[sudo-discuss] Memberships

[Max B]

Hard pass

On August 17, 2016 5:24:59 PM PDT, Xer0Dynamite <dreamingforward at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Consider yourself unwelcome in the sudo room space pending a formal
>ban.
>
>Before you (Mark Juul, Morgan Allen, Lesley Bell) shoot yourself(ves)
>in the foot, I implore you to listen with your reason, rather than
>your reactivity.  For example, there are no hackerspaces that are
>really thriving, do you know that?  Further, the level of analysis
>needed to fix sudo-room's problems are not simple. I say this from
>someone who's managed hundreds of thousands of dollars, can legally
>call himself a Doctor, have the auspices of MIT, and has been watching
>the movement from high above to ensure that it doesn't fail.
>Sometimes trouble follows individuals not because they are guilty but
>because they refuse to compromise in a system that DEMANDS it.  (In
>any event, you can sniff around further at
><linkedin.com/in/majanssen>.)
>
>Hopefully, all of you took the time to read the important info in the
>message (SUBJ: "Memberships") whereby I explained the complexity of
>your explorations vis á vis the group known as Anonymous.  Your
>judgments are COMPLETELY inappropriate pending *actually* asking me
>what my views are.  Presumably, sudo-room doesn't require men to
>desire male bodies EQUALLY to a woman's or to think that someone
>DRESSING UP AS A GIRL has somehow magically acquired a uterus and all
>the struggles that WOMEN have in this world.  I mean really give me a
>fucking break, because the word "inclusivity" can start to look
>awfully like marshmallow fluff when you have a lock on your door.
>(BTW, I will admit to having a preference on the M/F question).  The
>same issue is present with noisebridge -- they screen people who
>silently match their political ethos/pathos.  It's the kind deep and
>dangerous delusion that Christians have when they believe they're
>fighting for Jesus.
>
>This isn't a criticism of them, for I understand the difficulty of
>what I call REALITY (the street), but better to be trained and find
>heuristics to TRANSFORM these experiences than become another
>bourgeois hangout for (mostly) boys.
>
>You don't look incompetent, you look inexperienced.  I never thought
>you were noobs, it's just that it would be very difficult to duplicate
>the analysis that's been done to make hackerspaces self-sustaining.
>It's akin to making a national _constitution_.  You should consider
>that before you go excluding potential members who have offered to
>help.
>
>And finally, consider the part of the profile in which you apparently
>didn't have any problems or concerns:  "suicidal".  After the failure
>of Occupy, many of us involved in trying to make a balanced world are
>getting burned out.  The pressures of living are high and the hopes
>are not.  Hackerspaces were supposed to act as refuge and sanctuary
>for such fighters.  But it is getting sidetracked by MEN who blow
>their load in each other's mouths and WANT TAX BREAKS.  You didn't get
>it at all:  I was called a fag in high school, so were my friends, who
>were more punk than I was.  I can make legitimate use of that word and
>know far more about it than you who may just be looking to be
>"politically correct".  Perhaps your interest in humanity in a joke,
>but it implies that there is at least one human who is on the brink of
>ending his or her life.
>
>If the aforementioned all jumped to on Juul's train of thought without
>due consideration, then my analogy was more apt than I had planned:
>you are like the rats congregating on that sinking ship.
>
>Truth and Justice.
>
>Marxos
>
>
>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 7:20 PM, Xer0Dynamite
><dreamingforward at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/15/16, Marc Juul <juul at labitat.dk> wrote:
>>> > sudo room allows ... ONE ... member to block the membership
>>> > application....  ...You cannot become a sudo room member.
>>> > There is no way to appeal this decision.
>>> > (emphasis mine)
>>>
>>> Please take a moment to review your idea of memberships.  I
>understand
>>> your current policy as it is written.  Are you aware that such a
>>> policy amounts to a tacit dictatorship?  (One person can decide the
>>> fate of all future interactions.)
>>>
>>> Onto your other points.  You decided to explore a little more than
