Social Experiment Forum

[StormBerlin]

With the quick browsing I did, I noticed conceptanarchy reminds me of the consumption junction forum. I hate that forum.

[JumpinJesus]

Originally Posted by abaya

I hear your point, JJ, but at the same time... I'm not particularly interested in acting any other way than who I am on TFP, on the new forum or otherwise. It's a waste of time for me to invent a new personality or set of behaviors. This is who I am, now and in real life, at least as much as I can manage. It's tempting to be anonymous, but it's also pretty disingenuous when I already know most of the community... which is why my commitment remains here.

I also hear what you're saying and I can understand where there are those who don't feel the need to behave differently in another forum.

I equate it this way: I smoke, drink, cuss, have tattoos and piercings. I'm also a teacher. I don't allow my students to see that aspect of my personality because it's not appropriate for them. However, once I get home, I allow myself to indulge in that other aspect of my personality.

For me, TFP is a great place because it allows for intelligent and mature discussion, while Anarchy is equally great because we're not bound by the rules of TFP. Anarchy allows me to indulge in behaviors I would never engage in here. TFP basically reels us in and discourages us from being the asses we might otherwise be elsewhere.

[abaya]

Originally Posted by JumpinJesus

I equate it this way: I smoke, drink, cuss, have tattoos and piercings. I'm also a teacher. I don't allow my students to see that aspect of my personality because it's not appropriate for them. However, once I get home, I allow myself to indulge in that other aspect of my personality.

And that is *exactly* why I wasn't able to last long as a high school teacher. (Although THEY seemed to think I engaged in drunken orgies and crack smoking on a regular basis, which cracked me up.)

I guess I'm really not very good at segregating different parts of my personality... I've always kind of struggled with that. I am who I am who I am. So I guess that's the main reason I'm not terribly interested in working to create another persona elsewhere. Not to say I won't continuing observing the new place... just that I won't participate, not for a while at least.

But thanks for your insight, JJ... I appreciate it.

[Sharon]

abaya, just curious - the segregation thing, is that an issue for you because you have trouble compartmentalising different "roles", or is it an issue with you feeling like you're not being honest or authentic when you put on a different hat? I'm asking more out of curiosity than anything else. One of my best friends feels so guilty about lying that she can't even play the card game "Bluff".

[ngdawg]

Originally Posted by abaya

...snipI guess I'm really not very good at segregating different parts of my personality... I've always kind of struggled with that. I am who I am who I am. So I guess that's the main reason I'm not terribly interested in working to create another persona elsewhere.

I've tried that and it's very hard to do.
No matter what name I use, I am who I am. Some don't care for the bluntness, the shortcomings. Oh well. It's not worth trying to invent a persona, really. At some point, it's lying and it's found out.
There's a difference, I think, in having a professional life and a personal one and in keeping them as seperate entities; I have a friend, a well-respected high ranking person in an international company who is covered in tats, has piercings, engages in an 'alternate lifestyle'(not gay, but 'dfferent'), but his career doesn't mesh/intermingle with his personal life unless he meets someone he's interested in while working.
Of course, the internet is not a career unless you make it so. Since it's not for me, I don't find it necessary to invent; withold information, maybe, but not invent it.

[Carno]

I don't think anyone is "inventing" a new persona for the Anarchy forum, but rather expressing the facets of their personalities that don't fit so well with the TFP. Or maybe they just want to say crazy things and be ridiculous.

[Halx]

Why be different? Why feel that you have to be different?

I'm having fun observing everyone's reaction to it.

[Ourcrazymodern?]

Tried to get in there,
And damn it I could not so,
no input for you.

(sir)

[Daoust]

Originally Posted by Carno

I don't think anyone is "inventing" a new persona for the Anarchy forum, but rather expressing the facets of their personalities that don't fit so well with the TFP. Or maybe they just want to say crazy things and be ridiculous.

I think you are a wise man, Carno.

[Ourcrazymodern?]

