tweets totally f#(%ed twitter

Scoble deserves to be blamed. Problem is that so does Chris Brogan and the rest of the Alist. These dudes did not deliver a higher authority of morality. The best they can do is say "Be Nice"? Fuck them... you have that kind of pull on a network and you do nothing but talk about technology. These dudes are a waste and we deserve better then this shit. Scoble is one person... but we all know the big timers on these networks are abusing they're bandwidth. Let us make these Alisters get involved

I'm not saying the the rich should be punished. I'm saying that till the ecology of a social network gets better (and it wasn't that big a pond on twitter)... that the Alisters should be guides to the landscape. They function as community leaders and they rarely get involved or if they do then they're sense of morality is warped. I don't mind someone like Scoble and Brogan and iJustine or Calacanis existing if they give some opinion back to the community that guides people beyond making geek choices. Till we run into people who can moderate a forum fairly we should have friend limitations numbers.

For the most part the Alist is unacceptable and incapable of being social mover and changers.These dudes are marketing people.They only know how to market a revolution, not actually have any ideas about what needs to change. If you get thrown off of facebook do you post a video about how Iraq being an illegitimate war? No you post relevant videos to your situation, but Robert Scoble is a social abuser.These dudes don't break the rules... because there is none and when they do they convince facebook otherwise.

Myself I get blamed for using invite lists on facebook and for breaking the architecture of twitter. Scoble gets blamed for using a script that takes people's contact information. He gets thrown off and argues his way back and I am guilty of the same issues, but because I'm not Alist I do not get the same leverage. He never speaks out about others that go through his own situations. He is a sad man. I was getting bullied by a large group of people involved with @mailourmilitary because I found their program to be a threat to the people they were claiming to help. I speak back and I am the one accused of being a "cyberbully". BUT I AM ONE PERSON! One person can't be a cyberbully against thousands. So basically the Alist stood by as a mob of people picked on me. I can't blame the mob, because it was a mob, but the Alisters just let chaos reign. These people have no social responsibility, Shame on the Alist.

STEP ON FACE

Twitter and friendfeed can get along

3000 friends or less please

the problem is 3000 friends or more on any network Robert. What is your real motive? MARKETING! with the kind of following you have, you should be taking on more social responsibility (no not soup kitchens... you should be involved in the social issues between people other then yourself. People are getting harrassed by your so called friends), badmouthing the troops in Iraq? You work PR like a third world nation. When you are in doubt, blame America right? We Won't Be Fooled Again

Indiana Jones and Sean Connery

Harrison Ford started out as Han Solo, and now he ...
Harrison Ford has been consistent in the roles he has chosen since the beginning. There is a difference between a diversity and reinvention.  If anything the weakness in Harrison Ford's acting diversity is his inability to reinvent himself. He once played a murdering husband opposite Michelle Pfeiffer in "What Lies Beneath",
this movie is hardly memorable and is not realistic at all, but what it shows is that
Harrison Ford is best at playing himself. (the jaded anti-hero) I'm not saying he's a bad actor, but reinvention is not what he will be remembered for.
Even Jimmy Stewart in the twilight of his career played a bad guy.  Sean Connery is similar in that he rarely steps out of being himself in different situations, but Connery usually plays towards a more stuffy pretension at times then the jaded smirking Ford.  Both actors portray sarcastic anti establishment characters, but Ford always smirks at pomp and circumstance and Connery we all know was James Bond who while was not above multiple lovers, was for the most part was a stuffed shirt.  The reason Connery was able to play off Ford in the last Indiana Jones movie is the character's differences were realistic in a father and son relationship.  Young men rarely reflect the character traits of they're fathers.  If anything the Patriarchal martyrdom complex that Freud details is a factor.  Sons will rebel against they're dad, and as a result a son will rarely have a personality exactly similar to a father if the relationship between a genetic father and son are close  (even if appearances are similar).  There are of course exceptions, but the reason Connery seemed to be Harrison's father is that one could see how Ford's personality would evolve from Connery's.  This does not mean that there was a parallel in personality types.

