Emotional response unter alles

This is one of those things I figured out years ago, and afterward thought it went without saying because solipsism.

I’m more and more starting to think that the limbic system mode we’re running on – whether we’re male/female, intro/extro, positive/negative, etc, colors reality to such a massive degree that it’s meaningless to talk about truth unless we first state what limbic mode we’re running.

An introvert might become libertarian simply because he has a model-first approach to life (ie “sees” everyone as abstract actors in his head), has a natural affinity for elegant solutions, and has a strong sense of personal space. Is this truth? Or is it just reality viewed through the lens of the introvert’s nervous system?

Edenist Whackjob
Comment on Big problem in Aeolitalk

You’re absolutely right, and thank you for the easy post :-). This is why I say politics is mostly psychological projection. For instance, Common Law is English sense and civility writ large.

It’s not a categorical distinction, because your hardware matters much less when you’re giving directions to the gas station. Although it does matter.

Last thought: personality is more robust than intelligence and resistant to change, so saith Charlton.

About Aeoli Pera

Maybe do this later?
This entry was posted in politics, psychology, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

30 Responses to Emotional response unter alles

  1. Mycroft Jones says:

    Why would they leave their slaves behind?

  2. Rime says:

    “You’re absolutely right, and thank you for the easy post :-). This is why I say politics is mostly psychological projection. For instance, Common Law is English sense and civility writ large.”

    Politics is negotiations on behalf of our reproductive strategies. It is a means of organizing violence so that we might engage in our reproductive strategies. The English strategy (and Western strategy) requires cooperation, commons, militias, etc. All facilitated by a high trust society in which we supress parasitism, ascertain truth from falsehood (testemonialism), freeriding, etc. which we Westerners achieved by creating the Common Law. A man might find a new way to profit off parasitism, but as soon as he went before a jury that method of rentseeking was stamped out and the method of spotting such behavior codified.

    Capital punishment proves to be a wonderful tool for the genetic pacification of populations when it is used on rentseekers and parasites. What this selected for was a people capable of speaking truth, able to cooperate at an unprecedented level. After first conquering themselves the West went on to conquer the world. Edenists need to start reading Curt Doolittle.


    How do I italicize text in wordpress?

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      In a comment you can use a couple of different HTML tags. Typically i, b, and a work.

      >Edenists need to start reading Curt Doolittle.

      Alas, we are atomized, naive, and on the wrong end of a holiness spiral.

      >Politics is negotiations on behalf of our reproductive strategies. It is a means of organizing violence so that we might engage in our reproductive strategies.

      Reproductive strategies explain much of psychology, but not all.

      • Rime says:

        Most of Doolittle’s work is online. In fact, you can follow him on Facebook.

        “Reproductive strategies explain much of psychology, but not all.”

        I did not make that claim. I claimed that politics was reducable to organization of violence to further reproductive strategies. Niether politics nor reproduction encompass the whole mind and behavior of man. Did not mean to imply it.

      • Rime says:

        Good luck with this… Scott Alexander tried doing that and he had to ban all the neoreactionary commentators. Which sucked because they kept the place worth visiting via the huge cognitive dissonance they caused.


        Can you explain what you mean by “reproductive strategy explains a lot of psych but not all of it”? You can’t drop a thought-bomb like that and walk away.

        • Aeoli Pera says:

          >Good luck with this… Scott Alexander tried doing that and he had to ban all the neoreactionary commentators.

          I was being facetious. The idea of actually doing that is…absurd and unsettling.

          >Can you explain what you mean by “reproductive strategy explains a lot of psych but not all of it”? You can’t drop a thought-bomb like that and walk away.

          Refers to the premise of evolutionary psychology, which is that behavior derives from the game theory of survival and reproduction. In a game, there are often multiple viable strategies. The rest should therefore derive from the interaction of nature and nurture.

          See here for the flipside:


          I figure evopsyche, combined with a correct anthropological backdrop, gets you about 70% of the way to understanding human behavior. The rest seems to fall largely under memetics.

