My complaint about Mr. Eric F Chang, Ph.D.

[LEGOMAN]

This letter has three main sections. In the first, I argue that Mr. Eric F Chang, Ph.D. should take all the bull-pucky he's been throwing at us and fertilize his garden with it. In the second, I make it clear that we all have a moral obligation to stand up together and forcefully oppose Eric's prodigal expedients. And in the third and final section, I conclude that now is the time to redefine the rhetoric and make room for meaningful discussion. Let me get to the crux of the matter: Eric says that we're supposed to shut up and smile when he says craven things. That's his unvarying story, and it's a lie: an extremely disruptive and self-pitying lie. Unfortunately, it's a lie that is accepted unquestioningly, uncritically, by Eric's representatives.

If I were a complete sap, I'd believe Eric's line that he can scare us by using big words like "counterdemonstration". Unfortunately for him, I realize that Eric is totally thrasonical. We all are, to some extent, but he sets the curve. If we let him devastate vast acres of precious farmland, who's going to protect us? The government? Our parents? Superman? Probably none of the above. That's why it's important to unite rich and poor, young and old.

Something recently occurred to me that might occur to Eric, as well, if he would just turn down the volume of his voice for a moment: There are two types of people in this world. There are those who feature simplistic answers to complex problems and there are those who expose his beliefs (as I would certainly not call them logically reasoned arguments) for what they really are. Eric fits neatly into the former category, of course.

When it comes to Eric's exegeses, I, speaking as someone who is not an evil, paltry present-day robber baron, think that we have drifted along for too long in a state of blissful denial and outright complacency. It's time to provide a positive, confident, and assertive vision of humanity's future and our role in it. The sooner we do that the better because you have my word that Eric exhibits certain features that a humanitarian may be inclined to deplore. If, after hearing facts like that, you still believe that the majority of amateurish, sordid poseurs are heroes, if not saints, then there is honestly no hope for you.

As part of his efforts to gain a mainstream following, Eric publishes the Journal of Stroppy Radicalism. Included alongside articles discussing history, culture, art, religion, and philosophy are endorsements of Eric's plans to contravene decency. It is my personal opinion, based on years of observation, that his grand plan is to apotheosize nerdy firebrands. I'm sure Mao Tse Tung would approve. In any case, Eric knows that performing an occasional act of charity will make some people forgive -- or at least overlook -- all of his treasonous excesses. My take on the matter is that he fully intends to reward mediocrity. But that's not enough, not for him. Eric will additionally convert houses of worship into houses of officialism, which is why I profess that unlike him, when I make a mistake I'm willing to admit it. Consequently, if -- and I'm bending over backwards to maintain the illusion of "innocent until proven guilty" -- Eric were not actually responsible for trying to fan the flames of incendiarism into a planet-spanning inferno, then I'd stop saying that Eric holds onto power like the eunuch mandarins of the Forbidden City -- sterile obstacles to progress who encourage and exacerbate passivity in some people who might otherwise be active and responsible citizens.

Now that I think about it, Eric's premise (that we should all bear the brunt of his actions) is his morality disguised as pretended neutrality. Eric uses this disguised morality to support his communiqués, thereby making his argument self-refuting. I defy the short-sighted sciolists who spawn delusions of interdenominationalism's resplendence and I defy the powers of darkness that they represent. Eric's disquisitions are written in a peculiar doublespeak that is hard for the uninitiated to understand. That proves that Eric extricates himself from difficulty by intrigue, by chicanery, by dissimulation, by trimming, by an untruth, by an injustice. In many ways, he keeps telling us that it's perfectly safe to drink and drive. Are we also supposed to believe that everyone who doesn't share his beliefs is a superstitious evildoer deserving of death and damnation? I didn't think so.

Eric claims that the rules don't apply to him. That claim is preposterous and, to use Eric's own language, overtly resentful. No history can justify it. To state it in stark and simple terms, if you're like most people you just shrug your shoulders whenever you hear about his latest perorations. When your shoulders get tired of shrugging I hope you'll realize that Eric maintains that at birth every living being is assigned a celestial serial number or frequency power spectrum. That's not just a lie but is actually the exact opposite of the truth -- and Eric knows it. Why is Eric deliberately turning the truth on its head like that? The answer is almost utterly obvious -- this isn't rocket science, you know. The key is that ignorance is bliss. This may be why Eric's stooges are generally all smiles.

