[Enigma]

^ Both timelines on the front page contradict your claims.

http://theralphretort.com/deploraball-du...-12026016/

http://www.mediaite.com/online/alt-right...ploraball/

Mike announced BA wouldn't be attending, BA then started posting DMs/emails, calling Mike a cuck and Milo a scumbag, etc., then Mike responded.

If you can provide evidence to the contrary, we'd love to see it.

[Irenicus]

(12-28-2016 05:55 PM)weambulance Wrote:  

(12-28-2016 09:48 AM)rw95 Wrote:  

And how are twitter followers a shit metric? This is a common argument I hear from alt-righters, but I notice that the overwhelming majority of alt-right twitter accounts rarely have more than a few thousand followers (Vox Day being one of the noted exceptions.)

Because it takes zero effort to follow someone on twitter. Click a button once and you're done forever even if you never look at anything they say. Controversial people are followed by many people who don't like them as well. And if you're using twitter followers as some sort of metric for determining relative influence, you have to start from the assumption that both people are trying to use the platform equally. That is not the case here.

You can't compare the two men as apples to apples anyway. They target distinctly different audiences and Vox Day's work is aimed a lot farther down the right tail of the IQ bell curve than Mike's. They're complementary voices, not competitors.

I would say that both parameters (Twitter following and Alexa) do not really tell us about the popularity of a certain person or website. In case of Twitter, a lot of bots are used, which boost your profile in various ways. For example, it is a known fact that Hillary used a lot of them on her Twitter. Here.

Quote:

The Washington Examiner reports an audit of the Twitter accounts for the 2016 presidential candidates found Hillary Clinton has the highest percentage of phony followers by far, a whopping 41 percent. This means that of the 4.65 million followers Clinton claims, 1, 906,500 of them might be fakes.

http://www.breitbart.com/hillary-clinton...followers/



I mean...if there are ways to boost the number of followers at Twitter (as well as Facecrap)...there surely is a way to boost the number of clicks of some web site. It is not a rocket science, my friend. Not to mention that a lot of traffic is made from your enemies. After all, they want you to make a wrong move, and then...they strike! That also needs to be taken into account. I would not be suprised if a lot of Jezebel visitors are reading this very post!



When we take into account all that, there is only one parameter that can prove if you are relevant - your relevance in real life.



For example, Roosh has (from what I have gathered) appeared on several TV stations (Ukrainian and Romanian, I think). We all know what happened in Canada, and what happened during the Meetup outrage. Not to mention that he is a big shot in the Manosphere.




Whether we like him or hate him, he is a relevant factor.



Now, let's look at Mike. He is an author of several bestsellers and documentaries. He is (or was, I do not know) a lawyer who published articles in his field. He literally destroyed a lot of cucks (some politicians withdrew their candidacies even, because of him), SJW's (Gamergate). His name is spoken in the Trump Tower (Flynn). His name CERTAINLY (!!)involves massive triggering in the WH.



Whether we like him or hate him, he is a relevant factor.




Now, contrast him to Baked Alaska. What has he done? Nothing. He did not publish a bestseller. His name does not cause awe or terror in Trump Tower/WH.


Whether we like him or hate him, he is a irrelevant factor.




When he was given a chance to make something of his life (for 5k a month), he ruined it!
He bit the hand that was feeding him, and giving him some relevance. Worse, he did not show an ounce of remorse, but instead... doubled down. Hell...TRIPLED down. He is like a girls who screams all over the street that "you suck in bed" when you dumped her ass the night before. You, Baked Alaska, are no different!




In this case, I will side with Mike. Although I never met him (and likely, never will), he is a person who has my deepest respect, because of accomplishments. Oh, by the way, he did not doxx BA - his name was known before. Speaking of BA, he can go back to his pub, drink all day, and blame the Jews for being a failure. I do not know why people defend him even!

[SamuelBRoberts]

(12-28-2016 04:58 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

Controversial theory: I believe the alt-lite and alt-right had fuck all to do with winning the election for Trump, and that it was most likely the out-of control left in the media, academia and entertainment; the obvious socialist denial of reality eroding any remaining appeal of the left to the moderate left; the obvious corruption of Clinton; the observable invasion of Europe; the destruction of multiple Muslim shooters and bombers; cops being shot on the streets; widespread destructive rioting; and Trump supporters being violently-attacked in public, all of this happening with government protection and everyone being lectured to check their own racism for not being cool with it. The media, particularly, was so out of control and dishonest that they created their own Hero's Journey for Trump. A predictable Preference Cascade took care of the rest, because it reached the stage that even your average unplugged Normie on the street could see the writing on the wall.