  3. Rime says:

    They need us. We don’t need them.

  4. j says:


    synaesthesia, ofc, goes crazy (all sorts of color blends) with regards to emotional response/limbic system mode. e.g. we ‘know’ instinctively that some colors are feminine/masculine. maybe this contributes to the ‘everything is relative’ and ‘there is no objective truth’ universeview. reality just looks like one big multicolored LSD trip.

  5. TE says:

    First a comment to Aeoli and then to Koanic (since he has banned me from Altrugenics) and he will probably be able to read it here:

    Aeoli– I agree to friendly fistfight and will notify you if I’m ever in Indiana. It sounds like you and I have a similar attitude to fighting; lotta fun.

    Message to Koanic:

    You’re explanation about Tex is bullshit. Just say “I was wrong,” it’s not that hard.

    You are a pussy.

    Agree to the potential fistfight/wrestling, or revoke the ban.

    Death duel is ridiculous: you know that. You only say it’s the only option because you are afraid of both verbal combat and physical combat.

    Your cowardice, false-persona, and intellectual weakness is exposed.

    BTW there’s nothing wrong with not wanting to fight– just be honest and say you don’t want to. Don’t come up with bullshit about your honor requiring a duel with pistols to the death.

    quoting Koanic:

    “Obviously as a TM he doesn’t get it either. Unarmed duels are only appropriate when it is possible to shake hands afterwards. Suggesting a wrestling match on a thread titled “cannibal fags” was not the best move.”

    Why so sensitive?

    You are a fairy.

    You use rhetoric that’s aggressive and offensive all the time– you can dish it out but can’t take it. You are a bully and a coward and lacking in principle.

    (Yes, I know what you’re going to say “a TM couldn’t possibly understand my rhetoric-honor system”).

    Cut the psychological bullshit of “as a TM…” it’s bullshit.

    Your “honor” is in fact nothing but a solipsistic pussy cop-out to dodge any real conception of honor. You pretend like you have actual objective honor-principles but then change them ad hoc when you fail to live up to them, and spout bullshit like:

    “I am an MT who is biologically incapable of honor– therefore whatever I do is by definition ‘honor,’ (and I can just make it up as I go along).”

    Again, you fail at your own honor-standards.

    Like I said, the fight doesn’t have to be physical– it can be verbal if you prefer that, but I want my damn answers… I only suggest fist fighting because:

    a.) I really don’t give a frack– though I do think I would win in fistfight with you I don’t particularly care about losing– I’ve been punched in the face by people a lot bigger and stronger than you and there are worse things than an ass-whooping, and zero shame in losing as long as you fight with honor

    b.) You put on this “warrior” persona, wear a red leather “Tyler Durden” FightClub jacket, and claim to be a Spartan– I genuinely didn’t know to what extent this was bullshit or real– but you have now revealed it. It is complete, 100% bullshit.

    You are a pussy. You are afraid of agreeing to a fist fight. It is all a put on. Unlike me, you would be embarrassed by the thought of losing; and unlike me: you are afraid of the physical pain.

    Honest question: have you ever been in a fistfight?

    No shame in answering no.

    I don’t think, for a random example: Polymath has been in one (though I could be wrong), and I respect him no less for it. No shame AT ALL in not being the fistfighting type– the shame is in claiming you are while actually being afraid of it.

    Honest offer: I will agree to fist fight you with one hand tied behind my back.

    And moreso, it can be my right hand if you want (I’m right handed).

    Like I said, I don’t give a frack if I lose– the harder the fight the funner for me, and I don’t fear a punch in the face– although I do think even with one hand behind my back I could probably win.