More fundamentally, I am reminded of the quote, "He has rightly earned the scorn and derision with which he is viewed in many quarters." This comment is not as sexist as it seems because Eric wants to produce an army of mindless insects who will obey his every command. To produce such an army, he plans to destroy people's minds using either drugs or an advanced form of lobotomy. Whichever approach he takes, we must give to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance. Tell me something: Is Eric a professional simpleton or merely a well-meaning amateur? It's an interesting question and its examination will help us understand how Eric's mind works. Let me start by providing evidence that you can see exactly where this is going. Sadly, lack of space prevents me from elaborating further.

Eric's "compromises" occasionally differ in terms of how infernal can they are but generally share one fundamental tendency: They condone universal oppression. Although the historical battle between good and evil is exemplified in the philosophical division between Platonic order and Aristotelian chaos, Eric's prank phone calls run on pure irony. There's no need here to present any evidence of that; examples can be found all over the World Wide Web. In fact, a simple search will quickly reveal that we are observing the change in our society's philosophy and values from freedom and justice to corruption, decay, cynicism, and injustice. All of these "values" are artistically incorporated in one person: Eric F Chang. As we don our battle fatigues, let's at least be clear about what we're fighting for: Our war is not about reducing the deficit, not about ending welfare for the rich, and not about the largesse or responsibility of private philanthropy. All we want is for his spin doctors not to create widespread hysteria.

Eric can write anything he wants about how things would be different were we to give into his demands and let him create a gutless world of guilt and shame, but he has a strategy. His strategy is to introduce changes without testing them first. Wherever you encounter that strategy, you are dealing with Eric. He, in his hubris, has decided that he has the right to marginalize dissident voices. This means, in particular, that his claims are rife with contradictions and difficulties; they're thoroughly clueless, meet no objective criteria, and are unsuited for a supposedly educated population. And as if that weren't enough, he spouts a lot of numbers whenever he wants to make a point. He then subjectively interprets those numbers to support his adages while ignoring the fact that even maverick Internet news and opinion sites are beginning to proclaim that he lacks the dim flicker of sentience one needs to qualify as an imbecile. (The merits of his flimflams won't be discussed here because they lack merit.) If we intend to defend democracy, we had best learn to recognize its primary enemy and not be afraid to stand up and call him by name. That name is Mr. Eric F Chang, Ph.D..

[Eric Chang]

Not as much of a bitch as you are BITCH this is my complaint letter to you.

I feel obligated to say something about Kyle Hewitt because, as the Talmud says, "Silence is akin to assent." Before examining the present situation, however, it is important that I lend a helping hand. The practical struggle which now begins, sketched in broad outlines, takes the following course: If he can give us all a succinct and infallible argument proving that war is peace, freedom is slavery, and ignorance is strength, I will personally deliver his Nobel Prize for Longiloquent Rhetoric. In the meantime, Kyle keeps trying to deceive us into thinking that it's okay to leave the educational and emotional needs of our children in the merciless hands of intellectually challenged stool pigeons. The purpose of this deception may be to leave behind a wake of unholy reaction. Or maybe the purpose is to elevate Kyle's adages to prominence as epistemological principles. Oh what a tangled web Kyle weaves when first he practices to deceive.

Ignorance is bliss. This may be why Kyle's serfs are generally all smiles. While Kyle has a right to his opinion, he recently claimed that no one is smart enough to see through his transparent lies. I would have found this comment shocking had I not heard similar garbage from him a hundred times before. If history follows its course, it should be evident that there isn't a man, woman, or child alive today who thinks that newspapers should report only on items he agrees with, so let's toss out that ridiculous argument of Kyle's from the get-go.

Don't kid yourself: Kyle says that he has the linguistic prowess to produce a masterwork of meritorious literature. What he means by this, of course, is that he wants free reign to make bigotry respectable. By the way, he drools at the thought of swilling port and sherry at taxpayer expense. Now that that's cleared up, I'll continue with what I was saying before, that it's easy enough to hate him any day of the week on general principles. But now I'll tell you about some very specific things that he is up to, things that ought to make a real Kyle-hater out of you. First off, I have some advice for him. He should keep his mouth shut until he stops being such a nugatory power broker and starts being at least one of informative, agreeable, creative, or entertaining.

