I get more depressed the more I see...

both. international law and international orgs. i think i was mistaken and i had some other guy for intro to intl politics. in the orgs class i did a oral presentation on greenpeace, where i proved beyond a doubt that greenpeace sucks. in the international law class i did terrible because they were building some new building across the street and i was too fascinated watching it to pay attention to mokeba. i have problems like that.

because it was an undergrad poli sci class, not a real law school type class.

i disagree. the status quo doesnt frustrate me that much. i am willing to accept the fact that the majority of people are scoundrels. being passive is fine by me.

i dont feel like the media has much responsibility to be even-handed. i take it upon myself to draw conclusions. if the media misleads me, i blame myself for being gullible.

that is true, fox really filled a void. i think in the future as we have more options, the media will proportionally represent the people's biases. i see nothing to worry about.

i dont think it is any more or less noble to participate or speak out or not. although i actually never miss a chance to vote, and i am relatively opinionated and argumentative.

i feel like the only responsibility people have is to leave other people alone.

 

I post well-reasoned and articulate...

condemnations of your right wing heroes.

Yes, you are typical of the average poster over there: immature.

You just demonstrated it. When I rebutted your argument you felt the need to lash out against me personally. That's the history of Tiger Alley, and that apparently is what you wish to do here, too.

Here are some lessons in life for you: just because you say I lie doesn't make it so. Just because you have friends doesn't mean their testimony is credible, and instead detracts from their objectivity.

Now, tell me what YOUR good reason for being here is. Have you made it your job to lie about all of Bush's critics on this site? Is that your mission? To protect others from the truth? No wonder you're a Bush fan.

I posted a rebuttal to your thread. What in it is not factual? Just because you don't like the content doesn't make you any arbiter of truth.

 

Who cares about the lair? One of the owners is a complete liar. He shakes a can all day and refuses to get a job.

I hacked his admin board? too funny.........

He even kicked Tommy Banks off the site when he found out Tommy and I were pals............

The poor guy is owned by a few posters. It's really sad..........

 

I can't believe that forum is so popular given its horrible format.

 

LSUGradin, what about its format?

You mean its tree format?

I prefer that, actually, because it's easier to skip over things you've already seen.

The place got popular real early in the game, when it was viewed as an open source, insiders' sort of alternative to geaux.com

Seems like most of the real insiders have left, though. It runs on momentum. Nothing wrong with building up a family of fellow fans.

 

I suppos ewhatever you are used to initially is what you prefer.

I used to post messages on dialup bulletin board systems (bbs) pre-internet days. The format of those was similar to this.

 

You know, there's a very simple way to settle all this.

Rex, resubmit your essay here. Then we ask TE to submit whatever evidence he has that your work is plagiarized. If you two will do this, we can go forward w/ the original plan of submitting it ANONYMOUSLY to the academic authorities at LSU to judge. Whoever loses the case has to cease posting here for 6 months.

If, as you say, you have nothing to fear, you shouldn't have a problem with this. The facts in evidence in your essay shouldn't be a factor...the question is one of whether or not you stole somebody else's material. Those guys at LSU are pretty good at spotting that sort of thing...it's their job. And if they rule in your favor, then you're vindicated.

 

+1

Fellas, no one wants to read about your old fights. No need to rehash it here. I doubt anything new has been added since it was old.

 

Trust me when I say this...He'll never agree to it...

Having said that, martin, thanks for attempting to keep me on task and on subject...

I liked Mokeba, but it was an acquired taste in light of all the left wing propoganda and rhetoric trotted out on a weekly basis there...

 

Here is the piece in question.

Here is what I posted on the Alley one slow day:

--------------------------------------------------------

She was a precocious child, the apple of her loving father's eye, and she took tremendous joy in accompanying him to his work at the Great Library. There he taught mathematics to his eager students, and there she paid more attention than even the others, partially out of the great love and esteem she had for him, but mostly because she had been born with more curiosity, more imagination, and more intelligence than the male pupils around her.

When she grew older she, too, taught mathematics, because she had inherited her father's passion for teaching. But her fame would surpass even that of her father's, and her works and reputation would reach far beyond the Great Library. She wrote three brilliant and important treatises on geometry and algebra, plus another on astronomy, and travelled far and wide across the Mediterranean world publicizing her studies, spreading her knowledge, and sharing her love for those subjects.

