Only Producers get to vote on "Confidence." And, a member's "Confidence" level rises or falls on those votes - publicly. That's all I'm going to say about it for now. We're still a couple of weeks away.
P.S. If any of you are contemplating attacking me for anything I said in this post, make sure there's some meat on those bones. Some of you newbies with the "Atlas Shrugged is not about self-sacrifice! I'm more Objectivisty than you!" crap is just... no.
- - - - -
"If you are seriously interested in fighting for a better world, begin by identifying the nature of the problem. The battle is primarily intellectual (philosophical), not political. Politics is the last consequence, the practical implementation, of the fundamental (metaphysical-epistemological-ethical) ideas that dominate a given nation’s culture. You cannot fight or change the consequences without fighting and changing the cause; nor can you attempt any practical implementation without knowing what you want to implement.
"Speak on any scale open to you, large or small— to your friends, your associates, your professional organizations, or any legitimate public forum. You can never tell when your words will reach the right mind at the right time. You will see no immediate results—but it is of such activities that public opinion is made."
- Ayn Rand
Philosophy: Who needs it? "What can one do?"
Previous comments... You are currently on page 2.
It is not all bad to be challenged by one who is not yet there with the ideas of Rand. It can make us reach deeper into our own understanding of her ideas, If we then can influence another not yet there, we will have made the world one step better for ourselves. If they come and insist on tearing down Rand's ideas with only talking points from outside the gulch, then is the time to request that they leave.
"You can never tell when your words will reach the right mind at the right time." - A.R. And she had enormous patience with people who did not yet "get it", explaining and reasoning tirelessly, looking for the right words at the right time.
Looking forward to your new tools. It will be a lot more enjoyable to have discussions around here. Thank you! I'm with you all the way.
We need to keep in mind that truth is objective, not subject to majority vote. In any disagreement, look at the premises. There are no contradictions, and no conflict of interest between rational individuals. Thanks for airing out the place.
Respectfully,
Ed
HOWEVER, it might help others see how his obviously off the wall blithering is viewed, and help them understand clearly that his view is not the Objectivist one. That is of use.
AND ALSO, I'm willing to try it because it is - like so many of your ideas - WAY better than the scattered replies to him which was all we had recourse [original typo: recurse] to before.
Finally, I'm with Mamaemma in giving you my thanks for addressing the issue.
Rpoach? Interesting. Would have never guessed!
Let me take off my "Eudaimonia" hat for a second and put on my "rpoach" hat.
Please, know that the real people making these upgrades happen are jbaker and sdesapio.
Seriously.
I come up with a good suggestion every once in a while, but these are the guys pulling it all together.
I just try to help them out and not to break too much shit along the way.
And there are others making it happen too, like awebb and dfish.
Do I need to mention John & Harmon?
So make sure that all these guys get some of the love too.
I really like the 'confidence' idea. +1+1+1+1
You are the man on the beat. ...a temporary freeway jam... no major collisions here... Lets get the traffic moving; shall we? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfN-APKK...
I like my Hot button (its back) and look forward to tooting my horn!
Respectfully,
O.A.
I am really impressed at all the improvements that have come in lately and the ones still in the works.
Thank you for the hard work.
Now its up to us to hold up our end.
Load more comments...