When the eagles are silent, the parrots begin to jabber. -Sir Winston Churchill

TWITTER ATE MY SOUL

mouse stuck in a sticky trap

I found another mouse stuck in a sticky trap. I gave it to your boyfriend and he threw it in the sewer alive, because I was afraid to kill him myself. I regret not being able to kill small animals. I guess I'm just not the alpha male type that intimidates. I'm sensitive and I feel kinship with all of nature... even the little mouse. Yes I know Hitler couldn't kill a lobster... but I just don't like my manhood tested by the ladies. I know the mouse needed someone to put him out of his misery because all his little limbs had been broken by the trap, but I just think there is a more humane way to do it. I suppose predators eat them in a much more savage way, but I like to think I am above cruelty. It is why I try to eat kosher or humanely killed animals.

friendfeed's gender gap

It has come to my attention that there is a gender gap on friendfeed. While certainly there are some women, the proportion ratio from male to female is different on friendfeed then it is on twitter.

One has to wonder what is it about the natural hierarchal system of friendfeed that is abhorrent to the freeform twitter? It would see that the free formed twitter while chaotic is more reflective of the interactions that women prefer, and friendfeed is better suited for men who need naturally formed administration through seniority that is categorized by comments. Unfortunately this blue print allows little descent from the group.  One might say friendfeed almost seems to have a rabbinical authority.



Certainly women in general are never early adopters to new technology, but one could make the argument that they are very accepting of social technologies because they have benefited from other systems in the past.

why do TWITTER Stock, when you can do TWITTER STOCK '99?

ah yes peace love and...
"We don't need no water, let the motherfuckers burn.
Burn, motherfuckers, burn."

BLACK BOOK: friendfeed room just for artists

FARTING ON MY BROTHER

click here for your award

Stalked Women

some hot blonde NYC photographer friended me n I can't understand why she'd bother. I thought it was a gay friend's husband's joke at first. I think people are arbitrarily friending on facebook now. b4 people would humiliate me. now all the Heather are out n about. the funny thing is the elitists started getting elite on twitter and panopticons kind of busted they're bubble. now it's friendfeed. in the end... ur country club isn't elite. u made me well known by kicking me out

statistics are dangerous and misrepresent, but a terrorist attack has greater ills then the loss of human life. It is a symbolic act that can create chaos and destroy strong bonds. you fail to understand the power of terrorism if you think of terrorism as simply the loss of human life. Example Hezballah and Lebanon lost more life against Israel, but that was not the determining factor of righteousness. Israel was defending itself. Germany lost millions during WWII, unfortunately life is not always the determining factor of who is right and who is wrong. by breaking the rules we become terrorists. Rule breaking isn't necessarily morally wrong. Panopticons broke understood precedent on twitter (but not twitter terms). No one died. I consider it a guerrilla act against the twitter A List establishment. It was a success in creating a sense of distrust in the twitter community. No one died. Am I wrong?

Mother Pucker

just for the record after 21 accounts and a scraper named Panopticons, Meg Fowler and the transgendered Amanda Chapel let me follow. Sometimes being a jerk has benefits. Except then I realized the Meg Fowler is actually really annoying if you actually follow her. They just might be “Manon”, because there was nothing worthwhile to actually listen to. Sad but true lesson. These ladies don’t like followers because they don’t want you listening to themselves talk about boring redundant things in life. It isn’t being a snob that makes them elitist, it is they’re vanity of letting people smell they’re dirty underwear. I don’t know why Meg Fowler does this on twitter… but I guess habits are hard to break. If you ask her I’m sure she will say I’m a jerk, but I’m willing to bet based on the psychological profile of Meg Fowler that she probably dated a lot bigger jerks then I am. I just don’t buy the creepy complaint.

forget the TWIT-OUT... why not Noah-Out?

HEY SNOBS!

I don't know if you noticed, but I was thrown off the net. I would say I was surprised, but I'm not. I have now been thrown off facebook(9 times, accounts maxed at 450 friends *Details here*), twitter (21 times, accounts with 1000 followers),MySpace (1 time, but the account had over 1400 friends), flixter (1 time, sigh)I am about to piss a few people off in friendfeed and I am arguing my case on Get Satisfaction Wish me luck.

now twitter has turned off @theAntiChrist which wasn't part of panopticons! got 'em paranoid.they know the lie of free expression is exposed

I need the exposure! So remember girls to continue your malicious accusations calling me a stalker.

P.S. to those that are paranoid and think they can block an email account, don't bother.