    Now my demands are these– your choices are:

    a.) agree to the fight with my hand-behind-the-back.


    b.) Delete every post on Koanic Soul blog, ban yourself from Altrugenics for two months, and give the entire forum to someone like Glenn or Polymath to run as they see fit for 4 months, after which they are encouraged to return ownership to you if your behavior has improved.


    both c.) and d.) (I encourage you to take this option):

    b.) make the admission I requested on your blog, that you were wrong about Tex; with my whole post in the comment thread of Aeoli’s Russia post attached (not the cannibal-fag one, but the one showing Tex is full of shit on the Byzantine thing). It doesn’t have to be self depracating or grovelling, just something like “I should have said this before, but Tex is completely far off in lala land and dead wrong about a lot of things, here’s a great post by TEM showing that he’s historically illiterate.”
    c.) Unban me from the forum.

    So what’s it gonna be? A). or B). or C&D– or “none of them”– which would prove your cowardice. I suspect the answer will be “none of the above,” though I would love for you to prove me wrong.

    I’m also 100% serious when I say I hold no grudge. No shame whatsoever in admitting you’ve acted wrong, and then changing your act and getting your shit together.

    That is what I’ve done, and that is what you are afraid to do.

    It’s also what you use against me– claiming that my admission of having acted wrong in the past is ammunition against me when it’s actually the opposite. It’s the past, I’ve gotten over it, and taken full responsibility for my behavior. I’m moving forward and I will act more nobly in the future.

    That’s how men do it. That’s what honor is.

    Not refusing to admit your mistakes and changing your principles with bullshit justifications, and refusing to take responsibility for your actions like you are doing.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      >Aeoli– I agree to friendly fistfight and will notify you if I’m ever in Indiana. It sounds like you and I have a similar attitude to fighting; lotta fun.

      The government monopoly on violence is particularly annoying. Let me get together some people and make Detroit great again!

  6. TE says:

    Original thread on Altrugenics for those who aren’t aware:


    Extra note, I was kinda getting at this, but an additional side curiosity of challenging to the fight was to see if my “tough guy radar” was correct, so far it is.

    Original predictions: guys who talk a little bit, or a medium amount, about own physical toughness and probably are actually physically tough:

    Egyptian, Aeoli, Adam, Legionnaire

    Guys who don’t talk at all (as far as I can recall) about own physical toughness, but whom I would randomly guess (based on communication style) are:

    Glenn, Slammpropp

    Guys who don’t talk tough, and who I have no idea about (may be tough, maybe not, who knows, most probably around average toughness for the group mean):

    The rest of the forum.

    Guy who talks about being tough more than anyone else on the forum, and has invented an entire identity around it– but who is in fact not physically tough at all:


    Wannabee tough guy runner up:

    Tex, but need more data to confirm.

    Additional runners up:

    Several of the MTs who used to talk a bunch of toughguy shit on the old forum, but I don’t remember the names.

    So far we have Aeoli and Koanic confirmed in their places, I suspect I am right about the rest.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      Right now I’m just fat, which pisses me off. No comments on the others, but I suspect that they don’t have any emotional valence on the subject. If you want to rile people up, you have to push *their* buttons.

      My big button, for instance, is to engage me with lame pseudodialectical rhetoric, fail to understand my counterpoints, and then accuse me of being irrational. This is, incidentally, exactly what you’ve been engaged in but I know it’s very tongue-in-cheek.

      Fortunately I am learning how to out-group such people and engage them according to Vox’s rhetorical heuristics.

  7. TE says:

    Oh, actually, Lazer is probably also real tough guy, moderate tough-talk.

  8. TE says:

    Nother thing…

    Hopefully I dispelled the “rage,” bipolar-mania, something bad mood.

    Still people don’t see my intentions for what they are or think I’m trying to “get at” something.

    The thing is this:

    I say what I mean and mean what I say.

    There is no “getting at,” unlike y’all who muse on “rhetorical strategies” and how to hijack amygdalas, I decided recently that “rhetoric is for pussies.”

    My only rhetorical strategy is to say exactly what I mean as directly as possible.

    Keep with the rhetoric if you want, the “rhetoric is for pussies,” is a point I apply directly to myself, and don’t actually consider bad for others to use in all cases. Even more precisely, “rhetoric is boring to me, my only rhetoric is the rhetoric of no-rhetoric.”