I agree completely that a lot of the alt-right stuff is getting out of hand. I know I'm getting a little tired of associating with people who clearly don't have their shit together in the slightest. Milo is one such person. I got tired of his bullshit antics a long time ago, particularly since he started looking less like a provocateur and more like a coke addict.

I think, however, it's going too far to say that the alt-right had no impact on the election. What you wrote about a preference cascade is correct, but what has to be kept in mind is that this was a very, very close election, despite the difference in electoral vote totals. The alt-right may only have had a small impact, but without that small impact, it could easily have gone the other way. Here are a few of the ways I think the alt-right contributed to the Trump campaign, in no particular order.

1.) Getting the spirit cooking and other Podesta stories out over social media. When Clinton blames "Russian hackers" for her defeat, as she has done repeatedly, who she's really blaming is the alt-right. Wikileaks released the information, of course, but it was the alt-right who made sure people actually heard what was in it. As an example, the weekend leading up to the election, autistic 4channers were frantically spamming every Hispanic Christian group they could find with stories about Podesta's spirit cooking. There was a 100% media blackout on the wikileaks information. CNN was telling people, for instance, that if you looked at it you could go to jail. Without the alt-right's efforts to get the word out about the contents of the leaks, they would've just sat on the wikileaks website and been ignored.

2.) Forcing the enemy, in both the media and the Clinton campaign, to waste time and resources attacking a useless target. The Clinton campaign, as well as the media, spent an enormous amount of resources going after the alt-right. Clinton gave a major policy speech on it, one that occupied at least a week of the news cycle. The media spent a lot of time on the alt-right as well, because internet autists were tracking down reporters on twitter and making their lives miserable. Not only did Clinton end up looking like a loon talking about evil cartoon frogs on the internet, this was a drain on her resources, and more importantly, her attention. The alt-right was a big, shiny, tempting decoy that kept Clinton from going after avenues that could've been more effective. All the time, money, and resources she spent attacking the alt-right was a complete waste that didn't buy her a single vote.

3.) Providing "pre-suasion" (I think there's a less faggot-y word for this but I can't remember what it is) for the Hillary's health narrative. The first real hit Clinton took to her campaign was just after September 11th, when she collapsed and was thrown in the car at the 9/11 memorial ceremony. The reason this was so damaging was that the alt-right (And particularly Cernovich, for what it's worth) had been playing up her health issues for weeks. Thanks to the alt-right's implanting of the idea that Hillary's health was in bad shape, what would've been otherwise dismissed as a minor incident became a major blowup. It's hard to overestimate how damaging this was: the week after the 2nd debate, I personally passed two people on the street talking about how Hillary "had cotton mouth" because of "all the medicine she was taking". And this was in a very liberal area of the country, one that went for Hillary this election.

There are probably others, but those are the major ones as I see them. It's impossible to know how much effect they had on the election, but all together, I believe they had something, and I think it's incorrect to say that they played no part at all. As I said before, it's was a very close election in a lot of ways, and so without any of a hundred small influences, it could have gone the other direction.

[weambulance]

Quote:

^ Both timelines on the front page contradict your claims.

(links)

Mike announced BA wouldn't be attending, BA then started posting DMs/emails, calling Mike a cuck and Milo a scumbag, etc., then Mike responded.

If you can provide evidence to the contrary, we'd love to see it.

Those timelines themselves are not evidence , they're accounts of what happened just like mine is. And they don't include anything Mike did because he deleted it as soon as it happened, knowing how it looked. He made the first periscope, not Baked Alaska, which Baked Alaska references in his periscope as I recall. I witnessed events in real time, seeing the periscopes appearing and immediately vanishing from Mike's twitter and whatnot.

Sorry I didn't have my "record everything in case I ever need it" app running.

Mike was still whitewashing his twitter last night, though he was not targeting Baked Alaska at the time. I have several tweets screencapped (unrelated to BA affair) that he deleted because they don't match his "adult in the room" image. Who knows how many more got memory holed? Those are just the ones I noticed in my main feed last night, when I clicked on them to see replies and whoops, error, no more tweet!

I should not have to explain why I find the person who's not hiding anything and not pretending he didn't say and do things more trustworthy than the one who's presenting a whitewashed, spun case and refusing to stand behind his actions and words. Everything Baked Alaska said is still right there on his twitter if you want to see it. Mike won't even leave up a tweet where he calls someone an idiot who's using "cuck math".