I have over 50 email accounts forwarding to a centralized one on gmail. 

why Panopticons was created - the modern twitter panopticon of pure transparency has been exposed

I just want to remind twitter that Panopticons was created not to be a nuisance, but rather to remind the community that the transparent architecture of twitter with obvious security pratfalls is no place to solicit for the support, councilors and so called "advice givers" for military. EMail our Military claims to screen applicants, but I found them soliciting council in the most hostile on neighborhoods on twitter. Besides the fact that most of the population online is very against the war like Reverend Wright and sympathetic to terrorist action, I'm also concerned as to the mental health of soldiers in the military dealing with such complexities when mere day to day survival are of issue. It is a great irony that twitter deleted Panopticons for architectural in-fractures! Panopticons exposed twitter for hypocrisy and the only reason it was disabled was to censure, which is what twitter should of been doing from the get go with Email our Military.The American prison systems of the late 18th and 19th centuries utilised the notion of the Panopticon - Jeremy Bentham's design that allowed all prisoners to see each other (pan, all; optic, see/observe) and therefore reduce the duty and necessity of prison guards.The original panopticon got the prisoners to work menial jobs whilst all in each other's sight lines, therefore turning the watched and the watchers into one.

The modern twitter Panopticon of pure transparency has been exposed. The twitter transparency is only transparent when @Jack wants it to be, and it is very obvious that twitter wants the safety of American youth serving in Iraq to be transparent. There is no doubt that twitter is very hostile to male culture, what better way to surveillance what twitter fears more then anything else? Of course twitter is attempting to hide behind transparency. Of course twitter will claim there in no censorship! That is what a Panopticons is all about. Even facebook has some opaque elements, but twitter is just pure tyranny because what is opaque is arbitrary and dependent on pretensions.

Michel Foucault. Discipline & Punish (1975), Panopticism
http://foucault.info/documents/disciplineAndPunish/foucault.disciplineAndPunish.panOpticism.html





LETTER TO A TWITTER REP <---CLICK

Get Satisfaction and Libel - WRONGFUL ACCUSATIONS

Cyberbullies and hackers targeting sucessful women?
...there is a certain matter of Get Satisfaction's right to allow people arbitrarily accuse me of stalking. I'd like to make the case for libel if Get Satisfaction and TWITTER want to be so random. I want to give an example of "stalking" that is going through the courts in Beverly Hills (where MySpace is based) and let me establish and elaborate why what I am doing is different. If anything what people are doing to me is close to the "cyber bully" of Missouri.



Here is the link and I will quote the article here.

L.A. files 'cyber bully' charges against Missouri mother in connection with girl's suicide



http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/la-me-myspace16-2008may16,0,1266040.story

Lori Drew is accused of creating a fraudulent MySpace persona whose comments may be linked to the teen's death.

differences are the following
(1) it is very clear that all my accounts were in fact me. Everything I did was transparent, as opposed to the actions of TWITTER that took action without informing me.

(2) I never pretended that the accounts were not me.

(3) I never got intimately involved in such a way with any of the above people that I could inflict emotional pain after impersonating another person. frankly it would be a very sad thing if the woman defendant in this case above "IS" convicted. This would open the floodgates for all kinds of accusations that would put innocent people in jail.

(4) (a) if there were architectural breaches and not vile content issues, then the breaches of twitter architecture were not clearly outlined. (b) if the issue is vile speech then why did twitter let me get harangued by Palestinian sympathizers that were clearly anti-Semitic like @MarkDavidson and @QueenofSpain? Certainly @Hamas should be censored then as well.

(also what was with @MarkDavidson's JewFro joke? someone explain it to me because I didn't get it.) BTW Here is a little of what I went through with Mark Davidson <--click here One of the worst things about having your account erased is that all evidense is taken out of the forum.It is a good thing I have reserved much of it, but admitedly my evidence against @QueenOfSpain is on my old accounts, that twitter conveniently erased because they don't care about harassment at all. But this we all know.

(6) if the RSS feeds go to an imaginary friend in friendfeed, is this still stalking? Why are my actions an infraction of the architecture and not an infraction of content?

Check out this interesting answer on Yedda

Is it ethical to follow people on TWITTER that don't want to be followed?
you logged in for that? fuckoffanddie?

dyerbrookme agrees with me.


  I'm not an absolutist. I don't believe in a pure open society and I don't think it would be wise to make one. 