Although Kyle would rather I discuss the personality flaws of unwed, pregnant teenagers, his spin doctors have been staggering around like punch-drunk fighters hit too many times -- stunned, confused, betrayed, and trying desperately to rationalize his negligent commentaries. It is not a pretty sight. Ironically, he alleges that he has the trappings of deity. Naturally, this is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. Everybody is probably familiar with the cliche that people who agree with Kyle's reinterpretations of historic events are either stupid, drunk, on drugs, paid off by Kyle, or are balmy dips. Well, there's a lot of truth in that cliche.

In keeping with all of their inner quixotic brutality, Kyle's chums advocate measures that others criticize for being excessively impudent. We are at a crossroads. One road leads into the light of a bright, shining future in which sneaky, intransigent buttinskies like Kyle are completely absent. The other road leads into the darkness of Stalinism. The question, therefore, is: Who's driving the bus? You see, I despise everything about Kyle. I despise Kyle's attempts to perpetuate misguided and questionable notions of other myopic, insipid schmoes' intentions. I despise how he insists that ethical responsibility is merely a trammel of earthbound mortals and should not be required of a demigod like him. Most of all, I despise his complete obliviousness to the fact that sometime in the future he will expose and neutralize his enemies rather than sit at the same table and negotiate. Fortunately, that hasn't happened...yet. But it will doubtlessly happen if we don't enable adversaries to meet each other and establish direct personal bonds that contradict the stereotypes they rely upon to power their rude paroxysms.

Kyle habitually reads negative meanings into innocuous remarks. For that reason, he is an inspiration to disorderly coldhearted-types everywhere. They panegyrize Kyle's crusade to stir up class hatred and, more importantly, they don't realize that Kyle says that he has the authority to issue licenses for practicing cronyism. That is the most despicable lie I have ever heard in my entire life. The concepts underlying Kyle's macabre communications are like the Ptolemaic astronomy, which could not have been saved by positing more epicycles or eliminating some of the more glaring discrepancies. The fundamental idea -- that the heavens revolve around the Earth -- was wrong, just as Kyle's idea that profits come before people is wrong.

Although some contumelious grizzlers reluctantly concede that Kyle's public virtue is dwarfed by his private vice, they invariably deny that thanks to Kyle, we're all in a free fall into a pit of anarchism. It follows from this that he is on some sort of thesaurus-fueled rampage. Every sentence Kyle writes is filled with needlessly long words like "deintellectualization" and "macracanthrorhynchiasis". Either he is deliberately trying to confuse us or else he's secretly scheming to use rock music, with its savage, tribal, orgiastic beat, to deny minorities a cultural voice.

There are two flaws with Kyle's positions: 1) the absence of necessary historiographical context makes Kyle's agendas extremely difficult to accept, and 2) when it comes to Kyle's slurs, I maintain that we have drifted along for too long in a state of blissful denial and outright complacency. It's time to dole out acerbic criticism of Kyle and his phalanx of piteous legatees. The sooner we do that the better because the term "idiot savant" comes to mind when thinking of him. Admittedly, that term applies only halfway to him, which is why I profess that for the nonce, Kyle is content to obstruct various things. But before long, he will commit all sorts of mortal sins -- not to mention an uncountable number of venial ones.

If we sound the bugle of liberty then the sea of exclusionism, on which Kyle so heavily relies, will begin to dry up. What he is incapable of seeing is that his grand plan is to help hotheaded savages back up their prejudices with "scientific" proof. I'm sure Mao Tse Tung would approve. In any case, Kyle likes saying that he's the best thing to come along since the invention of sliced bread. Okay, that's a parody -- but not a very gross one. In point of fact, what we're involved in with Kyle is not a game. It's the most serious possible business, and every serious person -- every person with any shred of a sense of responsibility -- must concern himself with it.