Originally Posted by Carno

I don't think anyone is "inventing" a new persona for the Anarchy forum, but rather expressing the facets of their personalities that don't fit so well with the TFP. Or maybe they just want to say crazy things and be ridiculous.

If one knows they're crazy they're not being ridiculous
If one knows they're being ridiculous, they're not really crazy.

(Sharon, please...)

[Carno]

I never said anything about anyone being crazy or ridiculous, just that they perhaps wanted to say crazy things and act ridiculous.

[abaya]

/threadjack to answer Sharon...

Originally Posted by Sharon

is it an issue with you feeling like you're not being honest or authentic when you put on a different hat?

Yeah, you pretty much nailed it with that one. E.g. I would never make it as an actress... not that I don't see a problem with putting on different hats, I just don't have it in me. I also don't have it in me to shift aspects of my personality in different contexts... it feels very awkward when I do so. This is even what makes it hard for me to role-play during sex, in a role that feels in any way inauthentic to me... but that's another story.

As for the professional/personal division... yeah, even that is hard for me, as I mentioned with my teaching. Ideally, I'd like to have a job where I can be who I am without having to fit into some mold or another... and I'm still looking for that job. But I like my place on TFP, where I don't have to fit into anything... I am very comfortable here, for the most part.

Maybe I just don't like the anarchy forum, period. That's all.

[Carno]

Wait, why do you feel the need to "put on another hat" just to participate in the Anarchy forum? Many people simply use their TFP screennames.

[spectre]

I certainly don't put on another hat. I may act goofier, but those that know me know I'm just like that naturally.

[Sharon]

I have a theory - Concept:Anarchy is an experiment to see if people can survive without rules.

The theory is that while people may say (and even think) they want complete freedom, the legalistic nature of the mind means that constraints and structure are what people really desire. Take children for example - they may want to be free to stay up late and throw ice-cream, but there's pretty strong evidence to suggest that the children with permission to do so are severely unhappy. In the end, it is the children who are given structure and boundaries who will turn out to be happier, more productivity members of society. Children at the end of the day want boundaries.

So I'm guessing that CA will prove that people may enjoy anarchy briefly, but after a while even anarchists prefer the long-term stability of some kind of organisation, however loose it is.

[abaya]

Originally Posted by Carno

Wait, why do you feel the need to "put on another hat" just to participate in the Anarchy forum? Many people simply use their TFP screennames.

Alright, lemme try to explain. As you pointed out, the whole point of the anarchy forum is to be without rules, which by extension means to act somehow differently/crazier/goofier than you would "normally" (in TFP or wherever). I feel like it's the place where everyone "lets down their hair," and in that sense, puts on another hat or becomes a little goofy or just acts somehow different over there.

But for me, there is just no crazier/goofier. If I go over to C:A, under this screenname or another, I'll still act the same way... there's just no other "side" to me that is currently repressed or restrained by TFP, so I see no reason to go to C:A because I don't need the rules to be lifted. I would function the same way with the rules or without the rules.

Basically I have never really had a problem with the SOP here, so I don't feel a need to go "let loose" elsewhere. I see no benefit to participating in C:A.

[Halx]

Originally Posted by abaya

Alright, lemme try to explain. As you pointed out, the whole point of the anarchy forum is to be without rules, which by extension means to act somehow differently/crazier/goofier than you would "normally" (in TFP or wherever). I feel like it's the place where everyone "lets down their hair," and in that sense, puts on another hat or becomes a little goofy or just acts somehow different over there.

But for me, there is just no crazier/goofier. If I go over to C:A, under this screenname or another, I'll still act the same way... there's just no other "side" to me that is currently repressed or restrained by TFP, so I see no reason to go to C:A because I don't need the rules to be lifted. I would function the same way with the rules or without the rules.

Basically I have never really had a problem with the SOP here, so I don't feel a need to go "let loose" elsewhere. I see no benefit to participating in C:A.

