How, then, are we "purging this site of stupidity"? Such ignorance, insolence, arrogance and abuse certainly hasn't been limited to this thread. I'm now convinced that any interaction with, or response to, this person constitutes the feeding of a voracious troll.
You're the only troll here. Ad hominem without substance. I gave you a chance to redeem yourself, you choose not to take it. You continue to attack everyone else on this forum as if you're so great, yet when I argue against you, you have nothing to back up your claims other than "No comment". Either that, or more ad hominem. Go get a life.
djealnla: You were the one who started attacking me.
I claim that you do not have intelligence because you have nothing to back up your claims.
All you did was swear at me, and praise ahinton.
Why am I not allowed to express my opinion, while others (who happen to agree with you) are?
In short, all my claims can be easily be proven true.
wow, some people really are shameless, aren't they. My abusive language? How about your abusive language. "ignorance, insolence, abuse... voracious troll" and you're saying I'm using abusive language? You make a good comedian, I give you that much.
"Alistair is capable of writing in an intelligible manner." - You agreed with this."I'm intelligent." - Proven repeatedly across my life, many people would be willing to testify to that. What do you want me to do? Make a video of myself taking an IQ test and then put in on YouTube?"Your posts are worthless." - What exactly have they contributed to this discussion? Only a load of off-topicness. It's possible Alistair and me are genuinely guilty of posting irrelevant things, but we have contributed with many useful thoughts to this discussion, so, to speak in a slightly Biblical (or even better, Lutheran) fashion, our sins are covered (by the Lamb, even if I'm only a sheep ). You, on the other hand, have only managed to screw this discussion up.
Since there has been multiple posts after mine, I'll just post it as a new post.
Again, you are pretending to be an idiot.
It is clear that "on my side" refers to the people who are, on your side. Or are you really incapable of comprehending the fact that besides literal meanings, words can also have figurative meanings, or be used a metaphors and examples?
Also, I must say, multiple posting is the most typical act of spammers, and to not even have one of those posts be on topic, I really don't think you have the right to say anyone else is off topic.
But this sentence explains it all; You've got nothing to argue against my point, so you have to take such desperate measures to avoid this argument.
I might as well say "I will ignore your compliment" to your whole post, but I feel like ranting today.
If stating the fact that your own posts are off topic was "obvious", why would it be any different for mine?
Why do you take the initiative of commenting on how my post was off topic? Why not any of the people who are ON YOUR SIDE? Because they didn't criticize you?
Again, off topic red herring.
It doesn't matter who said what, that doesn't lower the value of the statement itself.
But the fact is, my quoting of gyzzzmo's words shows two things:1. I clearly intended to credit gyzzzmo, or else I wouldn't have quoted what he said, and just said it myself.2. I clearly agree with what he said, which was why I quoted it in the first place. I'm not crediting myself with coming up with those words, but I am certainly trying to make the same point he was making; or am I not allowed to agree with him? What he wrote wasn't poetry or anything sophisticated; it is clear on how to interpret it.
You clearly were responding to me with your post, which means you were arguing against me, my values and my opinions.
Thus, I am responding from my perspective. If I happen to agree with gyzzzmo, that doesn't mean I'm stealing his statement and giving credit to myself. Such a notion is laughable.I even pointed out my point, which you convienently chose to ignore and say there is no point.
Ad hominem attack.
Whether I write with perfect grammar or not does not lessen my argument.
No one is expecting everyone to have the same vocabulary.
After all, there are many professional jargon that only professionals know. However, for the purpose of a forum such as this, there is basically no need to use any complicated words that other people wouldn't understand to get your point across. You can just as easily use simpler words. In fact, it may be easier. But you choose not to, and instead write wordy sentences, which makes me think that you are trying to show off your writing.
But obviously you're not showing off your intelligence.
Just as well, you can quote my views on Sorabji, or even gyzzzmo's, although I'm not sure what the point would be. Similarly, there isn't a point in purely discussing about Ian Pace's views. It is much more productive to just discuss about Sorabji's music, and in the process bring in some comments from other musicians, which may or may not be Ian Pace.
Again, you resort to a literal reading of my words. "Told" does not have to be him using his voice to say directly to someone. Written work counts as well.