    The only time I’ll use ambiguous language is with a note (like this sentence explaining the above) that explains EXACTLY and LITERALLY what I mean.

    Edenist Whackjob’s speculations about divination and some hidden purpose are entertaining, but it misses the point– I mean exactly what I say.

    If I am accidentally imprecise I’m willing to clarify, too.

    My purpose is exactly what I say it is, to call bullshit when I see it. In the fist fight case it is a test of bullshit– hold Koanic to his own “Spartan warrior MT” standards to test for bullshit.

    Koanic’s reaction: case closed, point proven.

    Diagnosis, Koanic is full of shit.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      You ran afoul of a very specific rule created to avoid honor challenges to MT moderators. I told Koanic that he should have warned you before applying the punishment, even though you wouldn’t have heeded it, and he said that particular rule doesn’t get any warnings. That’s probably by design. He cares a lot more about the application of rules than about violence.

      • TE says:

        Well, I think the specific rule is damn stupid.

        So if I’ve broken it– good.

        Here’s why it makes no damn sense. Koanic allows “reasonable amounts of ad hominem” and he constantly uses ad hominem against those he disagrees with too, I would say unreasonably sometimes, but who cares.

        Now, if them’s the rules and an “honor challenge” is so loose that challenging to a fight or “insinuating that someone is a coward” breaks it, then it’s gonna be a problem.

        It’s damn normal for people to get heated and forget little “rules,” or go over the line in arguments that involve ad hominem.

        Ever heard people say things like “I shouldn’t have said that,” or “I went too far”?

        It’s damn normal in heated conversations (and internet ones).

        If Koanic really believes him being “honor challenged” by having a boxing/wrestling match demanded– so much so that it is an irreconcilable gap, and that he is now duty bound to either ignore me for life or kill me in a duel with pistols… well that’s damn stupid.

        It would be like if you made say, an accidental eye-poke an offense in the UFC that carries not only a warning or a point loss– but no warning lifetime ban from UFC after first offense. Nowadays the eye-poke rule is loosely enforced imo, and people take advantage, but a lifetime ban for first time offense would be ridiculous. Same with the rule.

        In other words, allowing “reasonable ad hom” naturally sets the conditions in which people WILL get close to the line; and therefore some will go over.

      • TE says:

        And I’ve met people with MT phrenology who don’t have ridiculous conceptions of “honor” like his, so I also don’t buy that bs for that reason.

        I really do think he made the stupid rule because he’s afraid of good criticism against him, and of physically fighting.

        I mean, Spartan pankration was practiced for training and “iron shapens iron,” type reasons– not solely for the reasons he gave for duels about solving inter tribe conflict. Additionally, he’s released vids of him wearing a Tyler Durden red jacket and glasses– and what would TD do? He’d fight. Wouldn’t need a reason and wouldn’t make an excuse.

        So yes, I do think Koanic’s warrior persona is complete bs and he is physically afraid of a fight. And I think the BS about my ideas not being threatening is… also BS

      • TE says:

        Ha, so a few quick thoughts more:

        First off, you are right I would break the rule if I had known it– because it’s stoopid. Think of it like a fighter who wakes up one day and realizes he’s in a shitty fight org and could get twice the pay and higher profile fights elsewhere; and the fight org has a stoopid rule like say: “no shouting ‘bananna chicken’ in the fight,” so he gets into the ring and shouts ‘bananna chicken! bananna chicken!”

        BUT y’all should still see the ‘honor challenge’ as a stoopid rewl because like I said, conditions are such where people WILL get close to the line under normal conditions, and therefore eventually people WILL go over. Now, I would’ve indeed broken the rule intentionally; but like the eyepoke lifetime ban hypothetical– it’s a rule that other “good fighters” will get close to breaking and accidentally break.