I'm with you on acting the same. I am the same way. And I can sympathize that I haven't created much of a reason to participate over there as opposed to over here. The benefit in posting there is simply to help get the concept off the ground.

[abaya]

Originally Posted by Halx

The benefit in posting there is simply to help get the concept off the ground.

Ah, there is that. Well, I'll think about it. Mostly I just see a bunch of goofing off and slandering over in C:A, so I'm going to wait until it "matures" a bit to see how I feel about joining. Not really worth my time at the moment, sorry Halx. I prefer to spend time here.

I do post occasionally on the "IndieBride" forum (hey, I needed somewhere to post wedding crap--be glad for that, TFP!), and incidentally, they haven't had any mods for a long time. So it's actually pretty anarchical... but since "anarchy" isn't mentioned blatantly anywhere, people run themselves pretty much according to whatever rules they have in their heads for participating in a forum. Which means it's pretty civilized, and most posts are of high quality. Then again, 99% of the members are women, which I think does make a difference in some inexplicable way.

[Halx]

I'll have none of that "women are naturally civilized" crap.

[shesus]

The thing is that people are comparing C:A to TFP. It's a different place and although it's anarchy it's with rules...just not as strict. I think that people do act differently in different situations. To say that you don't is quite odd. For example, you are telling me that people act the same way at a wedding as they do at a funeral. That people act the same way around their family as they do with their friends.

I can see this in kids. They will come to school and act completely different than they do at home. Is it because there are no rules for these places? No, it's because people are not 1 'mood' or wearing 1 'hat'. If a person is the same in every situation, then it would be found appropriate somewhere. You can't act like you are at a funeral all the time...that's just a downer.

I don't think people are putting on a show, I think they are taking advantage of another outlet to express themselves in a way they would in that type of environment. Now that isn't for everyone and that is ok. I, myself, struggle with a lot of the nonsense and flaming. I got told that I was too serious. I then follow the lead of others and state my opinions more harshly and get told that it is innappropriate. *shrug* can't please everyone. Different place, different mood, different facets of personality must be used.

[ShaniFaye]

I have never seen the point in pretending to be someone else no matter where I am....I signed up and was myself and sat and watched other people have fun in their own way as well....not my bag and this thread

In this thread we flame those above us

among some others is exactly why I wont participate further.

several people are running around there acting like they have been left at home alone for the first weekend when they were teenagers

Im sure it serves as an outlet for people that might feel stifled, and want to experiment...I dont need that.

Unfortunately I've lost some respect for some people that are over there showing a different side than I've seen before. I could never insult other people just for the "fun" of it. I dont see what that accomplishes

[mixedmedia]

Originally Posted by ShaniFaye

I have never seen the point in pretending to be someone else no matter where I am....I signed up and was myself and sat and watched other people have fun in their own way as well....not my bag and this thread

In this thread we flame those above us

among some others is exactly why I wont participate further.

several people are running around there acting like they have been left at home alone for the first weekend when they were teenagers

Im sure it serves as an outlet for people that might feel stifled, and want to experiment...I dont need that.

Unfortunately I've lost some respect for some people that are over there showing a different side than I've seen before. I could never insult other people just for the "fun" of it. I dont see what that accomplishes

I haven't spent a lot of time over there and I haven't noticed anyone I know of here behaving abominably. Although I have noticed a rougher edge on some people. There are several people acting like twelve year old ADHD kids who forgot their ritalin. And are almost as smart! I don't know who they are, but they don't act like tfper's. Which kind of makes me wonder about the origin and nature of this new board...something seems a little fishy.