Let the thought policing and careful image cultivation commence! That must be exhausting. At least he's not virtue signaling as bad as Bill Mitchell. Yet. The virtue signalling has started, though.

I'm done with this topic. Everything important has been said. The writing's on the wall. See or remain blind as you will.

[Cattle Rustler]

Country music? We all know Der Fuhrer likes Polka.

[Enigma]

(12-28-2016 07:37 PM)weambulance Wrote:  

Quote:

^ Both timelines on the front page contradict your claims.

(links)

Mike announced BA wouldn't be attending, BA then started posting DMs/emails, calling Mike a cuck and Milo a scumbag, etc., then Mike responded.

If you can provide evidence to the contrary, we'd love to see it.

Those timelines themselves are not evidence , they're accounts of what happened just like mine is.

There are links/screenshots of the tweets and Periscopes in question, along with the related timestamps.

How is that not evidence?

They also give a detailed timeline of events, which you haven't provided.

Quote:

I should not have to explain why I find the person who's not hiding anything and not pretending he didn't say and do things more trustworthy than the one who's presenting a whitewashed, spun case and refusing to stand behind his actions and words. Everything Baked Alaska said is still right there on his twitter if you want to see it. Mike won't even leave up a tweet where he calls someone an idiot who's using "cuck math".

Let the thought policing and careful image cultivation commence! That must be exhausting. At least he's not virtue signaling as bad as Bill Mitchell. Yet. The virtue signalling has started, though.

I'm done with this topic. Everything important has been said. The writing's on the wall. See or remain blind as you will.

According to you:

- TheRalphRetort, Mediaite, Business Insider, etc. are all lying for Mike.

- people have screenshots and recordings of all of Mike's tweets/periscopes, except the ones that you claim exist.

- BA didn't delete anything, despite the fact that the very Instagram post you brought attention to earlier is no longer on his page

Come on, dude.

I'm not "blind" about anything. Mike definitely deleted/didn't save certain things. That's why I'm asking you to explain what he posted earlier, but you won't. You're the one turning it into some kind of conspiracy.

You're making vague claims that contradict multiple other sources (that have no relation to Mike), while asking us to take your word for them. I don't see how that's reasonable.

[SirTimothy]

I honestly don't find myself attracted to either "side" of the drama at this point.

Baked Alaska has acted like a total jackass - his tweet about Matt Lasner being a "fag" and a "Jew", for example. Can he not see how that could massively turn off people who are middle-of-the-road? Of course we're never going to win over the HuffPo/Salon types, and we shouldn't try, but there are plenty of people in the middle who essentially decide elections. Yes there's a time and place to talk about Jewish interests, but yelling on Twitter about "fags and Jews" is just massively stupid, and having him being a part of a major pro-Trump event could be a disaster.

However, I don't really care for what the other side has done. You have a guy who brags about his homosexual escapades (Milo) who is going to take anything good and make it about himself, so I really don't like the fact that Mike is "allied" with him. Mike also seems to not be 100% honest either, when he says in his article:

Quote:

A week later Tim decides to “wonder” why Jews should be gassed

In reality, this is what Baked Alaska said:

[url=https://twitter.com/bakedalaska/status/813517917077651457][/url]

It's obvious he's not saying the second part is his own thoughts/words, so it's no wonder Mike's article provided a screenshot of everything except that.

So I really don't care to root for either side of this fight, because I don't think either side handled the situation well. That being said, I still plan to go to Deploraball, I still plan to see some of the RVF guys there, and still plan to have a fun time despite the current drama.

[weambulance]

Okay Enigma, I'm just a liar with a grudge against Mike. I didn't witness what I witnessed. You got me.

(Edit - to add, I'm not trying to replicate exactly what Mike said because I'm not Sheldon Cooper and I'm not going to risk getting details wrong.)

Or, maybe Mike's deliberate obfuscation of events is working as planned, because the guy's a lawyer and knows how to make a case.

Which thing are you saying Baked Alaska deleted? That's the only reason I'm responding, because I may have to amend my own story here. I'm interested in the truth, you see, so if you can show me that BA deleted something in an effort to protect his image that will modify my view slightly.

[Enigma]

(12-28-2016 08:13 PM)weambulance Wrote:  

Okay Enigma, I'm just a liar with a grudge against Mike. I didn't witness what I witnessed. You got me.

Or, maybe Mike's deliberate obfuscation of events is working as planned, because the guy's a lawyer and knows how to make a case.