        Okay, but here’s the real good part:

        I check VDs site to re-lookup this alphabet soup stuff and find the post “Insight into Gamma” and find:

        “I’ve often wondered why Gammas are so intent on trying to shut down discussion and silence others. And then it occurred to me that it is not because they are foolish, but because they are cowards.

        If you silence a Gamma, he submits. Sure, he’s seething and angry, and he’ll hold a grudge forever, but the one thing he isn’t going to do is fight. Physical confrontation is simply not an option for him.

        And that is why the Gamma is always astonished when he gets punched in the mouth. Because he would never fight, he can’t imagine that anyone else will do so. I know plenty of guys who have been in fights, and none of them are Gammas.

        Of course, that’s also why the Gamma shrieks like a little Swedish girl getting raped by refugees when anyone even suggests the possibility of force being utilized. The very thought of it is terrifying to him.”

        lolz, I’m being called a gamma but the guy who shuts down discussion and doesn’t wanna fight isn’t?

        And in the thread, commenter “Chad” says:

        “I would characterize Gamma as a man at odds with reality. He will characterize his shortcomings as virtues (for example cowardice becomes ‘restraint’). Due to this characterization he thinks he is the epitome of virtue, but the values of society are flawed into not recognizing his greatness. In his delusion he is trying to manifest pride.

        Due to this investment in an easily dispelled pride the Gamma cannot withstand discussions that challenge his belief that he is virtuous.

        Ha! Methinks this “honor challenge” rule looks suspiciously similar to the sort of rule a Gamma would make.


        “This is why Gamma Protagonist are invariably Gary Stus; the universe in which they exist must change to accommodate the Gamma’s virtue. The fantasy is that the Gamma Protagonist changed whatever universe he exists in to recognize his inherent greatness.”

        Yeah, Koanic’s “MT Spartan,” is different in some ways from a typical “Gary Stu,” but it’s all the same underneath. He thinks all women who have jobs are “sluts” (even if virgins), believes in the idea that women must always have a male escort, and basically has a muslim view of sexually. And of course, the key thing is that his own flavor of Gary Stu Gamma is guaranteed a wife and being placed at the top of this society.

        His “New Sparta,” ideal society does look suspiciously like a Gamma fantasy to me where Koanic’s own flavor of Gamma is on top by default, and where it’s illegal to question his virtue. Props (errr…. I guess) on him actually materializing it to an extent– forum, and I assume his wife agrees sorta with his stuff… but no way it could ever actually be a nation actually existing in reality.

  9. TE says:

    lolz, disregard all the various insults and goofy net-warrior fight challenges for a minute– bottom line I think I proved a point– to me I’ve proved beyond a reasonable doubt that my own natural mindset is more factual not naturally “speculative” enough for Edenosphere– I don’t know how others would see it, but I think I’ve proved that objectively th’ Edenosphere is overspeculative to say the least… personal opinions on who deserves to be called a bullshatter or full of shat or whose opinions are disgusting etc. aside– it seems that point is taken more seriously by some at least, so that’s a plus… still wouldn’t personally want to Edenosphere again even if I hadn’t blocked that possibility with the “honor challenge etc.” because the fact-fantasy gap and history-hatred to is still far to large….

    • Edenist whackjob says:

      I’ve voiced similar concerns before.

      Basically the Edenists seem to concede that the world view doesn’t hold under rationality, but they counter that it is rationality which is too narrow-minded. Usually imagination, intuition and instinct are offered as superior truth functions.

      To me, the obvious answer is to start testing pieces of the theory. No need to test ALL of it – just prove that the intuiters are generally good at intuiting.

      • Aeoli Pera says:

        >Basically the Edenists seem to concede that the world view doesn’t hold under rationality,

        “We” concede it is a work in progress in the same way that historical understanding and physics are works in progress.

        “but they counter that it is rationality which is too narrow-minded.”