Either way, there is no argument on what he thinks, if he thinks it he thinks it. What productive discussion can come from that? "Mr. Ian Pace thinks x""I agree with Mr. Pace""I disagree"/thread*The above is an example, not to be taken literally. So please, don't say "I have no idea what x is, so I can't comment on whether Ian Pace believes in x or not, or something to that effect.*Again, you take the literal meaning of my quote. Clearly people's opinions can change. But it doesn't change simply because someone thinks something. Or at least it shouldn't. A change in perspectives and opinions can occur with a productive discussion. Discussing whether a believes b is not (see example above)
Basically, all you've done is red herring across my arguments and use ad hominem attacks against me and my writing.
You've not cleared yourself of the FACT that you're both a hypocrit
...a show off spammer with nothing significant to say, other than using a plethora of logical fallacies to argue against something that was not said...
you have good writing skills, which I must admit
On the other hand, I really have nothing to say to djealnla.
Not only does this person only use ad hominem
but even their writing
is unsophisticated and dull
But I guess that's why this person faithfully follows you, ahinton (again, not literal).
Those with no intelligence do follow like sheep.
What is this chap on about??Paragraphs of nothing.Thal
I've explained why I feel that such a topic does not make sense.
If you really are intelligent, you won't use the word "proven" so lightly. They are your opinions. So if I kill a guy, and saved another guy (in two completely unrelated instances) then I've done no bad and no good? I don't see that logic.
YOu never directly praised ahinton. But the implications are there when you defend him so much, and say how he'll write a 26 paragraph whatever, saying that he is intelligent, etc etc etc...
Point is, you shouldn't start swearing at someone after seeing two posts from them. Agree?
Are you John's sister
Potatoes.
If you're saying that Ian Pace does not back up his claims, then what more is there to talk about? Can't talk about justification anymore...So really, the only thing left is about Sorabji's music. Which has nothing to do with Ian Pace! I will try to make my point one last time:It should not matter what Ian Pace thinks of Sorabji's music. A discussion on Sorabji's music centered around someone who won't even justify his own position is a waste of time, and won't bring about productive discussion. It makes much more since to directly talk about Sorabji's music itself, and occassionally bringing in the opinions of others, suh as Ian Pace.
Furthermore, it is also more fruitful to write in such a way that everyone can understand, as opposed to only a few people.
@ahinton: I really cannot believe you.
You don't realize the hypocracy in your posts? I can similarly say that you have no argument whatsoever just as you do, but I choose not to, because it isn't very fruitful. You really don't realize how none of your "arguments" against "mine" are really arguing against what I'm saying? Stop distorting what I'm saying.
Just because I decided to deal with your claim about Alistair's English does not mean I venerate him (i.e., Alistair) as if the Pope had beatified him.
geb
why is this chap spamming?
Chipped. And on certain shoulders, it would seem. And some with excessively thick skins; others with blight...Best,Alistair
HEHE, I don't have over 12,000 posts.
Yet of course, such a worthless comment you choose to ignore (In case you still can't comprehend, ignore means to not use a bunch of ad hominem attacks as you've done with me.). It is more than clear that you do take "sides".
Oh well, I must compliment you again
you're the first person that I've seen who is so full of his own BS to be able to use such silly arguments without being embarassed
Or maybe you are embarassed, I don't know.
Either way, your comments are more worthless than mine
I've nothing more to say to you.
resonse
beleive
I've never heard these words.Anyway, will anybody else tell us about their political views?
That has taken me over 5 years. At your current rate of spam, you will have many more than this if you last as long.Any 6 year old can work out averages, but it appears you cannot.Thal
On which and whose value-judgemental scale (if any), might I ask?