[roachboy]

i have looked at the new board a few times.
i dont get it.

i dont see any particular social experiment going on there: the space seems mostly about the notion that there are no rules--but there are rules--there are obviously rules--there are rules in the hierarchy that administers it; there are assumed rules in the divisions between forums; there are rules that shape how and what people write.
there are always rules.
the political question is not rules yes/no, but what kind of rules and who is going to be able to shape them.

the problem seems to me that "anarchism"--direct democracy--has been confused with anarchy (no rules) in a particularly bourgeois way--the assumption seems to be that the absence of top-down hierarchy (the way americans in fact have their lives run, even as they like to pretend that things are otherwise) means that there are no rules at all. in the absence of rules, people get to trot out their inner bonehead. they feel all trangressive and even (bizarrely) liberated because they can be stupid in a freer way. that they reproduce cliche after clilche, social type upon social type in their free expression of whatever seems not to cross anyone's mind. so it's "woo hoo, i can tell x to fuck themselves: the revolution is surely upon us all."

if there is a demonstration/experiment happening, the point of it appears to be to show that folk cannot govern themselves. well, that's one of them: the other appears to be to provide other folk the oppotunity to laugh as they demonstrate that they cannot govern themselves.
but the set-up is such that this is the outcome you want.
"here is a little experiment. there are no rules."
well, if there really are no rules, then there is no experiment.
how do you define an experiment without rules?


direct democracy is about the ability of a collective to directly shape all aspects of their social world. the collective decides what the rules will be, how they will be implemented, what will happen to those who violate them, and most importantly when and how these rules will change. if you want to go that route, then make the structure and origin of the board explicit and set up mechanisms so that folk who participate can access mod positions and enact structures collectively.

i have been doing improvised music for many years now. often folk think that improvisaton means no rules. that isn't at all true--there are always rules--you reproduce them continually, in your style, in your note selection, in the phrasing, in allusions, in your compostional logic. what improvisation does is puts you in a position of being able to tamper with/change your relation to these rules. but you can be sure that you wont tamper with or change much of anything if you are not aware of what it is that you are doing before, during and after you perform--at the more or less political level. the trick is to combine this self-awareness with a radical openness in the space of the performance.

so far, what i see happening in the anarchy space is a version of what raymond queneau criticized about surrealism:

they trade enslavement to a set of rules they knew about for enslavement to a set of rules they didn't know about.

i dont see much of interest in watching that be performed.
i find it depressing.

[Halx]

You have totally over-thought the entire process.

[Sultana]

Originally Posted by roachboy

*snip* i have been doing improvised music for many years now. often folk think that improvisaton means no rules. that isn't at all true--there are always rules--you reproduce them continually, in your style, in your note selection, in the phrasing, in allusions, in your compostional logic. what improvisation does is puts you in a position of being able to tamper with/change your relation to these rules. but you can be sure that you wont tamper with or change much of anything if you are not aware of what it is that you are doing before, during and after you perform--at the more or less political level. the trick is to combine this self-awareness with a radical openness in the space of the performance.
*snip*

It is the same in dance. I perform mostly improvisational raks orientale (belly dance) and dance fusion, and it doesn't mean I act out a physical form of Turette's Syndrome, it means I'm aware of *all* the "rules" of *all* the forms, and perform accordingly.

I have no problem with emphasizing certain aspects of my personality or psyche in different places as appropriate--sexy characture on stage when doing burly, serene when doing Egyptian-style dance, etc. Even being silly when out drinking with friends. But there needs to be a payback, and I don't see that happening there.

I'm also big on structure. That's what get's me going, motivates me--bringing order to chaos. There's enough lacking structure in day-to-day life that I don't find it attractive to go out of my way to even marginally participate. Not knocking the experiment per se, just explaining why it doesn't appeal to me, and why I won't be participating.