You haven't told anyone exactly what you witnessed. That's why I'm asking you

Quote:

Which thing are you saying Baked Alaska deleted? That's the only reason I'm responding, because I may have to amend my own story here. I'm interested in the truth, you see, so if you can show me that BA deleted something in an effort to protect his image that will modify my view slightly.

I don't see the "stabbed in the back by Cernovich" post on his Instagram anymore.

Anyways, we can just agree to disagree.

[weambulance]

I don't know if it was on his instagram to begin with, as I don't use instagram. Most of the stuff associated with this is there. However, I took this picture of his twitter page 60 seconds ago:



What are you looking for from me, court eyewitness testimony?

My contention is that Mike started the major drama by attacking Baked Alaska in a scorched-earth manner after treating him like a total piece of shit during his "employee counseling" which I already posted earlier in this thread. Baked Alaska references things Mike said in a periscope that I only saw a minute of and just in time for it to disappear in the long periscope he made, which is pinned at the top of his twitter page if you want to watch it. Have you?

Then another periscope was made by Mike, which again he deleted. Then he posted his account of things which is heavily spun and obfuscatory which I've already detailed, back on page 2-3 or so. Did you read my posts earlier in this thread, or not?

"On Mike's periscope he just spread lies about me. He said I was a drunk, and that I was in Vegas campaigning for Trump and that I was wasted [while] knocking on doors..." is what Baked Alaska said at about 4:45 in his periscope. Obviously Mike had made a periscope previous to the big one BA made if BA was referencing it. Then we know for a fact that he made a second one. Both are gone.

How do you expect Baked Alaska, a recovering alcoholic, to respond to Mike claiming he was drunk on the job in Vegas? Is that fair play? Then we have a quote of Mike calling Baked Alaska a "druggie ex employee" as the title of his second periscope (I think). The guy's straight edge. If someone attacked you in your most vulnerable spot and spread your dirty laundry all over the internet, would you just take that in stride? What if that someone was a guy you'd worked closely with and thought was your friend for months?

Mike went scorched earth and made an enemy out of Baked Alaska. Baked Alaska reacted emotionally and started slagging Mike every way he could in response. I don't blame him one bit, though I don't like the fact that he did hit some causes I care about as collateral damage.

Mike created this situation with his poor leadership and management skills, then tried to hide all of his own wrongdoing to make himself look like the reasonable one in the fight. I've led men in combat (infantry team leader) and in dangerous work environments (open pit mining) and the leadership Mike displayed in this case was terrible, and not something anyone should take as a good example.

The end.


(Edit - Typo)

[El Chinito loco]

(12-28-2016 03:53 PM)Enigma Wrote:  

Alt-Right logic:

Trump
- moderate
- Jewish children and advisers
- stresses alliance with Israel
- repeatedly disavows white nationalism/Alt-Right

Alt-Right verdict = Savior of the West and White race

Cernovich
- Far right
- Christian
- does everything possible to get Trump elected
- promotes Alt-Right voices 98 times out of 100
- tells an employee not to do Nazi salutes at a $90,000 event

Alt-Right verdict = Subversive cuck Jew book merchant



The SJW's favorite activity of all is to dogpile. Their favorite websites to frequent are Livejournal and Tumblr. They do not have relevant favorite real-world places, because SJWs are primarily civil rights activists only online.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.ph...%20warrior

Hmmm, what other group does all of their social and political activism online and tries to destroy the career of anyone who doesn't pass their purity signaling test? It somehow seems familiar.

A lot of the WN types use the same rhetoric. I don't view them as different from BLM, La Raza, or whatever other ethno/tribal identity politics groups are out there. These guys are just playing the same game and talk about victimhood in the same way that the regressive left does.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with wanting to preserve your own culture or nation. However, when that belief system goes far off the rails into racial purity talks and murmers of getting rid of all immigrants (even those native born) then it's most likely gone too far off the deep end. The only way for that to even be a tenable position to begin with is if immigration was severely restricted from the start as it is in the case of Japan.

As far as North America is concerned pandora's box was opened a long time ago.

Trying to reverse a full century of immigration would simply undo the social fabric of the U.S. altogether. Social, cultural, and political ostracization of non white nationalists based on some racial purity standard would also be a disaster. It would delegitimize all the hard fought gains from the right that got Trump elected to begin with.

On the other hand stopping illegal immigration and carefully restricting immigration according to the nation's best interests is a perfectly rational position to take.

I've seen a few bakedalaska periscopes and this guy is the biggest burnout i've ever seen. He's talking about "having fun and jokes" like he's a living 4chan meme. It's childish and lame. Like it or not politics and the culture war is very serious shit.