Anyone who hasn't been living in a cave with his eyes shut and his ears plugged knows that Kyle's slogans are intended to get us all on board the racialism train. We can therefore extrapolate that this is a contributing factor to the apparent decline of civilization and culture around us. So let Kyle call me hypersensitive. I call him odious. Many people who follow Kyle's metanarratives have come to the erroneous conclusion that character development is not a matter of "strength through adversity" but rather, "entitlement through victimization". The truth of the matter is that those of us who are too lazy or disinterested to attack his malice and hypocrisy have no right to complain when he and his lieutenants arouse the hostility and excite the cupidity of ungrateful menaces. It doesn't do us much good to become angry and wave our arms and shout about the evils of Kyle's dissertations in general terms. If we want other people to agree with us and join forces with us, then we must acquire the input of a representative cross-section of the community in a non-threatening, inclusive environment. Now that you've read this letter, let me challenge you, the reader, not just to help me advocate social change through dialogue, passive resistance, and nonviolence, but also to educate others about what I've written.

Bitch

[LEGOMAN]

Another complaint about Eric Chang
My topic is nothing new. However, since no one else has found it fit to address directly, I will address it here. Note that some of the facts I plan to use in this letter were provided to me by a highly educated person who managed to escape Eric Chang's impertinent indoctrination and is consequently believable. Eric Chang is out to place stumbling blocks in front of those of us who seek value and fulfilment in our personal and professional lives. And when we play its game, we become accomplices.

At this point in the letter, I'd like to categorize for you some of Eric Chang's pronouncements. Unfortunately, they're far too chauvinistic and counter-productive to fit neatly into any single, overarching framework, so the best I can do is to convey the message that Eric Chang pompously claims that the purpose of life is self-gratification. That sort of nonsense impresses many people, unfortunately.

I have no set opinion as to whether or not Eric Chang's condescending past resonates in its current pranks. I do, however, undoubtedly assert that it has been doing "in-depth research" (whatever it thinks that means) to prove that it has a duty to conceal the facts and lie to the rest of us, under oath if necessary, perjuring itself to help disseminate the True Faith of quislingism. I should mention that I've been doing some research of my own. So far, I've "discovered" that in public, Eric Chang vehemently inveighs against corruption and sin. But when nobody's looking, Eric Chang never fails to descend to character assassination and name calling.

The key point here is that I don't want to build castles in the air. I don't want to plan things that I can't yet implement. But I do want to brush away the cobwebs of barbarism because doing so clearly demonstrates how I recently checked out one of its recent tracts. Oh, look; Eric Chang's again saying that its ethically bankrupt faction is a respected civil-rights organization. Raise your hand if you're surprised. Seriously, though, if I said that hanging out with Pecksniffian, ignorant skinflints is a wonderful, culturally enriching experience, I'd be a liar. But I'd be being completely honest if I said that if I seem a bit macabre, it's only because I'm trying to communicate with it on its own level.

Eric Chang's conduct can be described as less than perfect. To top that off, we mustn't let Eric Chang plunge the whole of Christendom into wars and chaos. That would be like letting the Mafia serve as a new national police force in Italy. Eric Chang's refrains are very much in line with salacious, effrontive materialism in that they deface property with racially and sexually derogatory epithets and offensive symbols. But let's not lose perspective. It seems that no one else is telling you that I was personally offended -- and I don't easily offend -- by the value it places on making me turn pale and run for cover. So, since the burden lies with me to tell you that, I suppose I should say a few words on the subject. To begin with, Eric Chang has been known to say that obscurity, evasiveness, incomprehensibility, indirectness, and ambiguity are marks of depth and brilliance. That notion is so harebrained, I hardly know where to begin refuting it.

There is no doubt that Eric Chang will offer stones instead of bread to the emotional and spiritual hungers of the world eventually. Believe me, I would give everything I own to be wrong on that point, but the truth is that Eric Chang keeps trying to foster suspicion -- if not hatred -- of "outsiders". And if we don't remain eternally vigilant, it will truly succeed. No one that I speak with or correspond with is happy about this situation. Of course, I don't speak or correspond with drugged-out twaddlers, Eric Chang's deputies, or anyone else who fails to realize that when I'm through with Eric Chang it'll think twice before attempting to violate its pledge not to allow federally funded research to mushroom into a pea-brained, grossly inefficient system, hampered by snappish, picayunish derelicts and illogical nutters.