[ngdawg]

Originally Posted by roachboy

i have looked at the new board a few times.
i dont get it.

i dont see any particular social experiment going on there: the space seems mostly about the notion that there are no rules--but there are rules--there are obviously rules--there are rules in the hierarchy that administers it; there are assumed rules in the divisions between forums; there are rules that shape how and what people write.
there are always rules.
the political question is not rules yes/no, but what kind of rules and who is going to be able to shape them.

the problem seems to me that "anarchism"--direct democracy--has been confused with anarchy (no rules) in a particularly bourgeois way--the assumption seems to be that the absence of top-down hierarchy (the way americans in fact have their lives run, even as they like to pretend that things are otherwise) means that there are no rules at all. in the absence of rules, people get to trot out their inner bonehead. they feel all trangressive and even (bizarrely) liberated because they can be stupid in a freer way. that they reproduce cliche after clilche, social type upon social type in their free expression of whatever seems not to cross anyone's mind. so it's "woo hoo, i can tell x to fuck themselves: the revolution is surely upon us all."

if there is a demonstration/experiment happening, the point of it appears to be to show that folk cannot govern themselves. well, that's one of them: the other appears to be to provide other folk the oppotunity to laugh as they demonstrate that they cannot govern themselves. but the set-up is such that this is the outcome you want.
"here is a little experiment. there are no rules."
well, if there really are no rules, then there is no experiment.
how do you define an experiment without rules?


direct democracy is about the ability of a collective to directly shape all aspects of their social world. the collective decides what the rules will be, how they will be implemented, what will happen to those who violate them, and most importantly when and how these rules will change. if you want to go that route, then make the structure and origin of the board explicit and set up mechanisms so that folk who participate can access mod positions and enact structures collectively.

i have been doing improvised music for many years now. often folk think that improvisaton means no rules. that isn't at all true--there are always rules--you reproduce them continually, in your style, in your note selection, in the phrasing, in allusions, in your compostional logic. what improvisation does is puts you in a position of being able to tamper with/change your relation to these rules. but you can be sure that you wont tamper with or change much of anything if you are not aware of what it is that you are doing before, during and after you perform--at the more or less political level. the trick is to combine this self-awareness with a radical openness in the space of the performance.

so far, what i see happening in the anarchy space is a version of what raymond queneau criticized about surrealism:

they trade enslavement to a set of rules they knew about for enslavement to a set of rules they didn't know about.

i dont see much of interest in watching that be performed.
i find it depressing.

Well put. As to the notion of a few who have concerns about it being a 'popularity' contest and becoming 'cliqueish', the results are in...it is that, thus far. (You wanna see something really funny, you should see the flood of 'infractions' I got from one person.)
By accumulating these 'infractions', your 'rep' takes a nosedive, thusly preventing you from climbing up the status ladder. So far, it's working in a sense that the 'social experiment' aspect of it is revealing a true nature of mob behavior, cliqueish attitudes and the need to jump on whatever the bandwagon is that day-this incessant need to 'belong'. And once the 'rep' gives someone a 'power', they use it as they see fit, including delving into the inner workings of the site itself if they know how, announcing what 'power' they now have 'OOO, I can ban you now!!' and generally, as you stated, act like ADHD kids sans their meds.
People are dropping like flies out of disgust....
With no boundaries, no rules of decorum, some are simply woe to use responsibilty. Logical action takes a holiday in favor of self-gratifying moments of negative action. Smackdowns beget defense, defense begets mob attack, mob attack beget...well, whatever would follow-retreat or more defense. I am not innocent of this, but I used the 'anarchy' not as a chaotic, dance-nekkid, whoo-hoo, ,the parents are gone factor. In anarchy, the true base nature of a person comes out. There were no surprises at all there, except perhaps that what we've perceived in some is magnified and generally negatively. I'm sure you've seen classrooms where, as soon as the teacher steps out, kids start behaving differently. Some will just go nuts, get up, run, make noise, others just sit, perhaps scared, while still others take the opportunity to do something constructive. It is unfortunate but a fact of life that those who do the most noise-making are the ones that get the kudos, the attention, regardless of whether that noise is a positive one or a negative. And when you think about it, how many of the more negative ones from school do you remember even now?

[Supple Cow]

Originally Posted by roachboy

well, if there really are no rules, then there is no experiment.
how do you define an experiment without rules?

*snip*

i dont see much of interest in watching that be performed.
i find it depressing.

