Talk:Pro-pedo activists who have "become turncoats" - Revision history

User4: /* Since we are bitching at each other */

2015-03-26T02:11:36Z

Since we are bitching at each other

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:11, 26 March 2015
Line 147:		Line 147:
	</blockquote>		</blockquote>
	:"I'll ask again (for the third time) -- Why are you not interested in following up on such materials?" Oh, did I not make clear that it was because of laziness? [[User:Lysander\|Lysander]] ([[User talk:Lysander\|talk]]) 01:55, 26 March 2015 (UTC)		:"I'll ask again (for the third time) -- Why are you not interested in following up on such materials?" Oh, did I not make clear that it was because of laziness? [[User:Lysander\|Lysander]] ([[User talk:Lysander\|talk]]) 01:55, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

			::So, you say to me, "I want to do my ''own'' research, so just give me some names." -- which I did. And then you come back with, ''"Oh, did I not make clear that it was because of laziness?"'' when it is obvious that you have invested a lot of time and energy doing (your kind of "research") to find articles that are anti-pedo.

			::So it's like this, is it: "Catch me in ''one'' lie, and I'll just tell you ''another'' one!"

			::I see. And about all the ''other'' questions I have posed? Silence, huh? [[User:User4\|User4]] ([[User talk:User4\|talk]]) 02:11, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Lysander: /* Since we are bitching at each other */ :"I'll ask again (for the third time) -- Why are you not interested in following up on such materials?" Oh, did I not make clear that it was because of laziness? ~~~~

2015-03-26T01:55:10Z

Since we are bitching at each other: :"I'll ask again (for the third time) -- Why are you not interested in following up on such materials?" Oh, did I not make clear that it was because of laziness? ~~~~

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:55, 26 March 2015
Line 146:		Line 146:
	*That's not all. But it's enough for now. [[User:User4\|User4]] ([[User talk:User4\|talk]]) 01:36, 26 March 2015 (UTC)		*That's not all. But it's enough for now. [[User:User4\|User4]] ([[User talk:User4\|talk]]) 01:36, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
	</blockquote>		</blockquote>
			:"I'll ask again (for the third time) -- Why are you not interested in following up on such materials?" Oh, did I not make clear that it was because of laziness? [[User:Lysander\|Lysander]] ([[User talk:Lysander\|talk]]) 01:55, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

User4: /* Since we are bitching at each other */ Remove one line that was a little OTT

2015-03-26T01:46:59Z

Since we are bitching at each other: Remove one line that was a little OTT

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:46, 26 March 2015
Line 134:		Line 134:
	*You know fuck-all about marketing -- I'm going to do a post elsewhere and pillory you on that point. ''Watch this space!''		*You know fuck-all about marketing -- I'm going to do a post elsewhere and pillory you on that point. ''Watch this space!''

	*Oh, and talking about "cannibalism of babies" makes you hungry, does it? Hmm... Maybe my new article wasn't so far from the truth when it comes to "certain" ChildLovers, was it~~? Are you going to parade around with a bloody skull on your head, too, like ''others'' do~~?		*Oh, and talking about "cannibalism of babies" makes you hungry, does it? Hmm... Maybe my new article wasn't so far from the truth when it comes to "certain" ChildLovers, was it?

	*You are not man enough to admit your error in accusing me of using a non-existent word (a small point, I admit).		*You are not man enough to admit your error in accusing me of using a non-existent word (a small point, I admit).

User4 at 01:36, 26 March 2015

2015-03-26T01:36:19Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:36, 26 March 2015
Line 119:		Line 119:

	:::::::All this talk of cannibalism is making me hungry. Anyway, you don't have to always use citations to prove your points, but they help. You can use logic to refute an illogical/fallacious argument, without needing to do any research. But it's all the better if you can point out that respected academics have made the same point that you made. Then if a reader wants to make the same point elsewhere, they can quote that author rather than User4 or BoyWiki. [[User:Lysander\|Lysander]] ([[User talk:Lysander\|talk]]) 00:38, 26 March 2015 (UTC)		:::::::All this talk of cannibalism is making me hungry. Anyway, you don't have to always use citations to prove your points, but they help. You can use logic to refute an illogical/fallacious argument, without needing to do any research. But it's all the better if you can point out that respected academics have made the same point that you made. Then if a reader wants to make the same point elsewhere, they can quote that author rather than User4 or BoyWiki. [[User:Lysander\|Lysander]] ([[User talk:Lysander\|talk]]) 00:38, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