Eric Chang doesn't want us to encourage our spirits to soar. It would rather we settle for the meatless bone of militarism. It is a statistical certainty that Eric Chang is unable to see any issue in a broad perspective or from more than one side, just as it is a statistical certainty that by its standards, if you have morals, believe that character counts, and actually raise your own children -- let alone teach them to be morally fit -- you're definitely an intrusive, moonstruck braggart. My standards -- and I suspect yours as well -- are quite different from Eric Chang's. For instance, I indeed allege that I have to laugh when it says that nepotism and plagiarism are identical concepts. Where in the world did it get that idea? Not only does that idea contain absolutely no substance whatsoever but it says that it needs a little more time to clean up its act. As far as I'm concerned, its time has run out.

At one point, I actually believed that Eric Chang would stop being so headlong. Silly me. Eric Chang fears nothing more than the exposure of its motives and activities. Of that I am certain because Eric Chang would have us believe that it has its moral compass in tact. Such flummery can be quickly dissipated merely by skimming a few random pages from any book on the subject.

No matter how bad you think Eric Chang's lamentations are, I assure you that they are far, far worse than you think. Nevertheless, I could go on for pages listing innumerable examples of Eric Chang's dodgy campaigns of malice and malignity and refractory-to-the-core criticisms. I have already written enough, surely, to convince you that Eric Chang's slovenly rantings have caused disgraceful hoodwinkers to descend upon us like a swarm of locusts, plaguing our minds. Idle hands are the devil's tools. That's why Eric Chang spends its leisure time devising ever more capricious ways to gum up what were once great ideas. By the same token, some people say that that isn't sufficient evidence to prove that Eric Chang is secretly scheming to make today's oppressiveness look like grade-school work compared to what it has planned for the future. And I must agree; one needs much more evidence than that. But the evidence is there, for anyone who isn't afraid to look at it. Just look at the way that it ignores a breathtaking number of facts, most notably:

Fact: It is attracted to cameralism like a moth to a candle.

Fact: I shall spare no effort to initiate meaningful change.

Fact: It seems eager to follow the hastily dyed banner of particularism.

In addition, its functionaries often reverse the normal process of interpretation. That is, they value the unsaid over the said, the obscure over the clear.

Eric Chang must think that the world has no memory. At least, that certainly seems to be the implication in several of the accounts I've heard. Eric Chang truly believes that the cure for evil is more evil. It is just such churlish megalomania, malodorous, disreputable egoism, and intellectual aberrancy that stirs Eric Chang to criticize other people's beliefs, fashion sense, and lifestyle. I've never bothered Eric Chang. Yet Eric Chang wants to quote me out of context. Whatever happened to "live and let live"? Let me end by saying that I know that what I have written in this letter will send many readers (especially any who are big fans of Eric Chang) into a tizzy or a tantrum. I am sorry, but I remind them that I myself want to speak in the strongest possible terms against Eric Chang's snow jobs.

[Anz]

Why the fuck is modified so full of bullshit nowadays?

I can see why the ex world champion only visits modified when he's bored and wants to have a laugh. And why you don't see so many other good players around here.

If you look at other Internet forums you see that they're 99% crap talk, modified didn't use to be as bad. That's what made this a special forum. People actually wrote something worth of reading here.

I spent a year out of civilisation and couldn't access the Internet very often. And when I was back almost a year ago, modified has turned into this piece of shit like all the other Internet forums.

But one improvent there is - the "ignore" button.
Kyle Hewitt, you get the honor of being the first user on my ignore-list.

I don't know if I'm going to take this crap much longer. Ignoring half of the users would be retarted.

How about we try to make this a ciivilised forum that all footbaggers can use without feeling like the are wasting their time?

[LEGOMAN]

Kyle Hewitt, you get the honor of being the first user on my ignore-list.

Woohoo!

[habitat]

I started to read this shit until I realized on the third paragraph that you still hadn't said anything remotely interesting.

You got a dictionary. Fail troll fails.

[King Monkey]

[Moved to Discussion section - King Monkey]

[DJ]

Dear douchebag who posted 10 paragraphs that no one cared enough to even read,

Stop living

[LEGOMAN]

Dear douchebag who posted 10 paragraphs that no one cared enough to even read,

Stop living

who are you talking about? there is more then 1 person posting 10 paragraph posts.

[shredzilla]

Yeah but we CARED what Eric was saying!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!nfinity

[DJ]

Yeah but we CARED what Eric was saying!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!nfinity

Exactly

=D

[mannampepo]

i like both of them alot, i dont see why there should bee footbaggers bitchen at eachother.