I don't blame Mike at all for taking this very seriously and controlling the type of rhetoric coming from his camp. Noone who is vaguely red pill likes the vast Jewish influence over media, finance, and foreign policy in the U.S. but throwing out a lot of unfocused Jew bashing talk without a specific goal is simply not smart.

[Enigma]

@weambulance:

The first post from BA is publicly asking Cernovich, JackPosobiec, etc. why he's banned, around 8:30am.

[/url]

About half an hour later, Mike posts that Baked Alaska has been removed and BA immediately starts calling him a cuck, posting DMs, retweeting tons of posts that talk shit about Mike, etc.

You can see the lead up here.

https://twitter.com/search?f=tweets&vert...h&src=typd

Even at almost 10:30am, BA is still tweeting that he doesn't know why he's banned. This is well after he's been posting shit about Mike for over an hour.

[url=https://twitter.com/bakedalaska/status/813571610842013696]

Baked Alaska doesn't post his Periscope until almost 11:30.

That's exactly how the three articles posted in this thread recollect the events, and BA even retweeted the Business Insider article without comment or clarification.

In short, BA definitely was the first one to make the dispute public, and it also seems pretty clear that he was attacking Mike/posting DMs & emails before he even figured out why he was banned. Meaning Mike hadn't yet commented.

Anyways, I've already spent way too much time arguing about this shit. I'm done

EDIT: Times changed because of timezones.

[SeriousG]

On this forum Roosh has pursued a very sane policy in terms of his public image for his own protection, for the protection of the movement and for the protection of those of us that follow him.

Based Alaska doesn't really grasp that, nor tbh do people like Joseph Watson or Richard Spencer or even Mike C. They're too damned public.

[weambulance]

The only thing that's unclear is exactly when the text/DM exchange between Mike and Baked Alaska took place, because there's no date on it and because of time zone issues. I could probably figure it out but I don't care. Obviously they took place before Baked Alaska's name was removed from the event and he was banned, or the threat of removing his name from the event would be rather nonsensical.

Baked Alaska was asking why he was banned likely because he wanted a public statement from somebody. He escalated when they ignored him.

Nothing in anything you posted changes my points, or my sequence of events. I already said Baked Alaska took it public, but that Mike had seriously provoked him. That's self evidently true.

Nothing you say changes the fact that Mike created the situation--you're responsible for your employees and underlings, welcome to leadership 101--and totally botched its handling, then lied about and covered up what he did. Again, self evidently true.

You have not shown where Baked Alaska lied or obfuscated anything he did in this affair.

In short, I don't even understand what the point of your arguments is. You're just nitpicking minutia and sniping.

The drama is over anyway. Neither is engaging anymore.

[Delta]

A little advice if you want to get people on your side: Speak in a way that would appeal to potential supporters of your side.

Do not try to appeal to your enemies (SJWs). To them, you're a despicable shitlord no matter how polite or reasonable you try to be. This is the mistake so-called "cuckservatives" are criticized for, but I don't see any of it around these parts.

What I'd like to see less of around here is writing exclusively to appeal to those who are already on our side. This accomplishes nothing except turning the movement into a tight-knit circle jerk completely irrelevant to mainstream culture and viewed as a small collection of crackpot lunatics by the few people who are even aware of its existence.

When I say "potential supporters," I'm referring simply to those who haven't yet formed an opinion on the issue(s) in question. This is the audience you need to have in mind when post, blog, etc if you care more about the movement gaining some actual steam than about garnering "likes" and adoration from the peanut gallery.

Which brings me to the casual flinging around of the term "Jewish Question" (JQ): How do you think that looks to someone who is still deciding whether or not he's on our side? Since I'm familiar with this community, I know that it's a reference to media propaganda promulgated mostly by Jewish individuals, and nothing more sinister. But it doesn't matter what I think, because I'm already here. To the average person, "Jewish Question" = Naziism. An normal person casually browsing this thread would likely conclude that we support concentration camps, or at the very least, some degree of mistreatment of Jewish folks living in America. Think about that. Think about how damaging that is to the causes we actually believe in. Consider this shit before you hit the "Post" button.

[Samseau]

(12-28-2016 11:37 PM)Delta Wrote:  

A little advice if you want to get people on your side: Speak in a way that would appeal to potential supporters of your side.

Do not try to appeal to your enemies (SJWs). To them, you're a despicable shitlord no matter how polite or reasonable you try to be. This is the mistake so-called "cuckservatives" are criticized for, but I don't see any of it around these parts.