I'm not sure whether or not... I am... a... spammer Best,Alistair
This mean that if I stay for 5 years, more than likely my number of posts per day will still drop sginificantly
From what I have seen so far, I hope this is the case.Thal
As long as I have spammers to deal with, I cannot see my rate dropping much .Thal
where are these spammers, thal? I definitely have to give them a piece of my mind
As Mr. Ahinton is not on any "side", I'm not sure why he hasn't torn this piece apart yet, but since he hasn't, let me do the favours.First of all, I don't know many six year olds who understands the concept of averages, or even fractions, let alone be intelligent enough to work out averages. But I'm glad you can understand the concept of averages, thal. Let me teach you a more complex idea now; it's called limits.The problem with your statement, is that you are assuming linearity. But the fact is, the number of posts does not grow at a linear rate. Thus you cannot simply multiply the average by the number of days". Of course, averages are also very deceiving when the sample is small; Let's say I flip a coin and get heads. Can I say that you can always expect to flip heads when flipping a coin? Thus, we need another concept, the limit.As the number of flips tend to infinity, the number of heads and the number of tails will tend to 50% each, assuming that it is a fair coin.Now, if we use limits in this case, clearly that as time tends towards infinity, the average number of posts tends towards 0.This mean that if I stay for 5 years, more than likely my number of posts per day will still drop sginificantly, because things happen and people can't always have so much free time. I certainly hope that I will have enough free time everyday for the next 5 years, though.Of course, I highly doubt that you don't have days or weeks where you exceed 15 posts per day.Since you're not taking sides, please ask thal by whose value-judgemental scale is he using to say that I am going on about nothing, and that every one of my posts are spam?Please ask yourself, whose value-judgemental scale are you using when you declare that I am not making a point? Since you were kind enough to fix so many of my typos, spelling mistakes, and gramatical mistakes, let me do you a favour and teach you a new word: It's called context. If you can undestand this concept, your world wll get a lot bigger.Of course, as you still don't understand the meaning of context, let me demonstrate what you are doing with my post by doing the same to yours.
Carrots.Best,Alistair
Nils, please do your job, thank you very much.
I suspect "ongaku_oniko" is either Sorabji's spurned lover or Ian Pace
I beg your pardon? What on earth is that supposed to mean - taken literally or any other way? Yes, we could all do with some unwarranted heat taken out of this thread, but I'm far from convinced that this is any viable way in which to do so..Best,Alistair
Just for clarification (as this is the second time you've made this request in this thread), what do you consider Nils's "job" to be in this situation? What exactly are you asking him to do?
I must certainly be a loser with no life, and a spammer who blabs on about nothing, since the great djealnla, who is easily proven to be extremely intelligent with an amazing memory said so.
I sincerely apologize for intruding in, and disrupting this very important discussion that you intellectuals are having.
I will now go crawl back to the student's corner, improvisations and to a lesser extent, the other subforums relating to piano playing, where it seems that my spamminess and loserness is slightly more accepted.
If I must, I'll visit some of the other threads here in the Non piano board, where Mr. Thal, Mr. Ahinton and Ms. Djealnla are not having such a serious and important on-topic discussion.
And don't worry Ms. Djealnla, I understand that I must not prefer potatoes over carrots. Definitely not.
[T]he big spammer will leave this thread
There are two interesting issues to be raised here:1. What exactly where the implications of Sorabji's racial attitudes? If he didn't seek to advocate the extermination of any race, then what was the point of emphasizing one's racial origins? Did he seek to "celebrate differences", much like it could be said that some of today's fashion magazines may emphasize either "femininity" or "manhood"?
2. I'm not convinced that Pace referred to Sorabji as an "elitist composer"; I think he actually meant that Sorabji had elitist attitudes towards music education ("give not that which is holy unto the dogs" is a well known quote in this respect). While that may be true, Pace asserted that Sorabji's supporters are guilty of embracing an exclusivist attitude towards the promotion of the arts, which seems to be in contradiction to the lengths to which some people have gone to promote Sorabji's work, as well as the contributions of Jonathan Powell, Charles Hopkins or Marc-André Roberge to contemporary musical scholarship. Is that not correct?
Mr Pace's assertions as to the persuasions of those who care about Sorabji's work, be they scholars, listeners, performers, editors or whatever else, are founded on little if any knowledge of the subject, as your reference to that contradiction makes clear; they should be regarded accordingly.
Well, garbage still has to be exposed for what it is.
lol
Well, since I have no idea at which post(s) this is directed, I'll just hope you feel like explaining your use of the acronym quoted above.
Though this is admittedly unspecified (and I cannot and do not presume to speak for john11inch), I imagine that a reasonable guess might be that it is intended to refer to the post immediately above it, i.e. #193.Best,Alistair
The answer is that he did not seek to exterminate any race
Topic: Ian Pace on Sorabji 