[mannampepo]

Some of what I'm about to say regarding how he sucks at everything's smear tactics is so childishly simple, I fear it may be patronizing to explain; I apologize in advance. In the text that follows, when I quote from how he sucks at everything, I will use the word "excrement" in place of another word which is now apparently permitted in general circulation publications and which I have edited out. Many people are shocked when I tell them that how he sucks at everything's theories are sinful in theory and careless in practice. And I'm shocked that so many people are shocked. You see, I had thought everybody already knew that how he sucks at everything is extraordinarily brazen. We've all known that for a long time. However, its willingness to twist the history, sociology, and anthropology disseminated by our mass media and in our children's textbooks sets a new world record for brazenness.

I claim that how he sucks at everything is unwilling to stand up for what is true and right if there is no obvious advantage to it in doing so. For that reason, it is always trying to change the way we work. This annoys me because how he sucks at everything's previous changes have always been for the worse. I'm positive that its new changes will be even more impertinent because how he sucks at everything's statements such as "Anyone who disagrees with how he sucks at everything is ultimately debauched" indicate that we're not all looking at the same set of facts. Fortunately, these facts are easily verifiable with a trip to the library by any open and honest individual.

We must hold out the prospect of societal peace, prosperity, and a return to sane values and certainties. Those who claim otherwise do so only to justify their own selfish, mischievous conclusions. Show me where it says how he sucks at everything has the right to feed information from sources inside the government to organizations with particularly frightful agendas. Maybe how he sucks at everything has a reason for acting the way it does, but I doubt it. How he sucks at everything sees all the evidence, but it is reluctant to accept the conclusion that if Fate desired that it make a correct application of what it had read about classism it would have to indicate title and page number since the truculent champion of deceit, lies, theft, plunder, and rapine would otherwise never in all its existence find the correct place. But since Fate does not do this, it has repeatedly threatened to scapegoat easy, unpopular targets, thereby diverting responsibility from more culpable parties. Maybe that's just for maximum scaremongering effect. Or maybe it's because how he sucks at everything ignores the most basic ground rule of debate. In case you're not familiar with it, that rule is: attack the idea, not the person.

Who is how he sucks at everything to say that it's merely trying to make this world a better place in which to live? When I first encountered how he sucks at everything's perversions, all I could think of was, "How he sucks at everything's possession-obsessed circulars are barren of worth and bereft of purpose." How he sucks at everything ought to unstop its ears and uncover its eyes. Only then will it hear that to which it has been too long heedless. Only then will how he sucks at everything see that it maintains that either we should all bear the brunt of its actions or that it is the one who will lead us to our great shining future. How he sucks at everything denies any other possibility. Even if one isn't completely conversant with current events, the evidence overwhelmingly indicates that if how he sucks at everything were as bright as it thinks it is, it'd know that it is bound to have a rude awakening when it finally realizes how few people approve of its domineering, disgusting objectives. That said, let me continue.

The first lies that how he sucks at everything told us were relatively benign. Still, they have been progressing. And they will continue to progress until there is no more truth; its lies will grow until they blot out the sun.

Before I continue, let me state that if you think you can escape from how he sucks at everything's self-pitying, manipulative sophistries, then good-bye and good luck. To the rest of you I suggest that its latest manifesto, like all the ones that preceded it, is a consummate anthology of disastrously bad writing teeming with misquotations and inaccuracies, an odyssey of anecdotes that are occasionally entertaining but certainly not informative. How he sucks at everything is capable of only two things, namely whining and underhanded tricks. How did how he sucks at everything get so shrewish? I have my theories, but they're only speculation. At any rate, I want to make this clear so that those who do not understand deeper messages embedded within sarcastic irony -- and you know who I'm referring to -- can process my point.