The reason my system exists is to show@mailourmilitary how easy it is to create an account on twitter and cycle information somewhere. It was an argument aimed at this group of people who were using group cyber-bully techniques to silence any who spoke out against@mailourmilitary. I couldn't see any other way to defeat a group of people who tried to bombard they're opinions into truth by getting military personnel to write me and tell me how much they liked hearing from TWITTER people in Iraq. I felt for the soldiers, but this was just a ruse for a few lonely ladies to feel good about themselves and did not take the needs of the military into high regard.
Read More here:

WHY TWITTER PEOPLE SHOULDN'T EMAIL THE TROOPS 
Topics:  internet, social, ethical relativism, ethical review, ethical, web 2.0, blogging, social networking, twitter

Answered by SimonStudio on May 04, 2008

View the entire discussion on Yedda

after all this bullshit and bigotry these people have a nerve to call me a mysogynist... seriously. I'm no feminist, but I believe in dignity for all. I'm tired of this silly business. I hope if your reading this blog that you can get a good laugh out of all this, because I have been fighting the same war since the early 90's

next panopticon

next panopticons will be an imaginary friend in friendfeed that uses rss from sneak accounts on twitter. how does that break architecture on twitter? ur thoughts? and will twitter bother to delete the accounts now? the reflection will happen off twitter!

I prefer my ribs with BBQ sauce. Most of twitter says I'm a misogynist.

And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from the man, made He a woman.
http://yedda.com/questions/rib_Lord_God_taken_man_woman_1493111175634/#postId1863195406012

friendfeed panopticons coming soon

as the panopticons fellow... imagine instead of 21 twitter accounts. 21 friendfeed accounts and you don't tell people they are all you. you then have a conversation with yourself and force yourself to the top of the feed. yes I have already thought about it

letter to a twitter rep

Your company has led many to believe that you are not censoring. this implies some kind of inherent science to you're methods. Censorship is your right as a part of private property. Your social network is your property, but you set a precedent for people to leave. They will, especially with all the downtime your company has had as of late. You are delusional if you think you are above some censorial duty. (The argument that you are a monopolizing government that should not censor except in threatening cases is valid, but I will not use this here for a sake of argument because the accusation of a monopoly has not been proven yet.) I expect you to censor. I also expect there to be a backlash against you if you do without reasonable doubt of physical harm. you claim I have broken the architecture, but if so then you have to disable @chrisbrogan 's account because he is the one who theorized of the possibility of "panopticons". Another slippery slope. Certainly your architecture needs to be open enough with freedoms so that people can practice free will, but if this is so then twitter needs to stop being a coward and elaborate on what architecture abuse is. (and before you delete the accounts... not afterwords! shame on you!) At a certain point you are passing judgment with discretion. just now on this page I used foul inappropriate language, but I used it in the context of the forum here. There is no consistent method to this. The fact that you think there is, is a huge problem! Yes you can delete my accounts... but this is not the end of this. The pandora box has opened and if you do not elaborate and detail exact situations of abuse then the only people who are guilty of breaking your architecture is yourselves. Tell your buddies at twitter and co. that I am making my next campaign an education on how to build another "panopticons". Now there will not be one, but rather many. Your error will now be viral. Next time do your company a favor and include the alleged in your thought process. In courts both parties have to keep each other informed of what information is at hand. (witnesses, evidence, etc.) It is hard to take a company seriously about they're pretensions of free speech without the transparency. you're no better then any other social network. you seem to think your farts smell better. We all do.

this is a comment here
http://getsatisfaction.com/twitter/topics/is_panopticons_abusing_the_terms_of_service#reply_499110

Related Links:
http://simonstudiotheatre.blogspot.com/2008/05/get-satisfaction.html