			<blockquote>
			My, my. Now, aren't WE the "rational" one. Nice game you play -- first you bait someone until they (naturally) become angry. THEN you come back at them with some nice, reasonable words about your "really good motives" and your "fine intentions".

			Let's take a look at ''you,'' in ''your'' "rational" manner:

			*You post crap here, when you ''could'' post it on a wiki that you have total control over (the ChildPorn wiki). Then ''why'' would you want to post that crap here, instead of there?

			You know fuck-all about personal security. The last post I saw of yours on ChildWiki was -- to say the least -- "a bit risqué" (about a conversation you had with your wife about any female child-to-come in your family. ''It totally fucking blew my mind!'' [not what you said -- that was fine -- but the fact that you would endanger your personal security by saying what you did - incredible!]). So, why haven't the cops busted down your door yet? You have given ''plenty'' of personal information about yourself -- sufficient to be DOXd -- and yet, you are still (apparently) walking around as a free man. Isn't that just a little bit strange? (You just gave your age here in a post yesterday. How fucking dumb!!!)
			:*'''NOTE''': I am '''''NOT''''' accusing you of any criminal act, nor suggesting that you have violated any law. I am suggesting that your behavior ''should'' have aroused suspicions (within the minds of sick people) and were reason enough for you to be investigated -- whether or not any criminal activity had taken place. Many BoyLovers (totally innocent of any criminal activity) have been investigated by unscrupulous police officers due to activities which existed only within the imaginations of the police.

			*You are suggesting that software changes that could involve security risks for visitors and users be made at BoyWiki (now, don't go and play "innocent" with me here -- you know ''damned well'' that you yourself made posts about installing software that may involve security risks! And, yeah, I saw elsewhere where you said, "What software?" Screw you and your "innocence" act.)

			*You know fuck-all about marketing -- I'm going to do a post elsewhere and pillory you on that point. ''Watch this space!''

			*Oh, and talking about "cannibalism of babies" makes you hungry, does it? Hmm... Maybe my new article wasn't so far from the truth when it comes to "certain" ChildLovers, was it? Are you going to parade around with a bloody skull on your head, too, like ''others'' do?

			*You are not man enough to admit your error in accusing me of using a non-existent word (a small point, I admit).

			*You have not retracted your (erroneous) snide remark about my omitting lead-ins on my articles. (Another small point, but you know what they say about "The straw that broke the camel's back", don't you?)

			*You never responded to my comment that I have offered you many links to good, pro-pedo academic materials, but you have refused to follow up on any of them. I'll ask again (for the ''third'' time) -- Why are you not interested in following up on such materials?

			*Hmm... Strange things are going one here, buddy. Very strange.

			*That's not all. But it's enough for now. [[User:User4\|User4]] ([[User talk:User4\|talk]]) 01:36, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
			</blockquote>

Lysander: /* Since we are bitching at each other */

2015-03-26T00:38:13Z

Since we are bitching at each other

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:38, 26 March 2015
Line 112:		Line 112:
	OH LYSANDER - HERE IS THE FIRST ARTICLE FOR YOU TO "REFUTE"		OH LYSANDER - HERE IS THE FIRST ARTICLE FOR YOU TO "REFUTE"
	https://www.boywiki.org/en/Pedophiles_often_murder_their_victims So, hop to it, boy! Let's see you chop that article to pieces! '''''BE BOLD!''''' [[User:User4\|User4]] ([[User talk:User4\|talk]]) 00:30, 26 March 2015 (UTC)		https://www.boywiki.org/en/Pedophiles_often_murder_their_victims So, hop to it, boy! Let's see you chop that article to pieces! '''''BE BOLD!''''' [[User:User4\|User4]] ([[User talk:User4\|talk]]) 00:30, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
			:::::::My usual approach on any wiki I edit is to look for the gaps in coverage and fill them in. Typically that means taking a contrarian position, as a devil's advocate, or documenting criticism of the views espoused by the wiki's community. That tends to lead to eventually getting kicked off of wikis, but there needs to be someone playing that role, or else it becomes an echo chamber, without anyone pointing out the flaws in people's arguments or challenging people to work hard to refute the opposition and hone their argumentation abilities.