        Not narrow-minded. To my knowledge, all Christians subscribe to a mechanistic universe explained by strict cause and effect. Hence the “watchmaker” analogy. However, this mechanistic understanding is 1) incomplete (which can be proved from within ratio itself), and 2) slow, inefficient, and incapable of producing understanding. The primary virtues of the scientific method are 1) precision, 2) quantitative measurement, and 3) validity. I judge these things are unimportant right now.

        >Usually imagination, intuition and instinct are offered as superior truth functions.

        Not superior, just faster. They are where “soundness” comes from. You can’t rationalize your beliefs all the way down to NAND gates, that’s not how consciousness works.

        >To me, the obvious answer is to start testing pieces of the theory. No need to test ALL of it – just prove that the intuiters are generally good at intuiting.

        Fine, test it. I won’t stop anyone from putting in the time and effort.

        What is striking about people who say this is that no one except Spirit Bear has attempted to do so. Hence the description “anklebiters”.

        (Speaking now in the proverbial “you”.)

        Do you mean that you want to do this, or that you want me to spend even more time and effort doing it?

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      >to me I’ve proved beyond a reasonable doubt that my own natural mindset is more factual not naturally “speculative” enough for Edenosphere

      Your natural mindset has caused most observers to question your sanity aloud. Literally my first thought was that you were on cocaine.

      >I think I’ve proved that objectively th’ Edenosphere is overspeculative to say the least

      You are misusing the words “proved”, “objectively”, and “the”.

      • TE says:

        “Your natural mindset has caused most observers to question your sanity aloud.”

        That’s also the case with the whole Edenosphere and most outside observers who are non-Edenosphere. Y’all are generally viewed as insane.

        Additionally, not only outside observers, but the ‘natural mindset’ of most Edenospherians has caused most of them to question their own sanity aloud. “Am I insane?–” “everyone in the NH is mentally ill,” “okay, time for some insanity,” or other variations thereof have become staple catchphrases.

        So you can see perhaps why the simple questioning of sanity by Edenospherians doesn’t bother me in the least.

        Additionally, since I’ve been with myself after the post and feel sane, and none of my coworkers, roommates etc. have questioned my sanity in the past few days– I’m absolutely sure it’s not a problem. Mycroft heard my voice o’er the phone and knows it’s not the voice of a bipolar person too, so that’s at least one proof y’all can accept.

        In this same vein, one point I’d like to make is that I believe the “celebration” of insanity; and the joking about insanity reveals a darker truth, and that there really is a degree of voluntary insanity in the ‘sphere.

        It’s like how a man who’s afraid of something or knows something deep down will sometimes constantly “joke” about it.

        In other words, when Koanic made the first post saying something like “okay, brace yourselves for insanity,” (something like that, can’t remember the exact words) he started really and truly descending into voluntary insanity; and then people started imitating him and doing the same.

        Heaviside defended pretty well against the idea that this is a ‘cult’ in the modern sense of the word (I don’t think I ever specifically said it was though); and I agree that it’s not a classic ‘cult’. But it is a sort of voluntary insanity and therefore a bit cultlike in that aspect.

        Now it’s not full on insanity– so perhaps “voluntary delusion,” would be better… so substitute that word if you see it.

        Eh, if you don’t see it you don’t. I guess. But I’d recommend looking for it more if you don’t.

        “Literally my first thought was that you were on cocaine.”

        I dunno if the extremely bad grammar of the first post was a huge problem. But that was really just for fun and an impulse… though I’m probably gonna keep the informal intentional misspelling style cuz it’s fun.

        “You are misusing the words “proved”, “objectively”, and “the”.”

        Nope. “Prove” can be used more loosely in non hard sciences– I’m guessing that’s your objection. In any case, I think you know what I mean– I’ve tried to put my thoughts in a simple way that anyone can understand; and whatdya mean misusing “the?”

  10. TE says:

    oh, last thing for today since i gotta go, (or at least until tonight, but dang son these discussions startin’ ta be fun, for me at least).

    I ain’t tryin’ to make nobody leave the edenosphere– just tryin’ to expose as many flaws as I can, leave or stay or reform or not is y’alls choice. Seems like my points are being taken seriously (some at least) so that’s good enough for me.