Ya Got Trouble - Music Man Lyrics

Well, either you're closing your eyes
To a situation you do now wish to acknowledge
Or you are not aware of the caliber of disaster indicated
By the presence of a pool table in your community.
Ya got trouble, my friend, right here,
I say, trouble right here in River City.
Why sure I'm a billiard player,
Certainly mighty proud I say
I'm always mighty proud to say it.
I consider that the hours I spend
With a cue in my hand are golden.
Help you cultivate horse sense
And a cool head and a keen eye.
Never take and try to give
An iron-clad leave to yourself
From a three-reail billiard shot?
But just as I say,
It takes judgement, brains, and maturity to score
In a balkline game,
I say that any boob kin take
And shove a ball in a pocket.
And they call that sloth.
The first big step on the road
To the depths of deg-ra-Day--
I say, first, medicinal wine from a teaspoon,
Then beer from a bottle.
An' the next thing ya know,
Your son is playin' for money
In a pinch-back suit.
And list'nin to some big out-a-town Jasper
Hearin' him tell about horse-race gamblin'.
Not a wholesome trottin' race, no!
But a race where they set down right on the horse!
Like to see some stuck-up jockey'boy
Sittin' on Dan Patch? Make your blood boil?
Well, I should say.
Friends, lemme tell you what I mean.
Ya got one, two, three, four, five, six pockets in a table.
Pockets that mark the diff'rence
Between a gentlemen and a bum,
With a capital "B,"
And that rhymes with "P" and that stands for pool!
And all week long your River City
Youth'll be frittern away,
I say your young men'll be frittern!
Frittern away their noontime, suppertime, choretime too!
Get the ball in the pocket,
Never mind gittin' Dandelions pulled
Or the screen door patched or the beefsteak pounded.
Never mind pumpin' any water
'Til your parents are caught with the Cistern empty
On a Saturday night and that's trouble,
Oh, yes we got lots and lots a' trouble.
I'm thinkin' of the kids in the knickerbockers,
Shirt-tail young ones, peekin' in the pool
Hall window after school, look, folks!
Right here in River City.
Trouble with a capital "T"
And that rhymes with "P" and that stands for pool!
Now, I know all you folks are the right kinda parents.
I'm gonna be perfectly frank.
Would ya like to know what kinda conversation goes
On while they're loafin' around that Hall?
They're tryin' out Bevo, tryin' out cubebs,
Tryin' out Tailor Mades like Cigarette Feends!
And braggin' all about
How they're gonna cover up a tell-tale breath with Sen-Sen.
One fine night, they leave the pool hall,
Headin' for the dance at the Arm'ry!
Libertine men and Scarlet women!
And Rag-time, shameless music
That'll grab your son and your daughter
With the arms of a jungle animal instink!
Mass-staria!
Friends, the idle brain is the devil's playground!

People:
Trouble, oh we got trouble,
Right here in River City!
With a capital "T"
That rhymes with "P"
And that stands for Pool,
That stands for pool.
We've surely got trouble!
Right here in River City,
Right here!
Gotta figger out a way
To keep the young ones moral after school!
Trouble, trouble, trouble, trouble, trouble...

Harold:
Mothers of River City!
Heed the warning before it's too late!
Watch for the tell-tale sign of corruption!
The moment your son leaves the house,
Does he rebuckle his knickerbockers below the knee?
Is there a nicotine stain on his index finger?
A dime novel hidden in the corn crib?
Is he starting to memorize jokes from Capt.
Billy's Whiz Bang?
Are certain words creeping into his conversation?
Words like 'swell?"
And 'so's your old man?"
Well, if so my friends,
Ya got trouble,
Right here in River city!
With a capital "T"
And that rhymes with "P"
And that stands for Pool.
We've surely got trouble!
Right here in River City!
Remember the Maine, Plymouth Rock and the Golden Rule!
Oh, we've got trouble.
We're in terrible, terrible trouble.
That game with the fifteen numbered balls is a devil's tool!
Oh yes we got trouble, trouble, trouble!
With a "T"! Gotta rhyme it with "P"!
And that stands for Pool!!!

Get Satisfaction

I'm impressed that I caused such lengthy dialogue.
I'm not going to deny that I'm going to savor this moment of seeing my name in a thread... but frankly I'm bored with this and most of the threaded issues related to @panopticons. feeling a lot of butting heads. I'm a creative person and I feel that this social culture is way too transparent for free thought to really emerge... but this is all theory. I sincerely doubt I ruined your day as much as you say I have. Get a LIFE!
http://getsatisfaction.com/twitter/topics/is_panopticons_abusing_the_terms_of_service

first let me deal with the personal
I'm not crazy.
My actions were premeditated and thought out for a very long time.
If I am crazy... that is a very slippery slope.
I don't think anyone here is crazy. I think some of you have an agenda, but that is not crazy. I see you benefitting from the context I am presenting you.

(1) Kosso. No Apologies to you. Your worse half is not a nice person. She was hostile from the get go. Don't expect me to act like a gentleman online. I am not a physical threat to her. She is the one that instigated the nastiness from the very beginning. The worst thing is she assumed this was all about her, when @panopticons had nothing to do with her personally. That is how vain she is. Frankly she's just a curmudgeon, but kind of a stupid one.