			:::::::You won't get very good at chess if you don't have anyone willing to play the other side, will you? The guy playing the opposing pieces is not necessarily your enemy. He could be trying to help you become better.

			:::::::By the way, ChildPorn.info sought to be a repository of all info and opinions on CP, and since it has no community (I was the only editor), I was able to be truly neutral, since there was no established community view to be a contrarian against. Plus there is more sympathy in the academic community for legalizing CP or at least reforming CP laws and questioning the assumptions they're based on, that there is for making radical changes in the age of consent. Anyway, some of those articles, I've been bringing over to BoyWiki.

			:::::::All this talk of cannibalism is making me hungry. Anyway, you don't have to always use citations to prove your points, but they help. You can use logic to refute an illogical/fallacious argument, without needing to do any research. But it's all the better if you can point out that respected academics have made the same point that you made. Then if a reader wants to make the same point elsewhere, they can quote that author rather than User4 or BoyWiki. [[User:Lysander\|Lysander]] ([[User talk:Lysander\|talk]]) 00:38, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

User4: /* Since we are bitching at each other */

2015-03-26T00:30:20Z

Since we are bitching at each other

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:30, 26 March 2015
Line 109:		Line 109:

	::::::Well, so do I. So I'd better be off now - I've got to get an early start on the "Boy Cannibals/Boy Murderers" articles I have to write -- with ''lots'' and ''lots'' of ''perfectly correct citations''' that "prove" my case. Then ''you'' can refute the (fully documented) claims in my article. Yeah, sure... [[User:User4\|User4]] ([[User talk:User4\|talk]]) 23:12, 25 March 2015 (UTC)		::::::Well, so do I. So I'd better be off now - I've got to get an early start on the "Boy Cannibals/Boy Murderers" articles I have to write -- with ''lots'' and ''lots'' of ''perfectly correct citations''' that "prove" my case. Then ''you'' can refute the (fully documented) claims in my article. Yeah, sure... [[User:User4\|User4]] ([[User talk:User4\|talk]]) 23:12, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

			OH LYSANDER - HERE IS THE FIRST ARTICLE FOR YOU TO "REFUTE"
			https://www.boywiki.org/en/Pedophiles_often_murder_their_victims So, hop to it, boy! Let's see you chop that article to pieces! '''''BE BOLD!''''' [[User:User4\|User4]] ([[User talk:User4\|talk]]) 00:30, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

User4: /* Since we are bitching at each other */

2015-03-25T23:12:00Z

Since we are bitching at each other

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:12, 25 March 2015
Line 77:		Line 77:

	:::::That's the ideal, but we won't always get there immediately (kinda like how some of the articles you create don't immediately have a lead paragraph that conforms to style guidelines, and someone else has to do it for you). [[User:Lysander\|Lysander]] ([[User talk:Lysander\|talk]]) 22:05, 25 March 2015 (UTC)		:::::That's the ideal, but we won't always get there immediately (kinda like how some of the articles you create don't immediately have a lead paragraph that conforms to style guidelines, and someone else has to do it for you). [[User:Lysander\|Lysander]] ([[User talk:Lysander\|talk]]) 22:05, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

			::::::''"In a Perfect World..."''

			::::::Nice, how you side-stepped almost all of my criticism, and went off into another topic. A careless reader (which most people are, by the way) would not notice that you had done so, and would see the (off-topic, for the most part) response on your part as being "reasonable".

			::::::I (but probably few, if any, others) have noticed that you do that. Clever of you!

