Anti-Intellectual Lobbying

It's called "moral equivalency", Ulrika -- as in your argument doesn't HAVE any.

You're implying that those who think they're due some kind of group authority in SL are the "intellectuals" and the rest of us who think the whole thing is a fruitless, empty charade in self-promotion are somehow less than intellectual.

I'll match my knowledge of Voltaire and Dawkins against yours any day , but it has absolutely zero to do with whether subscribers should be given the reins of power in a virtual world owned and managed by a real world corporation.

By taking that very pragmatic issue and trying to compare it to a real-life struggle between religious superstition and science may be the most disingenious trick I've seen on this board in weeks.

HURRAH! Another stilted and poorly-worded poll/forum post! Man, I love the smell of forum drama in the mid-afternoon! Ulrika, if you see things like what you push for as the paragon of intellectual discourse, why isn't the N'berg project enough for you? While I certainly appreciate your semi-veiled use of connotation to spin your posed question, I think Karl Rove still has one up on you here.

It's like a twenty-five-cent-word version of the Time Cube website. Those who oppose your ideas are just "educated stupid."

What I have seen in the umpteen threads discussing the SL Bill of Rights and other so-called progressive movements is that some people feel the need to be protected from LL and the speech of other residents that they find offensive. Others don't want to see their fun ruined by systems that could potentially increase or create hassle in their Second Life experience. Is that anti-intellectual? Not really. Do you consider yourself an intellectual? Most certainly, it would seem.

While I think that virtual worlds can be great for testing sociopolitical theories on a smaller sample set of users before implementing the same policies in a more broad, real-world context, I don't think many people desperately want their SL experience to end up being the realization of a law review article by Dan Hunter & Greg Lastowka. The nice thing about N'berg was that it seemed to be a fun experiment for those who wished to participate.

Although it has not been working well for the U.S. in Iraq, if you really want to further your agenda, I'd suggest attempting to "win the hearts and minds" of the people you wish to assimilate. Polls like this are generally a bad way to do things, and really matter just about as much as the fact that Vandy is currently 3-0 this college football season.

As far as your specific wishlist is concerned, I have to say that it is very hard for someone to support the "bill of rights" concept until there is actually a proposed document to read and critique. Furthermore, I think that one of your main premises for the rights of avatars is flawed. Just because someone says something is so doesn't make it fact. Even if LL has described SL as a "world" or "country," it doesn't mean that it is, in fact, a nation founded on any form of social contract. Certainly, we have a licensing agreement/TOS. Somehow, I don't think that's what Locke envisioned.

The only way I would personally support any sort of secondary agreement between LL and the Residents that deals with speech issues would be if ALL speech (even that which most people find highly despicable) were free. This includes the right of bigots to build concentration camps, Al Jolson blackface avatars, anti-[insert minority or social group here] propaganda, etc. Then we could have tons of minutae about content vs. conduct based speech restrictions, Time Place Manner restrictions on speech and builds, arguments over separate but equal sims for various groups, both hateful and non, etc. My, wouldn't that simplify things.

Do I like bigots? No. Do I think that pushing for "natural rights of avatars" must inherently include protecting the bigots and their right to speak and build? Yes, absolutely.

I had originally intended to be snarkier and just make some pithy comment about proposing an "Intellect Slider" feature. Instead, I decided to address this whole issue. I am now ritually unclean. If anyone needs me, I will be at the barber's getting bled and leeched.

ROFL .. teens use the same concept with teachers and parents. Just say uh huh, ok, whatever you say and they'll leave you alone! *chuckles*

Yep, that's exactly whan an Internet Troll wants, we going to fuel your sick satisfaction to no end. Enjoy it while you can. However, I would like to suggest that you don't omit this Kingdom:
http://www.trollkingdom.net/

I think, they can really take advantage of your wisdom, hey who know maybe you can write your Bill of Rights of the Trolls !

I for one prefer to be called "idiot savant". Please take note of this for your next outburst.

The definition that you youself provide isn't an insult. BTW I'm not an Ulrika supporter, as soon as she says something I disagree with, I'll be sure to engage her in debate.

also --the above post was itself anti-intellectual, as it continues to come from an emotional place and not a reasoned response.

Citing MJW as proof of anything is akin to the parable of the four blind men describing an elephant.... minus the blind men.... and the elephant.

"Ulrika", could you please share with this thread the scientific evidence that will allow you to make the case that science should be considered by all paramount?

....And you call their theories irrational....

My replies always come from my special place.