>you
>>> were told in the membership application and it got you into jumping
>to
>>> some conclusions that aren't going towards truth (as you would
>>> otherwise, reasonably, expect).
>>>
>>> The twitter account you mention has no face as it is a shared
>account
>>> belonging to part of an activist collective called "Anonymous". 
>More
>>> to the point, it is a space for those with no voice, like those in
>>> prison for crimes that your leaders do on an annual basis, the
>Native
>>> Americans (who shouldn't be expected to learn how to use the
>internet
>>> just to get justice).  You apparently didn't wish to include those
>>> tweets.  The profile tag line that *I* had placed there was "So
>>> transparent as to be invisible...."  (and did not reference the
>female
>>> directly).  That is, in fact, how you found it at all. 
>Unfortunately,
>>> that tagline is no longer there.  I'm still transparent, and you can
>>> ask me anything you want, should you decide to use your freedom that
>>> we've been fighting on your behalf for genuine inquiry rather than
>>> forming premature conclusions that serve neither me nor the future
>of
>>> sudoroom.  We use this collective individuality as a counterpoint to
>>> the adverse collective personality that you under one now called
>>> "Annuit Coeptis" which you can find on the back of the US$1,
>>> left-hand-side.  That phrase is ancient Latin for "We are looking
>over
>>> you" with the preposition "over" to imply, semantically, the notion
>of
>>> parentship.
>>>
>>> To the point, if you wish to go over all the tweets on that account
>>> one-by-one, we can do that, in the presence of your the sudo-room
>>> polit-bureau, if you'd like.  I will admit, for example, that I had
>>> indeed tweeted that women should [collectively] stop sucking the
>cock
>>> of the anti-Christ.  You got me.
>>>
>>> As has been communicated on several occasions by Anonymous, anyone
>can
>>> join this movement  The membership application for the account in
>>> question is much more simple.  I just have to give you the password
>>> and you are automatically in, there is no vetting process.  ...But
>>> judging from your message, I assume you wouldn't be interested.   Am
>I
>>> to understand, for example, that you have only seen the anatomy of a
>>> woman through approved and vetted processes and mediums, yourself?
>>> Please take a moment and reflect.
>>>
>>> The note on the profile that you *didn't* take into account that
>these
>>> are missives from the "uber-mind".   Perhaps it is unfortunate that
>it
>>> makes reference to a part of the female anatomy in a manner of which
>>> you do not approve.  I, myself, did approve, otherwise I would have
>>> removed it, and I further know the intentions of the person(s) who
>set
>>> that note in the profile believes and *fights* for women to be
>equal.
>>> How much have you yourself done that?  (I should note that I cannot
>be
>>> certain that only the one individual set that profile, such is the
>>> nature of anonymity and aggregating activism.)
>>>
>>> I have to believe, for your sake, that your note was not sent
>strictly
>>> with your own personality in mind, but also a result of a collective
>>> consciousness in which you do not have complete control.  Few do
>have
>>> control.  Between your diet, the medical system, and the law, pretty
>>> much everyone has been p0wned.
>>>
>>> Towards some other points, I should attempt to reason with you on
>your
>>> current decision.  Sudo-room, in its present state, is financially
>>> insolvent, has no business plan, has rent in the 10s of THOUSANDS of
>>> dollars and is in the ghetto.  You do have need to save your ship
>from
>>> sinking.  I am here on a raft shooting the flare that "I'm here". 
>If
>>> you wish to continue to captain that giant ship on your own, I have
>to
>>> allow that.  For that is my own personal policy:  to allow others to
>>> fail -- if, when given the options and consequences of error, they
>>> choose to act on their own.  Even then.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Mark,
>>> aka Marxos, Captain Dynamite.
>>>
>>
>_______________________________________________
>sudo-discuss mailing list
>sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>https://sudoroom.org/lists/listinfo/sudo-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20160817/b94220cd/attachment.html>