			::::::And then you finish with a snide remark ''"(kinda like how some of the articles you create don't immediately have a lead paragraph that conforms to style guidelines, and someone else has to do it for you)"'' Would you mind showing me "all those articles" of mine that ''someone else'' has written a lead paragraph to? You can't, can you? '''''AND YOU WILL IGNORE THIS QUESTION AND PRETEND THAT I DID NOT ASK IT, WHICH LEAVES IN PEOPLE'S MINDS THE (FALSE) "FACT" THAT I DON'T WRITE LEAD-INS, AND OTHERS HAVE TO DO IT FOR ME - <BIG>WHICH HAS NOT BEEN THE CASE AT ALL!'''''</BIG>

			::::::I'll tell you something - an article with real "meat" (like many that I write) but that lacks a "pretty intro" lead is worth much more than all those articles written by (here comes MY snide remark) someone who misleads others by propagating the "myths" about BoyLovers, but ''does'' do it with a "correctly formatted" lead to their article.

			::::::Do you have any idea of the hundreds and hundreds (possibly ''thousands'') of people who have been led to download and read the dozens of important books about BoyLove and BoyLovers that '''''I''''' have taken months to convert into nicely formatted .PDF files, for easy downloading? Maybe I have not put "correct lead-in sections" to the introductions I have made regarding the availability of certain texts, ''but I got them to download (and almost certainly read) the books!''

			::::::Can ''you'' make such a claim?

			::::::''My way'' is ''almost certain'' to have changed many many minds.

			::::::Can ''you'' make such a claim?

			::::::So '''''fuck off''''' with your (unproven) "theory" that by repeating on BoyWiki the ''crap'' others say about BoyLovers elsewhere on the Internet that you are somehow "making the world a better place" (as I, on the other hand, have almost ''certainly'' already done!)

			::::::Shall I create articles such as, "BoyLovers are cannibals," or "BoyLovers murder the boys they fuck" and back those assertions up with lots of citations to pseudo-scientific studies and blog postings, and then leave it to ''you'' to refute the claims in my articles? How would that be of benefit to BoyWiki? Huh? '''''HOW?'''''

			::::::So, you put it on ''me'' to refute the crap you post, knowing full well that it only takes ''seconds'' for someone to claim, "2 + 2 = 5" but it would take someone else ''hours'' to refute that false statement -- if one were to include all the necessary citations and "proofs".

			::::::Take a look at the article [[User4/Draft/THE CASE FOR ABOLISHING THE AGE OF CONSENT LAWS‎]]. That one, well-reasoned article dispels dozens of falsehoods that others claim to be true. "Ah," you say, "but there are no citations!" Well, '''''fuck''''' your citations. Citations don't change minds, appealing to the '''heart''' (emotions) changes minds!

			::::::'''''THAT''''' is what we need more of. We should use a ''proactive'' approach, not a defensive approach, which is what you are championing.

			::::::Yeah, yeah, yeah... you have the "right" to post crap on BoyWiki, as long as it is correctly documented.

			::::::Well, so do I. So I'd better be off now - I've got to get an early start on the "Boy Cannibals/Boy Murderers" articles I have to write -- with ''lots'' and ''lots'' of ''perfectly correct citations''' that "prove" my case. Then ''you'' can refute the (fully documented) claims in my article. Yeah, sure... [[User:User4\|User4]] ([[User talk:User4\|talk]]) 23:12, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Lysander: /* Since we are bitching at each other */ re

2015-03-25T22:05:31Z

Since we are bitching at each other: re

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:05, 25 March 2015
Line 72:		Line 72:

	::::'''''We don't need that kind of crap here!''''' [[User:User4\|User4]] ([[User talk:User4\|talk]]) 21:14, 25 March 2015 (UTC)		::::'''''We don't need that kind of crap here!''''' [[User:User4\|User4]] ([[User talk:User4\|talk]]) 21:14, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
			:::::Documenting an anti-BL view can be the first step in creating a good article; it's just that the work eventually needs to be completed by documenting the pro-BL view as well.