*hammer slams head of the nail*



Re: diverting attention away from TFP/wearing different 'hats'

You can't announce that there is another playground with another set of rules next door and then expect this playground to stay the same in terms of quality of interaction and quantity of playmates.

I think the mere existence of this other forum in the context of being publicized here is damaging to the level of interactions here. I know that my level of interactions here has changed (more than once) as a direct consequence of having interacted with members of this forum in another context (in those cases, IRL). Creating this 'anarchy' bit and then endorsing it here on TFP does nothing to add to this community. It may be creating some form of change, but I would not call evolution.

[abaya]

Originally Posted by Supple Cow

I think the mere existence of this other forum in the context of being publicized here is damaging to the level of interactions here.

(bolding is mine)... yes, I think you've hit on another nail here, SC. If the new forum had not been advertised here, and had simply been another new forum on the internet where people randomly found themselves through browsing, I think the results could be different.

But because it is being "advertised" here as being a place of anarchy, then we are getting a far different response to it than we would otherwise. People are drawn to it as a foil of TFP, and specifically for that purpose. Which means the sample is skewed. It's not going to have the chance to develop independently of TFP precisely because it's NOT independent of TFP, mostly because of this thread.

[aberkok]

Wow, roach... true dat!

I am bewildered by the reasons given for trying to "keep things separate." Isn't that a rule being imposed? How the heck are we, as human beings, supposed to act in any way without imposing some kind of order on things, even if it is just in the way we perceive them!?

I for one don't intend on denying who I am or taking on another persona when posting on C.A. I've heard the arguments about acting differently in different arenas, but I don't buy it....for myself anyway. I'm still the same person. Maybe for me it just comes out more when I post.

I'm still willing to give it a go, but I'm finding it poisonous. There's not a whole lot of effort being put into the posting so far (on the whole).

[abaya]

Originally Posted by aberkok

I for one don't intend on denying who I am or taking on another persona when posting on C.A. I've heard the arguments about acting differently in different arenas, but I don't buy it....for myself anyway. I'm still the same person. Maybe for me it just comes out more when I post.

I don't see you being a different person over there, but damn, some people that I used to actually like and feel warm towards on TFP have revealed an utterly repulsive side of their personality on C:A. I guess that's what's they want to show, though, so the joke's on me for believing that they were being their true selves over here. Makes me feel a bit sad to see it all go down this way, though... it's definitely affecting the way I see things over here, too.

Originally Posted by ShaniFaye

Unfortunately I've lost some respect for some people that are over there showing a different side than I've seen before. I could never insult other people just for the "fun" of it. I dont see what that accomplishes

Just read your post again, Shani... and I agree completely.

[ngdawg]

Originally Posted by abaya

I don't see you being a different person over there, but damn, some people that I used to actually like and feel warm towards on TFP have revealed an utterly repulsive side of their personality on C:A. I guess that's what's they want to show, though, so the joke's on me for believing that they were being their true selves over here. Makes me feel a bit sad to see it all go down this way, though... it's definitely affecting the way I see things over here, too.

Just read your post again, Shani... and I agree completely.

It's fascinating, isn't it?
I have to admit, I was really pissed at first, but I find it all so ridiculously funny in a sad way. It's a day game, I'm playing to the hilt....why should people, anyone, have that privilege of just being a repulsive basher of others? And some, who are most likely there under different names, think that by hiding under a new nick, it gives them carte blanche to be total assholes.
To think, just to be a pisser, you can hit some little icon over and over and over, come up with some excuse as to why and tadah! you're outta there. Don't need any reason but like or dislike that person. Like'em, make a good mark, don't like'em, make a bad one. And it doesn't take a crowd-one or two with their own agenda can do it as if they think they're sullying some reputation.
The joke is not on you, Abaya...it's on those who think they're playing the joke. They're so far into it, even when hit with the truth, they still attempt to joke it off by being even more repulsive than before. I am guilty of giving audience, though, and fodder, something I truly tried not to do, but the target was so.......huge....
But I do agree, it is showing a not-pleasant side of many who were thought to be decent people when over here. Me? Eh, I'm hardly ever pleasant...no loss there!