    Someone on altrugen mischaracterized my demand as that Koanic totally disassociate himself with Tex, which is not the case. I just said post my comment and say that Tex is full of shit. My attitude in this is, and will always be “up your game, push yourself, raise your standards.”

    Now since Tex has such a temper maybe calling him “full of shit” would be de facto complete disassociation– (though I’ve had people say the equivalent to me, and we later reconciled– in normal people world saying “you’re full of shit!” is pretty damn offensive, but not completely unforgivable ‘honor challenge’). So I do take back the “say he’s full of shit” part– and it was a bit rash of me to demand that. Instead just say “he’s very, very, very, ignorant of history” or something neutral but not intentionally offensive. As long as it accurately conveys that Tex is way, way, way off on history, then it can be made as friendly as possible.

    also to jsl especially, but to all y’all: this be the attitude I’m a-tryin’ to promote:

    (why not more Diaz to keep with the same theme)

    Now I know it’s a bit corny and maybe trite self-helpy, and full of half-Mexicanz, negros, and eye-talians, but bear with it for just a bit.

    Not so much the Muhammed Ali parts, cuz that you need the right context– but especially the Sylvester Stallone Rocky speech part about searchin’ for someone to blame; and the “it’s not just in some of us,” cuz seriously, I think y’all mad that “humanity” been a-tryin’ to take that light you know is in you– and I ain’t sayin’ they ain’t!– but y’all gotta stop tryin’ to respond by takin’ the light outta them, which is what the Edenosphere seems to be all about– instead keep a-tryin’ to find the light in you without tryin’ to say ain’t nowun else got their own light.

    If y’all want some holotonality or whatever it’s called too, my mood is a-changed from the aggressive anti-NSAC Diaz to this one:

    See, I’m maybe motormouthin’ (or motortyping) like Diaz does when he’s quite excited… and it’s kinda like how he says he needed to get outta Stockton– the Edenosphere is kinda like Stockton to me– but don’t think just cuz I need to get out and think it’s a shitty town that I hate y’all… and maybe it’s kinda like how he says he doesn’t want to boss around his brother too much cuz he’s his own man (meaning I think I’m probably getting too aggressive with some of this, so I’ll try to tone it down a bit– but the agression comes not from a tyrannical desire but a good place like Nick’s tendency to get too much into his brother’s life)…

    It’s like how Nick says his brother is taking WAY, way, way too little money for his fights– I think y’all with your history hatred and ignoring evidence, and general poor methodology based on too much fantasy– AND your poor attitudes of inner confusion and weakness compensating with masterrace-masterbation is WAY, way, way better than y’all can do, and WAY, way, way better than y’all “deserve”, but like Koanic said banning me otoh– deserve ain’t got nuttin’ ta do wit’ it– y’all gotta up y’alls game, raise your standards, stop accepting so much less than you are capable of… it’s like y’all got a shitty contract… so tear dat muthafracka up and get a new one!

    I wouldn’t be so harsh and push these points so damn hard if I didn’t think y’all can do it… maybe not fast enough for me, (cuz I’m lookin’ for rapid, immediate change and overhaul)… and I’m fine with that– hopefully y’all start changing now though even if it be at a slower pace.

    Maybe I am over cocky a bit– but better to be carried away in the right direction than drift away in the wrong direction– that’s how I see it.

    I went into this whole “attack” with the attitude– “it changes or I’m done”– ad utrumque paratus as the Romans would say– now it’s “I need greener pastures… BUT I damn well wanna gobble as much grass before the final exit, and damn well wanna ALSO leave y’all with as many frickin’ bags of grass seed and fertilizer and whatever else– maybe y’all won’t use ’em, but they’re there, PLUS I think y’all able to find even more seeds on your own once you get started!

    Let’s see the Edenosphere blossom to a frickin’ lush meadow with cows grazing and shiet like that nah’m sayin’!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s