			:::::[[BoyWiki:Content_guidelines#Encyclopedia_guidelines]] states, "Articles which serve as encyclopedic references should be objective, factual in content, and balanced in tone. . . . There are many topics which are controversial and topics where the boylove community shares no common agreement. In its role as an online boylove encyclopedia, BoyWiki strives to acknowledge differing viewpoints fairly and without necessarily advocating any particular one. Space can be granted to explore many different facets of topics."

			:::::That's the ideal, but we won't always get there immediately (kinda like how some of the articles you create don't immediately have a lead paragraph that conforms to style guidelines, and someone else has to do it for you). [[User:Lysander\|Lysander]] ([[User talk:Lysander\|talk]]) 22:05, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

User4: /* Since we are bitching at each other */

2015-03-25T21:14:54Z

Since we are bitching at each other

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:14, 25 March 2015
Line 58:		Line 58:

	::Perhaps your goal actually ''is'' to try to reinforce the negative myths about BoyLove, but I do not see that as being of any benefit to BW. Instead, I see most of what you have been doing here at BW as being highly counter-productive to the goal of BW -- that goal being to ''expose'' the falsity of the various mythologies created around BoyLove by providing factual, accurate information about BoyLove and BoyLovers. Which is ''not'' what you have been doing here. [[User:User4\|User4]] ([[User talk:User4\|talk]]) 20:03, 25 March 2015 (UTC)		::Perhaps your goal actually ''is'' to try to reinforce the negative myths about BoyLove, but I do not see that as being of any benefit to BW. Instead, I see most of what you have been doing here at BW as being highly counter-productive to the goal of BW -- that goal being to ''expose'' the falsity of the various mythologies created around BoyLove by providing factual, accurate information about BoyLove and BoyLovers. Which is ''not'' what you have been doing here. [[User:User4\|User4]] ([[User talk:User4\|talk]]) 20:03, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

	:::Well, the academic literature is not exactly replete with BL-friendly (or I guess I should say BL-sympathetic) articles. If it were, I'm sure I'd stumble across more of such articles in my research, and that content would end up being cited in my articles more frequently.		:::Well, the academic literature is not exactly replete with BL-friendly (or I guess I should say BL-sympathetic) articles. If it were, I'm sure I'd stumble across more of such articles in my research, and that content would end up being cited in my articles more frequently.

	:::Part of my goal is to create articles and accumulate research that will also be usable on other wikis, e.g. Wikipedia. BoyWiki can be a refuge for Wikipedians-in-exile, but it can also be a staging ground for articles that are being prepared for creation on Wikipedia. A truly neutral article will seem to Wikipedians to be biased in favor of BL, and will seem to BoyWikians to be biased against BL. The academic literature is usually biased against BL, so any raw quotations or paraphrases of that content will tend to still have that bias. It can serve as a stimulus for refutation, though, if people are willing to put the work in to write those refutations. A complaint about bias is the first step in that process; hopefully those complaints will be accompanied by citations to reliable sources, so that they will be actionable. We can't just make a bald assertion "this is hogwash". [[User:Lysander\|Lysander]] ([[User talk:Lysander\|talk]]) 20:52, 25 March 2015 (UTC)		:::Part of my goal is to create articles and accumulate research that will also be usable on other wikis, e.g. Wikipedia. BoyWiki can be a refuge for Wikipedians-in-exile, but it can also be a staging ground for articles that are being prepared for creation on Wikipedia. A truly neutral article will seem to Wikipedians to be biased in favor of BL, and will seem to BoyWikians to be biased against BL. The academic literature is usually biased against BL, so any raw quotations or paraphrases of that content will tend to still have that bias. It can serve as a stimulus for refutation, though, if people are willing to put the work in to write those refutations. A complaint about bias is the first step in that process; hopefully those complaints will be accompanied by citations to reliable sources, so that they will be actionable. We can't just make a bald assertion "this is hogwash". [[User:Lysander\|Lysander]] ([[User talk:Lysander\|talk]]) 20:52, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

			::::'''''WHAT?''''' I have ''hundreds of academic articles'' which I have discovered through ''my'' research which are to some extent or another "BL-sympathetic". Which says to me that you either are ''not a competent researcher'' or are ''biased towards "NON-BL-sympathetic" research''.