[abaya]

Originally Posted by ngdawg

Me? Eh, I'm hardly ever pleasant...no loss there!

Hey, at least you're consistent. And I can respect that.

[ngdawg]

Originally Posted by abaya

Hey, at least you're consistent. And I can respect that.

/makes more characters to post

[Daoust]

Originally Posted by abaya

I don't see you being a different person over there, but damn, some people that I used to actually like and feel warm towards on TFP have revealed an utterly repulsive side of their personality on C:A. I guess that's what's they want to show, though, so the joke's on me for believing that they were being their true selves over here. Makes me feel a bit sad to see it all go down this way, though... it's definitely affecting the way I see things over here, too.

Just read your post again, Shani... and I agree completely.

Here's another one who totally agrees with this post.

I admit, sometimes I don't always let every part of who I am show on the TFP. For example I'm not as goofy on TFP as I am in real life. Initially I thought C:A could be a great outlet for goofy posts, or just a place to have fun. I like to have fun, and I wish I took more opportunity to showcase that side of me on TFP. I wanted to have fun on C:A but it wasn't long before I was turning into a grouch because I was annoyed at people who were making ridiculous posts, or giving infractions on every post I made just because they felt like doing it. Stupid stuff.

Theres a difference between having a little fun and being really immature. I think that C:A could thrive with plenty of the former, seasoned with a little bit of the latter. Unfortunately it's being overrun by immaturity and idiocy. Which, I guess, is what you get without any kind of order.

It's really frustrating that much of that some part of that idiocy is coming from current TFP members who are showcasing some completely different, and somewhat discouraging personas on CA than they exhibit here. It's odd.

I'm still sticking around C:A to see if it gets better. I know that many TFPers are bailing out of there because they have found that there is nothing there worth viewing or discussing anymore. And the idiocy is oppressive. I'm hoping for some change.

[ShaniFaye]

Daoust, it was really fun with you in the beginning and I thank you for providing that, but now its nothing but a disgusting display of supposed "adults" reverting back to high school behavior, I think Im shocked more than anything else. The "rats" have taken over the sinking ship hon...but if it does change Im sure you'll be one of the reasons

abaya I agree with everything you said too. I got an "infraction" for saying fuck of all things hehehe and some of the comments I read over there today are way more worse than me saying "lighten the fuck up".


lol its like watching a train wreck

[World's King]

So I signed up mainly cause I do whatever Halx tells me to... but after I read this thread and the forum itself... I don't fucking get it. Seems kind of lame to me. But that's just me. And who really listens to me anyway...

[mixedmedia]

The more I see of what's going on over there the more it creeps me out. And to find out that most of the people w/ non-tfp names are actually tfp members, man, that's really dismaying given the juvenile interpretations of what "anarchy" is and the general level of retarded bullshit being dished out by them and others. I'm not in the "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" clique so I don't know who these people are and I don't want to know who they are. It's like finding out that your best friend is in the Klan or something. I just hope it's all worth the animosity you're sure to bring back here with you.

[Sharon]

I decided to join because I thought I'd help Halx out with his little experiment, but if I had foreseen that it would disturb TFPers the way I'm reading above, I wouldn't have done.

I'm sorry if anything I said upset anyone.

[Ourcrazymodern?]

Originally Posted by Ourcrazymodern?

If one knows they're crazy they're not being ridiculous
If one knows they're being ridiculous, they're not really crazy.

(Sharon, please...)

...sorry for quoting myself!!!!!!!!!

[mixedmedia]

Originally Posted by Sharon

I decided to join because I thought I'd help Halx out with his little experiment, but if I had foreseen that it would disturb TFPers the way I'm reading above, I wouldn't have done.

I'm sorry if anything I said upset anyone.

Speaking for myself, I'm not talking about you, Sharon.