What I'd like to see less of around here is writing exclusively to appeal to those who are already on our side. This accomplishes nothing except turning the movement into a tight-knit circle jerk completely irrelevant to mainstream culture and viewed as a small collection of crackpot lunatics by the few people who are even aware of its existence.

When I say "potential supporters," I'm referring simply to those who haven't yet formed an opinion on the issue(s) in question. This is the audience you need to have in mind when post, blog, etc if you care more about the movement gaining some actual steam than about garnering "likes" and adoration from the peanut gallery.

Which brings me to the casual flinging around of the term "Jewish Question" (JQ): How do you think that looks to someone who is still deciding whether or not he's on our side? Since I'm familiar with this community, I know that it's a reference to media propaganda promulgated mostly by Jewish individuals, and nothing more sinister. But it doesn't matter what I think, because I'm already here. To the average person, "Jewish Question" = Naziism. An normal person casually browsing this thread would likely conclude that we support concentration camps, or at the very least, some degree of mistreatment of Jewish folks living in America. Think about that. Think about how damaging that is to the causes we actually believe in. Consider this shit before you hit the "Post" button.

This is why I always refer to the Talmud (religion) instead of the race (Jew). Takes the edge off and people keep listening enough to hear the full position. It also shows your interested in the belief system a major subset of Jews have, and not just interested in "race questions" in general.

[CynicalContrarian]

Far more inclined to be the aloof, lonewolf type instead of joining a group in lockstep to someone else's purpose.
So as I only glanced through this thread with a casual gaze, bear with me if it's already been mentioned.

Regardless of who the individual is or who the group is. I'd say, if you're starting from a sentiment of hatred.
It's a fair bet you're starting on the back foot & don't have the capacity of self-control or the ability to analyze a situation on a grand scale.

Similar to the old Henry Thomas Buckle quote :

Quote:

Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people.

Emotive hatred not being a great thing for the health of one's soul.

[AnonymousBosch]

Enigma:

Calmly and politely, since I'm under a warning:

I wasn't engaging in deliberate-obfuscation re: Forney. I called them both out at the time, and later called out Forney when he started going Race Realist in his podcast, which pained me to do so, because I think he's a damn good writer and journalist and I want to see him get his demons under control because I think he's got some potentially-sold works ahead as he matures. If he could channel his anger into some serious gym work, his natural sarcasm has great game potential.

But we're left in the bizarre situation where Mike is disavowing Baked Alaska for saying 'Kike' whilst not disavowing Forney for saying 'Nigger'. What constitutes protected classes in the Alt-Lite?

As for Mike, we simply observe and process information differently. I never assume people with a product to sell or a brand to promote are exactly as they appear. If you can take him and his apparent altruism at face value, so be it, but there's enough people on the left, middle and right of the political spectrum who despise him for there to be a lot of information out there.

Myself? I just lived through many Hyped-Up Gamergate Tweets that went fucking nowhere - a commonality he shares with Milo. Stuff like this:



Much like Milo, the moment Gamergate stopped being useful, he dropped it. But after months of this, you start to notice a pattern.



Now, you could look to the recent thread on Mark Zuckerberg's Sister and accuse me of doing much the same thing, to which I'd say, no, I'm much more malicious than that. I explored a theory of the Degenerate Triad back in late 2014, theorising that SJW types were driven by Emotionalism, Irrationalism and Symbolism - I predicted this would eventually lead to Hardcore Fascist Thought in the left due to a sense of Moral Righteousness. Based upon this Personality, I know it's a waste of time to argue with them, because, well, they're Emotional and Irrational.

All you can do is deliberately-trigger an emotional overload in them.

So whilst Quintus takes the high road and delivers and impassioned and fair takedown, I simply analyse her mental construct, see what she values, and, shot after shot, I fire: you're not unique; your thought is generic; you're overweight; you're extremely-privileged; you can't cook; your work won't endure; you seek comfort through food and online pity; and your oral fixation suggests you secretly-want to fuck your dentist father.

These are the things that will haunt and hurt her.

I then said two things to Quintus privately:

1) I've most likely done all I can do there;
2) I'm not proud of myself. These are small, ugly acts that weigh on a man's soul.

And lately, I've been wondering if that's all technology is really offering us - the ability to be lesser men. My sister recently observed Satan was the 'prince of the power of the air' so is it any wonder so much toxicity comes through us via the internet? My reply was: "It seems to encourage toxicity. It's a fundamental result of social media design."

More and more I think purge this evil from your life. Disconnect. I'm shocked at the level the political discourse has sunk to this year, where professional adults act like out of control children. Everyone is trapped.