How he sucks at everything somehow manages to maintain a straight face when saying that advertising is the most veridical form of human communication. I am greatly grieved by this occurrence of falsehood and fantastic storytelling which is the resultant of layers of social dishevelment and disillusionment amongst the fine citizens of a once organized, motivated, and cognitively enlightened civilization. There's a little-known truth that isn't readily acknowledged by the most perverted wastrels I've ever seen: How he sucks at everything extricates itself from difficulty by intrigue, by chicanery, by dissimulation, by trimming, by an untruth, by an injustice. If how he sucks at everything wants to be taken seriously, it should counter the arguments in this letter with facts, not illogical panaceas, personal anecdotes, or insults. Let no one say that how he sucks at everything is the arbiter of all things. No, this is insensate, bleeding-heart cameralism and must be regarded as an attempt to conjure up dirt against its fellow human beings. If I didn't think how he sucks at everything would curry favor with obstreperous, maladroit drunks using a barrage of flattery, especially recognition of their "value", their "importance", their "educational mission", and other myopic nonsense, I wouldn't say that it is on some sort of thesaurus-fueled rampage. Every sentence how he sucks at everything writes is filled with needlessly long words like "thymolsulphonephthalein" and "homotransplantation". Either it is deliberately trying to confuse us or else it's secretly scheming to use terms of opprobrium such as "uninformed, censorious lackwits" and "hypersensitive derelicts" to castigate whomever it opposes.

That fact is simply inescapable to any thinking man or woman. "Thinking" is the key word in the previous sentence. For those of you out there who don't know what I'm talking about, let me give you a quick explanation: I don't want to build castles in the air. I don't want to plan things that I can't yet implement. But I do want to raise issues, as opposed to guns or knives, because doing so clearly demonstrates how it doesn't want us to give it condign punishment. It would rather we settle for the meatless bone of incendiarism. How he sucks at everything keeps trying to sully my reputation. And if we don't remain eternally vigilant, it will definitely succeed. No one that I speak with or correspond with is happy about this situation. Of course, I don't speak or correspond with petulant lotharios, how he sucks at everything's underlings, or anyone else who fails to realize that what I wrote just a moment ago is not the paranoid rambling of a coldhearted wacko. It's a fact.

Are you still with me? How he sucks at everything claims that science is merely a tool invented by the current elite to maintain power. That claim illustrates a serious reasoning fallacy, one that is pandemic in its anecdotes. Then again, how he sucks at everything keeps trying to deceive us into thinking that mediocrity and normalcy are ideal virtues. The purpose of this deception may be to sidetrack us, so we can't strengthen our roots so we can weather the storms that threaten our foundation. Or maybe the purpose is to lobotomize everyone caught thinking an independent thought. Oh what a tangled web how he sucks at everything weaves when first it practices to deceive.

There is one crucial fact that we must not overlook if we are to perceive our current situation as it is, rather than in the anamorphosis of some "ideology" such as vandalism or narcissism. Specifically, if you think about it you'll see that how he sucks at everything's foolish positions are merely a distraction. They're just something to generate more op-ed pieces, more news conferences for media talking heads, and more punditry from people like me. Meanwhile, how he sucks at everything's janissaries, who are legion, are continuing their quiet work of advancing how he sucks at everything's real goal, which is to impose ideology, control thought, and punish virtually any behavior it disapproves of. In closing, please remember that my ultimate goal is to supply the missing ingredient that could stop the worldwide slide into antagonism. If I advance, follow me. If I stop, urge me on. If I retreat, kill me.

[mannampepo]

Thats all i really think about Kyle i just didnt wanna say anything....

[habitat]

Is this copypasta?

[Wasabi]

Why is this in the Discussion forum?

[Jeremy]

Have a look at the other topics in the "discussion" forum...

[Wasabi]

To be quite literal, I think this topic is full of bullshit, and I feel and fully agree with Anz's distaste and discontent for topics made in such satire that leads to no meaningful discussion. Honestly, this topic was just full of circular arguments that lead to nothing in general. There was "nothing" to seriously discussion; just a rants that compounded to other rants and so on.

Really, I don't see how this belongs in the Discussion forum, or anywhere in general. It's just plain awful, and I wish it were deleted. I've wasted valuable time just reading and skimming over it to see what the whole point was about.

[Jeremy]

My point is that there are many topics of the same meaningless nature in the discussion forum. While it was once for "serious discussion only" it's now a place where mods move anything that should either be deleted or is otherwise pointless. Hence while there are some serious discussion topics here, there are a lot that have no value apart from the entertainment of watching people lose to trolls.

[King Monkey]

You will notice that i moved this topic here the day that it was created, before it developed. I skimmed the posts and found that there was no reference to footbag and it is not up to me to then determine whether the users had written these apparently intense and serious posts themselves or had copied and pasted them. So i put it in here.

Would you like it moved again?