Top 10 Lies: Open Discussion

[---]

seven days in a week - a great big brainwashing lie

[kevlar]

arr yeti come on, i was completely agreeing with you. What i mean by my first sentence is that i am not surprised you don't agree with other peoples top 10 lies. I wouldn't be surprised if other people didn't agree either. i don't agree with all the top 10 lies that piper said for example. even though i said that it was a good top 10. i don't think it was realy set in stone or ultra serious top 10, i thought we were just messing around about top 10 lies.

You miss the point. Nobody has to say anything. The majority of people will assume it is a consensus.

if people think that then put a disclaimer, all views expressed on this top10 thread are not the views endorsed by concen as a whole. if anything i think it will lead to some debate which has been lacking on here for a while. imo.

i actually did reread his post when you said what you said, i didn't get the idea that he was going to make it a concen top10 lies. i realy don't see what is all the fuss about, i was making a joke that was not related to you at all yeti, just saying when i read my top 10 i was saying it like a lottery announcer, i thought that was funny. don't see why this thread has to turn into some sort of argument about concensus, when that was not the intention of anyone here from what i could tell.

[---]

why do we need to "sell lies" anyway though?

[kevlar]

who is selling them ?

the lies are already sold, we are just pointing out the effective deal the customers had.

[---]

(05-24-2010 07:51 PM)kevlar Wrote:  who is selling them ?

the lies are already sold, we are just pointing out the effective deal the customers had.

oh right, I see. What if they think that that is overly patronising though??

[yeti]

(05-24-2010 06:41 PM)NickHedge Wrote:  If you list the "TRUTHS" how do you prove that they are "TRUTHS"?

Obviously, ultimately, I can't - but I never claimed they were absolute truths. In fact, by prefacing the list with the statement:

Quote:I can think of a few right now that most would agree with

I'm implying that these are subjective truths. The absolute truth is obviously unknowable.

(05-24-2010 06:41 PM)NickHedge Wrote:  Your mention of the board being a republic more than a democracy leads me to believe that you are reminding us that it is a small governing body that runs this board as opposed to the members of the board being able to set the course. Which when it comes down to it that's fine with me. But why did it need to be mentioned?

I was referring to the dynamics of the people who use the board, not the people who maintain it. Obviously, the board is ultimately a dictatorship, because the mods have total authority as to who is welcome here. We (not just me - I'm the host and techie, the mods ultimately run it) have collectively decided to be as hands off as possible in what people can say, but that we will intervene if someone is trolling. I see this as a bulwark against the tyranny of the majority.

(05-24-2010 06:41 PM)NickHedge Wrote:  Your mention of those of us who believe in God are either going to leave the board or the ones that stay will be the obnoxious ones - the zealots if you will. I personally take offense to that criticism.

Sorry to hear about your problem. Try to work through it ASAP.

I stand by my assertion that people who are religious are not going to want to hang around on a board that is on record as stating their world view is one of the greatest lies ever told. Therefore a large percentage of them will leave, in my opinion, which is backed up by decades of experience. There, does that sound better?

I also stand by my assertion that I will not be part of a board that by implication, association, innuendo, or otherwise, be on record as believing that Paul McCartney is dead.

(05-24-2010 06:41 PM)NickHedge Wrote:  The reason for this is because I believe in God, I'm not trying to save anyone and I wouldn't leave. So what category do I fall into? I'm not a zealot and I wouldn't just leave because something doesn't meet my belief system. That's narrow minded.

It would be narrow-minded if I actually thought the way you think I do. I don't see things in black and white 100% of the time. I'm smart enough to know that there are always exceptions to rules.

(05-24-2010 06:41 PM)NickHedge Wrote:  I believe that Paul McCartney is a fake. I fully subscribe to the Spaceman's theory on that. Does that make me an idiot or a moron by you? Or does it make me someone who has a different idea or theory?

It forces me to realize that you are extremely gullible. It says a lot about your lack of critical thinking skills.

(05-24-2010 06:41 PM)NickHedge Wrote:  Granted this is a diverse board, but it is no different than any other board. People are the same wherever you go. The rules may change, the names may change but the people remain the same.

I would be willing to bet that almost everyone here would disagree with that statement. Read through the introductions forum for numerous examples. People are constantly saying how they appreciate how much different the board (which is the sum of its people) is.

(05-24-2010 06:41 PM)NickHedge Wrote:  It takes all the people on this board to make it what it is. You run it, you keep it going,

I merely host it. The mods run it and the members keep it going.

(05-24-2010 06:41 PM)NickHedge Wrote:  but your opinions are no more or less credible than any one else's. We all have opinions. We all believe what we believe. Who is to say who is right and who is wrong.

We all decide for ourselves what to believe is the truth. I base my truths on the available evidence. Too many people don't know the difference between credible evidence and worthless evidence. I feel sorry for them.

[h3rm35]

"Religion has a place in society. This is coming from a confirmed atheist. Its does not deserve the press it gets however it also has a tendency to go where its not welcome or (and more importantly) not relevant."

The "big guy in the sky" proposition is still a massive lie that has been screwing people over for millenniums...
remember the criteria:

1) How widely accepted the lie was and for how long it has or was believed to be true by the majority
2) Cost and repercussions to humanity including quality of life and loss of life, monetary, social and in regards to policy and ideologies both direct and indirect
3) How intensely it was perpetrated by its advocates
4) How much everyday thoughts fears, suspicions, hope and actions of the general public are affected by the fallacy

it doesn't say anywhere in there that the lie can't be useful to some... That's really the point of creating one, isn't it?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
btw, I get your point yeti...
but it leaves me confused as to why you posted your first comment. honestly, I didn't read all the posts in this thread when I first posted.. I mainly posted because I thought that you were saying you'd like to see it return to its original form over one liners and non-serious comments, which is why I stayed away from it to begin with...
If you weren't cool with the initial agenda of the thread, why was it a "shame" that it was "trashed already"? I'm not jumping on your case here, just seeking clarification.