(2) Queen of Spain is a NAZI... and so is anyone who has Reverend Wright's opinions. As a Jew I'm not afraid to use the term NAZI just because you feel uncomfortable with it. Stalin was a NAZI, Arafat was a NAZI and so is Queen of Spain. I'm not going to get penned in by how you define your language. For me NAZI is a person who hates JEWS. Either directly or indirectly. I will defend myself physically and those that go out of they're way to mess with Jews I will take action. Kind of pointless to talk about theory when you have a gun to your head metaphorically. I have no delusions or grandiose pretensions of pacifism.

(3) Roy Blumenthal your exactly why I created Panopticons, because "Leftists" like you always see censorship and power as a convenience for your own ideas. Your more in love with the label of liberalism in your own head then the people who get hurt by your orthodoxy. Your not about liberties. There is nothing "Liberal" about you.

(4) you don't like it. block it. I didn't create the twitter architecture and frankly I'm as frustrated as everyone else with it's drawbacks. I'm exploring the boundaries and we all should.

(5) please don't bring my family into this. For one thing if your real issue is my politics then you should know that I am the only conservative in my family (probably ever). My father was a well known war protester. Both of my parents come from the Ivy League Elitist establishments that I have fought with my entire life. I have to deal with differences in opinion in my own family everyday.

Prokofy, I'm sorry you had to deal with all the bad apples that have been driving me up a wall this year. My advice is stop. There is no dialogue with these people. They have a different agenda which is not the open minded element of your own. I am sorry for putting you into this. Nothing has been gained by your dialog or diplomacy.

yes. this is what I want. I want people to realize how narrow minded they're little categories are. Prokofy... you made it all worth it. You can't stop my voice and you can't stop a retweet... twitter can disable accounts, but I can build a new panopticons every day. My next step though will not be to create another panopticons, my next step is to encourage and teach others to build they're own. You might not realize it, but I'm doing you a favor. Every high school kid in America will so be doing exactly what I am doing. I know I didn't innovate this idea. I heard Chris Brogan talking about the flaw months ago. The idea of panopticons is to publicize the flaw. you better stop attacking me personally, because every kid who gets blocked by a PMS infused retrobate like Kosso's girl will be building they're own @Panopticons very shortly

ps... in case this is erased. (I know this is not my blog) It will be on my blog. I trust you all know how to get there by now.

http://simonstudiotheatre.blogspot.com/2008/05/get-satisfaction.html

Rock The Vote ....Blech

Politics and the Rock or Pop Star. In 2004 "Rock the Vote", was supposed to bring out the Democrats. Puff Daddy and others in a music video like shoot and promotion were supposed to bring out the young set. Unfortunately the group failed to do segment marketing to figure out who the actual viewers on youth Television were. "Rock the Vote" ended up bringing more conservatives to the polls then otherwise, and while they watched P Diddy they certainly didn't take his politics as they're own. In what should of been an easy election for Kerry (between being funded by George Soros and Bush's stolen election accusations) It ended up being a loss because the entertainment industry forgot they're own bullshit. Youth voting has actually declined since "Rock the Vote" has been in existence. Only in 1992 did youth voting increase upward from its continuing downward descent, but so did all other age groups that year. Voter turnout among 18-24 year-olds was around 45% in 1990, Rock the Vote’s first year in business, but by 2000, this age group was voting in the range of 38%. There were about 27 million young people aged 18-24 in 1990 and around 29 million in 2000. That means around 11 million young people voted in 2000, and 12.1 million young people voted in 1990, for a net loss of one million young voters. "Rock the Vote" claims that in 1992 it registered 350,000 young people and help lead over two million new young voters to the polls and that these young people reversed a 20-year cycle of declining participation with a 20 percent increase in youth turnout compared to the previous Presidential election.  Statistics show that Rock the Vote likely rode a statistical blip, as overall turnout was higher among all age groups that year. In 1996, "Rock the Vote" claimed to register 500,000 new voters, still short of what it was losing over time. Conservatives watch television and are generally more inclined to be (so called) culturally hip then the cultural elite. The media often doesn't realize what kind of jaded sarcastic people might actually watch a broadcast. It doesn't seem Obama and Obama girl learned any lessons here. Cooler then thou tactics might work a little in a primary to shock people into knowing your name, but the end result in a general election will be disgust.

rockthevote.com

BLOCKED on TWITTER

Check out this interesting answer on Yedda

>Is it ethical to follow people on TWITTER that don't want to be followed?

yes I do believe it is ethical to surveilance blockers of Twitter.  I wasn't asking what I felt.  I'm asking what you feel.  I wrote the question like the way someone on TWITTER would write.