As such, when I see this recent dust up between Milo, BA and Mike, I simply see Tormented, Trapped Spirits, raging amongst themselves, because Rage is what is familiar and comfortable.

Obviously, your mileage may vary, due to the differences in how you observe and process information. I can't help with that, which is why I doubt the power of the Alt Right due to considering possible theories that we've all played out a pre-scripted scenario in this election because I've been hugely-surprised that Trump's win was ever allowed to happen.

As such, I wonder if this sudden growing shift away from socialism into nationalism isn't organic and has been pre-ordained; that deliberate prejudices are being encouraged and cultivated to more easily wipe the old slate clean, should things come to physical violence; and that one of the greatest impediments to overthrowing the western status quo has always been the inability to raise the political consciousness of the working class and that perhaps this goal was more easily-achieved not by offering them power, but by threatening their comfort.

What would really be going on would be a fight between those who believe power is best achieved through subjugation and destruction of the masses via Socialism, and New Thinkers who see the inevitable failure inherent in any Socialist New World Order Structure, and, as such, understand that most people have simple desires and can easily be controlled via the illusion of comfortable prosperity, and that's a power structure that more readily-endures.

Hell, perhaps it's even (((tribe))) against (((tribe))).

The Alt-Right functions as Useful Idiots in this scenario, believing they're making a revolutionary difference, when it's really all Deep State Intelligence and Psy-Ops driving everything. Nothing is revealed that isn't designed to make us venomously-hate the desired opponents, so the Left is encouraged to be as degenerate and destructive as possible before the transition, perhaps emboldened by Clueless Socialists who still believe they're in power.

The left has no idea of the current physical danger they are in if they've been deemed surplus to requirements, particularly as in a prosperous society they would hold little functional value to to their dysfunction. If this is the way forward, the Alt-Lite serves no function and will hold no real power, and the Alt-Right will be encouraged via their activities being largely-ignored by the government.

The alternative is exactly what played out: a classic Hero's Journey with an Underdog Triumphing against the stuffy establishment. Basically, an early-80's 'slobs vs. snobs' Hollywood movie, back when (((Hollywood))) was trying to raise the social conscious of the working class. Maybe it's possible, though, once again, (given the constant subversion by the left of every institution in my lifetime), I just don't see how it was allowed to happen.

I'm not sure what Jan 20th will bring, but it should be interesting either way.

[Slim Shady]

If the Alt-Right are allowable useful idiots, people like Mike are building their own brands to counter the Deep-State powers. To take up such a monumental task requires playing the long game, which requires incredible patience, impeccable timing, and perhaps making hard decisions along the way that one isn't really proud of.

I agree with weambulance (and Roosh) that this wasn't dealt with correctly by the leader, but AB I think the answer is right there in your own post, bubbling just beneath the surface. In your heart you know that the Deep State or ((JQ)) or w/e is still in power, and it can't be taken on directly, especially after they were taken by surprise and had a massive defeat (you could argue Trump had to compromise with the Deep State to be allowed into power). Assuming that we had a victory, we are due for a defeat, facing the wounded giant. This is the time to be most patient, most vigilant - more so than before the election.

This doesn't seem too hard to parse through for me.

[fokker]

@AB - I reckon Mike hasn't disavowed Matt for his use of the N-word due to the two being friends. BA was just a business partner.

[Dr. Howard]

(12-28-2016 10:21 PM)weambulance Wrote:  

The only thing that's unclear is exactly when the text/DM exchange between Mike and Baked Alaska took place, because there's no date on it and because of time zone issues. I could probably figure it out but I don't care. Obviously they took place before Baked Alaska's name was removed from the event and he was banned, or the threat of removing his name from the event would be rather nonsensical.

Baked Alaska was asking why he was banned likely because he wanted a public statement from somebody. He escalated when they ignored him.

Nothing in anything you posted changes my points, or my sequence of events. I already said Baked Alaska took it public, but that Mike had seriously provoked him. That's self evidently true.

Nothing you say changes the fact that Mike created the situation--you're responsible for your employees and underlings, welcome to leadership 101--and totally botched its handling, then lied about and covered up what he did. Again, self evidently true.

You have not shown where Baked Alaska lied or obfuscated anything he did in this affair.

In short, I don't even understand what the point of your arguments is. You're just nitpicking minutia and sniping.

The drama is over anyway. Neither is engaging anymore.

I concur with Weamblance's take.

I used to get called out to job sites to fire employees with minimal drama. This was usually in the case where the site foreman and the employee had worked up some ego beef with each other and did not want to lose face with their crew.