[---]

yeti Wrote:The absolute truth is obviously unknowable.

ain't that the truth...

[yeti]

(05-24-2010 07:24 PM)kevlar Wrote:  if people think that then put a disclaimer, all views expressed on this top10 thread are not the views endorsed by concen as a whole. if anything i think it will lead to some debate which has been lacking on here for a while. imo.

I don't care what people write in threads, because it is clearly labeled as sourced to the author.

I care deeply about the distribution of some PDF or other file to media organizations which is labeled as the top 10 lies of humanity as sourced from the people at ConCen, because what may be designed as inclusive can only be divisive.

I'm sorry if I don't see the humour in this, but I take the reputation of this place very seriously...

[---]

FWIW I'm not so crash hot on the idea either tbh 2c

..probably just lingering bitterness on my part because the scouts didn't want me to join their organisation.

I can't decide whether to have the Rwanda genocide in the number 4 slot or put it as a 6 maybe 5

---

Does Concen actually have a reputation? Is it a site of repute? I'll change into more formal pants if so

---

i'm not suggesting the Rwanda genocide didn't occur but it is a pretty hefty porky of the UN to claim they didn't enable it... just clarifying what my vague rambling meant..

[JFK]

I am 100% on board with your train of thought Yeti.

Out of curiousity, which BBS's did you sysop in the good 'ole days of 2400 baud ?

[NickHedge]

So yeti, let me see if I have this right... In essence you are saying that my critical thinking ability is determined entirely on one thing...whether I believe Paul McCartney is real or not? Hmmm.....not that I might have other things right but because of Paul McCartney I can't qualify as a critical thinker. Yes, well I can see the importance of that in determining a person's overall value in life. Yes, that makes perfect sense.

It's a shame it's only your opinion. I have learned in my life that if I live by what other people think of me then I'm not really living at all. If I were to see myself as you obviously see me, well whose to say I might be driven to eat a bullet. (And I'm sure the back benchers and drive bys are cheering right now for that to happen).

You can sit there and pick apart everything I stated and make me out to be an irrational fool - but your opinion of me changes nothing. If you judge me that way then your diversity argument doesn't hold water. Let's see...what did you say again......oh yes here it is:

I also stand by my assertion that I will not be part of a board that by implication, association, innuendo, or otherwise, be on record as believing that Paul McCartney is dead.

Does this statement mean that since you hold to this belief system (as ridiculous as it is) that you will not allow people who do believe that to be a part of your board? Will you force them out, belittle them, make life hell for them? What punishment will you exert over them to make them pay for something that YOU DON'T BELIEVE IN? I'm sorry and diversity comes into this where?

My suggestion to you is lose the diversity lie, and rewrite your board membership requirements to include that a member CANNOT believe in God and must swear allegiance to the fact that Paul McCartney is REAL. Since after all, you believe Paul is real and 95% of the board is against God....so why have us annoying little fools and simpletons wandering around like bobbleheads giving the place a bad name? Get rid of those who do not subscribe to your doctrines. That's the politically correct way to do it. Yes, abide by the party line or else.

This board is no different than the way the world itself is being run. The same politics, the same games, the same attitude. And yes, you can come back with the extremely intelligent reply of "If you don't like it you can always leave". Well no shit sherlock I know that. But I can also voice my opinion. Let's just see how much a person can voice their opinion before they are accused of trolling, spamming or any number of convenient little excuses.

I do wonder if this place is not run straight out of Falls Church, Virginia.

[kevlar]

Quote:I care deeply about the distribution of some PDF or other file to media organizations which is labeled as the top 10 lies of humanity as sourced from the people at ConCen, because what may be designed as inclusive can only be divisive.

I'm sorry if I don't see the humour in this, but I take the reputation of this place very seriously...

i see your valid point and i agree completely. yeti i respect your opinions as much as everyone on here, i hope you know that.

however i do feel kind of nervous when you disagree with me as i don't want you to ban me or do anything silly like close the forum etc, i hope my thoughts are unfounded?

[yeti]

(05-24-2010 08:35 PM)h3rm35 Wrote:  btw, I get your point yeti...
but it leaves me confused as to why you posted your first comment. honestly, I didn't read all the posts in this thread when I first posted.. I mainly posted because I thought that you were saying you'd like to see it return to its original form over one liners and non-serious comments, which is why I stayed away from it to begin with...
If you weren't cool with the initial agenda of the thread, why was it a "shame" that it was "trashed already"? I'm not jumping on your case here, just seeking clarification.

I'm all for humour, the more the better, when and where appropriate. I assumed that piper was actually serious with his posting, based on his past posts. Either he's just having us all on, or actually believes that bullshit.

As a single post in a thread, I have no problem with it, but when it's the 2nd post in a thread designed to be serious, it poisons the tone for subsequent posts.

My initial feelings on the idea were positive, but not for long...

[---]

(05-24-2010 09:33 PM)NickHedge Wrote:  I do wonder if this place is not run straight out of Falls Church, Virginia.

That would be the classic private joke to make if you happened tapping away from that very location..