 

If you understand bocking then obviously you do too!  Yes you are welcome to make your tweets private, but you can't stop people from creating new accounts to watch you.  I follow a lot of people I disagree with.  I am on TWITTER to learn and my primary reason for being there is for information.  Some people go to TWITTER thinking it is the next MySpace, but there are no friends there.  As a result I can follow you better as an unknown then as a person you hate.  I feel this is the architecture of TWITTER.  I like it... and I am going to use it as such.

 

I am now on my 22nd account.  

The more the beeee---aaacches BLOCK... the more accounts I will have

 

;-P 

Topics:  internet, social, ethical relativism, ethical review, ethical, web 2.0, blogging, social networking, twitter

Answered by SimonStudio on May 10, 2008

View the entire discussion on Yedda

favorite comment by a believer in the system...

"Yes, of course it's ethical to follow people who block you. That's because the people doing the blocking the most are often top-level influencers like @davewinder or @techcrunch or
@stevegillmor who want to aggregate and filter and analyze information abut without any ideas critical of their role, their media, or them. And that's just plain wrong.

You can't have an open system and an open society with that sort of blockage.

It's not about private end-user blockage of this or that person who might stalk or annoy them; the problem is the arrogant abusiveness of people in the top 100 or the A-list. they're a severe problem to a developing media like this because they're friends with the devs and will nerf and bork it to suit themselves.

I have no idea if retweeting and invading feeds and such becomes a problem because frankly, I only skim feeds rather than becoming reliant them. Feeds are becoming cumbersome and passe. FriendFeed postable aggregators are becoming more usable.

I think if you don't like someone's voice inside your personal following feed, you just don't follow them, full stop. If you don't want someone to read you in real time in a stream, block them.

But as for vanity feeds trying to pick up even a mention of a name, hey, you get the wheat and the chaff if you are that obsessed with your self-image, and believe you are God's gift to social media for being a meta-analyzer.

If Twitter restricts itself to serve these new media czars who are more controlling than old media, new Twitter like things will appear around them."

Prokofy Neva
http://twitter.com/prokofy

@PurpleCar is the real lie

@PurpleCar seems to think of herself as an impartial moderator, when she herself is part of the eMOM tyranny. She asked me to turn off @panopticons. She also said she couldn't contact me on twitter because I unfollowed her when the fact is that she unfollowed me first. Talk about a Jimmy Carter Impartial! When I pointed out that 1 out of three of the troops (according to RAND) have serious mental health issues she pointed out that she was a psychoanalyst (she might be lying). How many of 'YALL want psychotherapists talking to the troops without military supervision? Haven't we learned enough about the industry of psychoanalysis to realize that shrinks unsupervised are a very bad thing?
NO ONE SHOULD BE TALKING TO THE TROOPS ON TWITTER... and especially not those who are solicited in the eMOM @MailOurMilitary community. I have been following the crowd for months and they are brash arrogant, reckless and dangerous. (a lot like the member of the psychoanalytic community and their drug pushing) The people they solicit to talk to soldiers are generally against the war in Iraq. This is not public health. This is a tyranny.


click for more on the issue of @Panopticons and

If your reading this @PurpleCar!
color wars are one thing... (funny yeah sure. People on TWITTER are lemmings. ha ha self referential joke!), but eMOM @MailOurMilitary takes a "one of us/high school society" too far.

The most frustrating thing for me of course is I treated this whore of a woman as a friend. @PurpleCar is very coy. I don't know what her intentions are, but her game is caustic. I think she likes to toy with men she doesn't know. I tried to be nice to her because she went to University of Pittsburgh when I was at Carnegie Mellon. I tried telling her how messed up the academic climate is in that city. She seemed to find that as some kind of fuel to toy with. I tried to be honest with her... but I think I might of opened up to a person that carries a lot of baggage and I should not of consulted with her. She is not fit to be a counselor and I shudder to think that she is attempting to act as such with the troops. I talked to her the night my brother got attacked in our family car by the mysterious White Truck. I believe she unfollowed because she didn't want to be involved, but to have the pretension of friendship means you care about your friends. I'm on TWITTER to begin with because I was tired of the social networking idea of friends. People with four thousand plus of them... and they say the are impartial and don't have opinions, but the truth is these people are not friends. I created @panopticons to combat not only @MailOurMilitary, but the other forced social element of social networking. @panopticons is not the monster. It is people like @PurpleCar who are the real monster.