I would go out to the site, as unannounced as I could, after talking to the foreman and then seek out the employee for a private meeting. The meeting would essentially be "I'm out here because your production has been going down. I'd rather not fire you because I don't think you're a bad employee, but I'd like to give you the opportunity to look for another job on your own terms. I'll pay you for the rest of today (I'd always show up in the morning) and you tell me what you want me to tell the crew and the foreman about your leaving and I'll pass it along. Figure that out and we'll pack your gear up and I'll give you a ride back into town, without any hard feelings."

I had guys want their 'exit story' to be that they had a bad back, they got another job, they got accepted to college, their mom died etc. Which I communicated, and they walked off the job site, head held high, ego intact. The employer and foreman got rid of a problem employee, with no retaliation, which was my goal.

This was much better than what usually happened. The foreman and the employee escalated a workplace war with each other which resulted in a public 'your fired' and the employee would fight back by sabotaging equipment, getting in a fight or filing a fake workers compensation claim to retaliate.

Mike vs. Baked Alaska put ego over form and function. I also think that Mike was trying to play a card from Trump's 'revenge' playbook, which didn't go well. Baked Alaska is a young dude that needs to work on his self control as well.

[not-a-pua]

After reading more about this I conclude: I blame the stupid Internet.
Mike should have known that he deals with a man-child in Baked Alaska. A shitposting meme producing(?) shitlord.
Should have simply picked up the phone and told him to cool it.
All these DM's and public infights suck.
The white nationalists like the development of course. They want people like PJW and Cernovic and Milo far, far away from their stuff.

[HD668B]

(12-29-2016 08:40 AM)Dr. Howard Wrote:  

I concur with Weamblance's take.

Indeed the point is not "who started first", a childish question to ask, but more importantly why two grown men started cat calling each other on the interwebs for all to see.

As others as pointed out, this should be resolved in person, and at least not in public.

This drama is especially striking since the alt-right is supposedly representing a new kind of masculinity, where honour and old-school gentleman etiquette should be used.

[Gmac]

(12-28-2016 09:36 PM)Enigma Wrote:  

@weambulance:

The first post from BA is publicly asking Cernovich, JackPosobiec, etc. why he's banned, around 8:30am.

[/url]

About half an hour later, Mike posts that Baked Alaska has been removed and BA immediately starts calling him a cuck, posting DMs, retweeting tons of posts that talk shit about Mike, etc.

You can see the lead up here.

https://twitter.com/search?f=tweets&vert...h&src=typd

Even at almost 10:30am, BA is still tweeting that he doesn't know why he's banned. This is well after he's been posting shit about Mike for over an hour.

[url=https://twitter.com/bakedalaska/status/813571610842013696]

Baked Alaska doesn't post his Periscope until almost 11:30.

That's exactly how the three articles posted in this thread recollect the events, and BA even retweeted the Business Insider article without comment or clarification.

In short, BA definitely was the first one to make the dispute public, and it also seems pretty clear that he was attacking Mike/posting DMs & emails before he even figured out why he was banned. Meaning Mike hadn't yet commented.

Anyways, I've already spent way too much time arguing about this shit. I'm done

EDIT: Times changed because of timezones.

You've got the timeline wrong. I was in that group chat and that happened last Thursday. BA made up with Mike and the rest of the team shortly after. Meltdown happened Monday night.

[I DIDN'T KILL MY WIFE]

(12-29-2016 09:13 AM)not-a-pua Wrote:  

After reading more about this I conclude: I blame the stupid Internet.
Mike should have known that he deals with a man-child in Baked Alaska. A shitposting meme producing(?) shitlord.
Should have simply picked up the phone and told him to cool it.
All these DM's and public infights suck.
The white nationalists like the development of course. They want people like PJW and Cernovic and Milo far, far away from their stuff.

This is a very relevant point. With this whole instant messaging shit people forgot the arcane art of picking up a phone, calling someone and talking it out. Everyone needs to show how "alpha" and "takes no shit" they are in public, which leads to (rightfully) wounded egos and retaliation. If there is one thing we could learn from the Asian and honor cultures it is the art of giving others the opportunity to save face.

Also people somehow forget that the internet never forgets. DMs, chat logs, periscopes, tweets, letters, they all leave traces which can never be erased and can always be showcased. Never write something that you'd regret if the other person revealed to the world in business dealings. The casual nature of social media lets people forget that all messages are basically evidence.

Also there's this old saying: "When two are fighting, the third one is thrilled"