YOU assume she is referring to stupidity. She is referring to people who oppose intellectual approaches, which you yourself stipulate to in the post quoted.

In short you have asked "Why do you call people who oppose intellectual approaches anti-intellectual?"

It's not THAT special.

Yes Kendra. I'm referring not to intelligence but to those who oppose intellectual approaches. You are exactly right.

~Ulrika~

It's a typical situation, in these typical times.
Too many choices.

Everybody's happy, everybody's free
We'll keep the big door open - everyone will come around.

Why are you different? Why are you that way?
If you don't step in line we'll lock you away.

It all comes down to nothing.

this is where the arguement went incompetent-with-a-dictionary-intellectual

intellectual does not necessarily mean intelligent.

ulrika, the problem with your arguement is that it's intellectualism versus anti-intellectualism. the truth is that the former is pseudo-intellectual or rpg-intellectual. it completely overlooks the fact that we are not citizens, there is no country, and there is no consequence to SL.

I UNDERSTAND that she means that people are not capable of understanding the "intellectual" approaches and if they could _only_ understand this then they'd know the "intellectual" approach is "correct".

I and others are perfectly capable of undertstanding ideas, if they are patently ridiculous. And just because someone opposes them doesn't make them "anti-intellectual".

If it makes people anything, it makes them anti-stupid-{proposals,ideas}.

Intentionally or not, you're looking like an Ulrika apologist.

Well I guess if folks find the word offensive I will stop using it, but it's a definition that fits to my mind. An "anti-intellectual" is just someone who echews intellectual content and activity in favour of other means of uh... "interaction." Seems fairly accurate to me.

BTW - Ingrid, you are definitely not an anti-intellectual, I am fairly certain that I heard you care about lots of stuff.

No, you clearly called us anti-intellectuals who irrationally resist change.

Excellent play on words now, but your initial statement is quite clear.

TY for the fun afternoon thread anyhow. I was falling asleep here at my desk.

I would love to know that too, and to help you Ulrika here is the accepted scientific process:

1. Start with your hypothesis: eg. Everyone who opposes my ideas are anti-intellectuals

2. Plan your experiment to test the hypothesis: eg. List everyone in the the forums who opposed your ideas, then investigate who they are, what they do, what are their general opinions and posts.

3. Analyze and present us with your data: eg. You have found that x% of the individuals who opposed your ideals were of lower education than ..., they believed in things like astrology, intelligent design, etc. compared to y% of the individuals who agreed with you. Of course upon further multi-parameter statistical analysis of age and sex matched subjects, you have concluded that those who oppose your ideas are of lesser intellectuals than those who support them.

Can we please see the results??

Lordy.

The forums are better than cable while Ulrika is around.

/me watches with great mirth

It's a personal pet peeve of mine. While I'm aware of the fact that I'm a very "intelligent" person, I am, in general, highly "anti-intellectual" in a fashion that can only appear in an artist raised in a family of academics.

Texas is full of women and willing,
Eyes too close, ...
Who are these people, raised in bars,
..., sex on farms.
Texas hoedown, this is the lowdown,
You're full of shit, destined to go down.
Let's go down, herd 'em up.
If you agree, then let's word 'em up.
And if you don't...
THEN STFU.

That would be the implied definition of an anti-intellectual.

Again, you confuse the term irrational with an insult.

For the record --I consider myself completely anti-intellectual and sublimely irrational.
Doesn't mean I'm non-intelligent or incapable of not understanding reason.

Your very interpretation of Ulrika's first post in this thread is both irrational and anti-intellectual. How do you not see that?

A subpar faux High School student council ran by power hungry self promoting delusional internet asshats is not an intellectual approach. Every form of government I have seen proposed in SL amount to the previous sentence.


I know you just like to stir the shit, so I am going to assume this is just another shit stirring post.

but there is also a corrective measure to this. while the MJW is being dragged down by anti-intellectuals such as porkofy and cocoa since prokofy pushed anshe out of the group, it is resurging with activity. the group recently passed a proposal for elecetions and soon it will be decided whether MJW represents anti-intellectual paranoia of aimee's panties, misguided pseudo-intellectual civil rights lobbying, or intellectual, justice-loving privacy and new features lobbying or something else entirely.

You can piss up a rope and feel the pissy dribble,
you can piss up a rope and I'll just sit and giggle
for the last 6 months I've been packin' your bags
and you can wipe my balls with a soft wet rag
till my balls are shiny, and smooth as silk
Coz I'm sick of your mouth and your 2 percent milk...

No I can't cope, go piss up a rope