The end result of this whole travesty is it kept me from doing my work, but I think it is a small price to pay considering the amount of damage she could be doing to soldiers.

TWITTER CRASH

panopticons wants to keep up with you on Twitter

panopticons wants to keep up with you on Twitter
To find out more about Twitter, visit the link below:

http://twitter.com/i/79045e718b84cd3bd6a4a52b5be75a64d271f14e

Thanks,
-The Twitter Team

About Twitter

Twitter is a unique approach to communication and networking based on the simple concept of status. What are you doing? What are your friends doing—right now? With Twitter, you may answer this question over SMS, IM, or the Web and the responses are shared between contacts.

TheJesus TheGOD and QRU Loop

Last night I left three of my AVATARS in loop. I lost around 85 followers.

http://www.twitter.com/TheJesus
http://www.twitter.com/TheGOD
http://www.twitter.com/QRU
http://www.twitter.com/NoahDavidSimon

I was trying to control @TheGOD and @TheJesus. It didn't work and it began controlling me. Back to the drawing board. I shouldn't of let my cat try to talk me into bed. he kept on begging. I didn't realize the feed would haywire.
My aliases on TWITTER are listed on my website. I'm keeping it transparent so it doesn't bite me in the ass.
Eventually I assume most of you will unfollow n block me... but by that point I will have perfected the craft of puppet accounts! puppet accounts can be fed N2 a root account, where I can follow all fools that thought they could block me. there is NO blocking! the final account will take the RSS feed of multiple accounts and run it N2 one account. you will not realize the new account is me. twitter is about information, not privacy. this should scare off all the Betty eMOMs into a panopticon surveillance phobia. I realize that heirarchy is part of life's function, but as a thinking person I have to make sure my reputation has thorns. it is less important to me if you follow me or not. what is important is I can follow enemies. this is all about following people that block me. that is it. I don't care if they pay attention or not. I'm not the "BUGBLATTER BEAST" if you don't follow me, I'm still dangerous to values that have not been tried. I know u can't defeat logic. I don't know anyone here enough to know if they r enemies yet, what I do know is most people unfollow n "block" because of nothing. It could be tyranny, but I didn't create TWITTER, and if you don't like it... YOU CAN'T BLOCK me. those r my thorns. u can UNFOLLOW with the button, but if u anger me I will enter ur community n convince ur friends that ur wrong. no more BLOCKING. interesting feeds r created by those whose opinions r not popular. they block when questioned. I want in. I want 2 learn n dialogue. I know I don't have 2 like or agree 2 benefit. I love reading Nietzsche n Machiavelli. I assume they would block. my cycle last night was not intentional. I already realized it was theoretically possible. I was trying to filter it out. the idea is to cycle and control multiple avatars from a central one. not create a loop. if I can accomplish this then I can speak to those that block me. speak to the dead so to speak. theoretically I can make Jesus speak by saying on this account. end result was creating a loop.

Answer my question? "Is it ethical to follow people on TWITTER that don't want to be

Check out this interesting answer on Yedda

What is God's name? I am who I am is not a name ...

yes... but the Hebrews could say "FRED"!

fear the FRED!

here is a related question here http://yedda.com/questions/religion_7359591963130/

Christ is a detail and it gets in the way of the point I was talking about above. The name of g-d and messiah are not key to

"Tikkun Olum".

Like all great truths, the bible has a lot of great points. There is a g-d, but my g-d is not a book. The bible tries to point out what happens when you mistake material for spirit. It is called idol worshipping. Todays idol worshippers come on many forms. To assume that only you understand the bible the way you want to see it has been an idol for centuries and we pay the price for our foolishness with religious tyranny. G-d destroyed all theocracies in the past. It is recorded in the bible itself. Even the greats like Saul, David and Soloman were left with a divided kingdom after they're reign. It is clear that the bible does not recommend an absolute truth. The truth is in the bible, and the truth is learn... but don't use it as a weapon to control the people around you. Others will come to you and ask where you got your wisdom... and then you can explain to them that you found it here... but you still don't have to think the world is only 5000 years old or that Noah forgot to mention microscopic organisms or many of the other holes in the story. The bible is not perfect... inspired by g-d, means it was scribed by well intending imperfect men.

Topics: religion

Answered by SimonStudio on May 31, 2008

View the entire discussion on Yedda