			::::When I have attempted, in the past, to provide you with links to these articles, '''you seemed to lack any interest whatsoever''' in ''pursuing'' those links, but instead asked me for "names" so you could do your ''own'' research.

			::::And what have you come up with through ''your own'' research? We see that it is replete with ''"NON-BL-sympathetic"'' articles from (so-called) "child-abuse professionals" who repeat the common myths! What ''possible'' use is ''that'' to BoyWiki?

			::::If you, as you have stated, wish to publish "controversial" (from a BoyLover point of view) materials here, simply so that others might then "refute" their premises -- either here on BoyWiki, or (eventually - who knows when?) on some ''other'' fora, then ''you are doing BoyWiki a great disservice!''

			::::'''''We don't need that kind of crap here!''''' [[User:User4\|User4]] ([[User talk:User4\|talk]]) 21:14, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Lysander: /* Since we are bitching at each other */

2015-03-25T20:53:31Z

Since we are bitching at each other

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:53, 25 March 2015
Line 58:		Line 58:

	::Perhaps your goal actually ''is'' to try to reinforce the negative myths about BoyLove, but I do not see that as being of any benefit to BW. Instead, I see most of what you have been doing here at BW as being highly counter-productive to the goal of BW -- that goal being to ''expose'' the falsity of the various mythologies created around BoyLove by providing factual, accurate information about BoyLove and BoyLovers. Which is ''not'' what you have been doing here. [[User:User4\|User4]] ([[User talk:User4\|talk]]) 20:03, 25 March 2015 (UTC)		::Perhaps your goal actually ''is'' to try to reinforce the negative myths about BoyLove, but I do not see that as being of any benefit to BW. Instead, I see most of what you have been doing here at BW as being highly counter-productive to the goal of BW -- that goal being to ''expose'' the falsity of the various mythologies created around BoyLove by providing factual, accurate information about BoyLove and BoyLovers. Which is ''not'' what you have been doing here. [[User:User4\|User4]] ([[User talk:User4\|talk]]) 20:03, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
	:::Well, the academic literature is not exactly replete with BL-friendly (or I guess I should say BL-sympathetic) articles. Part of my goal is to create articles and accumulate research that will also be usable on other wikis, e.g. Wikipedia. BoyWiki can be a refuge for Wikipedians-in-exile, but it can also be a staging ground for articles that are being prepared for creation on Wikipedia. A truly neutral article will seem to Wikipedians to be biased in favor of BL, and will seem to BoyWikians to be biased against BL. The academic literature is usually biased against BL, so any raw quotations or paraphrases of that content will tend to still have that bias. It can serve as a stimulus for refutation, though, if people are willing to put the work in to write those refutations. A complaint about bias is the first step in that process; hopefully those complaints will be accompanied by citations to reliable sources, so that they will be actionable. We can't just make a bald assertion "this is hogwash". [[User:Lysander\|Lysander]] ([[User talk:Lysander\|talk]]) 20:52, 25 March 2015 (UTC)		:::Well, the academic literature is not exactly replete with BL-friendly (or I guess I should say BL-sympathetic) articles. If it were, I'm sure I'd stumble across more of such articles in my research, and that content would end up being cited in my articles more frequently.

			:::Part of my goal is to create articles and accumulate research that will also be usable on other wikis, e.g. Wikipedia. BoyWiki can be a refuge for Wikipedians-in-exile, but it can also be a staging ground for articles that are being prepared for creation on Wikipedia. A truly neutral article will seem to Wikipedians to be biased in favor of BL, and will seem to BoyWikians to be biased against BL. The academic literature is usually biased against BL, so any raw quotations or paraphrases of that content will tend to still have that bias. It can serve as a stimulus for refutation, though, if people are willing to put the work in to write those refutations. A complaint about bias is the first step in that process; hopefully those complaints will be accompanied by citations to reliable sources, so that they will be actionable. We can't just make a bald assertion "this is hogwash". [[User:Lysander\|Lysander]] ([[User talk:Lysander\|talk]]) 20:52, 25 March 2015 (UTC)