Not merely an academician, she was also a practical lady, recognizing mundane needs all around her, and the great possibilities of her sciences in solution of those needs, and thus used her extraordinary talents to invent an instrument for distilling water, an instrument to measure the specific gravity of water, an astrolabe, and a planisphere.

But more importantly, and ultimately more tragically, she was more than a mathematician and inventor. She was a thinker. The beauty she saw in lines and triangles was the same beauty she saw in truth and logic, and when letters came to her school addressed merely to "The Philosopher" everyone knew to whom they were intended. "Reserve your right to think," she implored of her audiences, "for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all."

Whether she foresaw the inevitable consequences of that advice is a question for history, but one day while teaching her students a mob broke into her classroom and dragged her savagely out by her hair into the street. There, unsatisfied to cut out just her brave tongue, they peeled off her skin with oyster shells. Obviously, some had not agreed that she had any right to think, and believed she had thought wrongly, and wished to deprive her of any ability to think at all.

As her body lay in the street, her blood outlining her carcass and a separate pile of skin, a curious thing became evident about her assailants: they were all attired as Christian monks.

Alas, the great fame our heroine had acquired through her unabashed brilliance had attracted some unfortunate observers, and whereas they might have forgiven her audacity to teach subjects like mathematics, theretofore the God-ordained province of only males, one Cyril could positively not abide her other more dangerous utterances, such as "To teach superstitions as truth is a most terrible thing." Unfortunately for our doomed heroine, to teach truth as truth had also become a most terrible thing.

So it was Cyril who had sent his underling assassins in 4th century Alexandria to do his dirty work, to chop the life from one of history's greatest teachers. And for his display of Christian power, this Cyril won his fierce contest for supremacy of the Christian patriarchy in Alexandria, by brutally silencing its most enchanting but most idolatrous voice.

And for his efforts this bold Cyril was ceremoniously and gloriously sanctified by the Roman Catholic Church, and remains a Catholic saint to this day. For while pain and death by oyster shells is obviously fleeting, the dangers of witchcraft ostensibly persist. And thus persists the esteemed Cyril in history, while few of us know the sad story of the too obviously brilliant Hypatia.


---------------------------------------------------------

Now, some things should be readily apparent about this mini-essay:

1) I did not live during the time of Hypatia. Any information I include about her life MUST come from other sources.

To declare that I "plagiarized" this essay because I include biographical information is absurd. It's exactly the same as accusing any modern student who writes on the life of George Washington of plagiarizing.

2) The THESIS (i.e. the point) of this mini-essay was not to present a biography of Hypatia's life, but to contrast her relative historical obscurity with the unfair esteem accorded to St. Cyril. The thesis is INDIGNATION, not biography.

Now, when I made that post somebody (I think it was LSUMJ) on the Alley accused me of copying and pasting somebody else's essay as my own. I denied that accusation as absurd, and challenged him to prove it.

Since it was original, he couldn't find it. Instead he came back with a site that contained similar biographical information (one from which I had got a list of her inventions, by the way), and declared that because some biographical information was the same, that I "plagiarized."

You see, all of a sudden the accusation had changed from "cutting and pasting" (i.e. stealing) somebody else's essay to "plagiarizing."

That's how things go on the Alley.... if the original accusation is proven to be a ridiculous lie, keep changing it in the hope that something down the line will stick.

The site that LSUMJ had found was biographical; it did not contain my thesis, as described above. My paragraphs, sentences, and asides were all original... so how could it be "cutting and pasting"?

My post also included conjectural information and value judgments not found anywhere else, in words not found anywhere else.

Now, I fully admit that if this were an assignment paper I would have to cite my sources for biographical information. But this was a message board post, and not some assignment.

TigerEducated wanted to submit my essay to one of his professors and come back with a ruling that my paper had not conformed with Department rules for submission.

Well, DUH. It was never WRITTEN for any submission to an English department. It was written for message board readers.

So, when I told TigerEducated that I would HAPPILY submit my paper if I were allowed to present it FORMALLY, including a bibliograph, he balked. Why do you think that is?

Sorry to relive this episode here. I didn't really want to. But TigerEducated persists in bringing it up. And just as he lied about me being divorced (I am not) and being a professor (I am not) and being a Democrat (I am not)... he keeps lying about this Hypatia paper.

Hopefully, this will be the last of it, and I won't have to post this same thing again.