Quote from: Spoetnik on April 20, 2014, 02:08:27 PM

Quote from: CryptoLyon on April 20, 2014, 02:06:42 PM

Is Spoetnik only existence is to spread FUd lies and trash talk in this forum?

I am still amazed this guy did not get banned from Bitcointalk.org already.

It is not very hard to ban him... Just report to moderators every single FUD post he makes!

0 comments and you are trashing and flaming me because i complained about having my coins vanish
and that i asked if people heard about a fork or they too were missing deposits ?

YOU SHOULD BE BANNED FOR TROLLING .

Having just been exposed to Spoetnik's sniffish agendas, I ponder how best to express my disgust at Spoetnik's total lack of sensitivity and reasoning. To address this in a pedantic manner, in the rest of this letter, factual information will be prefaced as such and my own opinions will be clearly stated as opinions. For instance, it is a fact that Spoetnik wants us to feel sorry for the uncongenial, pesky drossels who encourage a deadly acceptance of intolerance. I claim we should instead feel sorry for their victims, all of whom know full well that if I want to self-censor my critique of Spoetnik, that should be my prerogative. I don't need Spoetnik forcing me to.

I may be opening a Pandora's box by writing this, but my only wonder is, Why can't Spoetnik relieve its aching sense of inadequacy without having to eliminate the plebiscitary mechanisms that ensure a free and democratic society? If you need help in answering that question, you may note that we have to set an example. If we do, others will follow, and soon everyone will be studying the problem and recommending corrective action. This is an encouraging prospect, especially given that its hypocrisy is transparent. Even the least discerning among us can see right through it.

Spoetnik has always favored providing a privileged and protected status for obtuse maggots. Think I'm exaggerating? Just ask any of the most valuable members of our community and they'll all tell you how all of the bad things that are currently going on are a symptom of Spoetnik's pigheaded orations. They are not a cause; they are an effect. Although there are no formal, external validating criteria for Spoetnik's pharisaical claims, I think we can safely say that by treating traditional values as if they were hypersensitive, ill-bred crimes, Spoetnik has forfeited its claim to be morally superior to Attila's Huns or Hulagu's Mongols. Every store in the country should have that chiseled in large letters over the entryway. Maybe then people would grasp that Spoetnik is planning to exploit issues such as the global economic crisis and the increase in world terrorism in order to instigate planet-wide chaos. Planet-wide chaos is its gateway to global tyranny, which will in turn enable it to enthrone falsehood in the very center of human thought.

Spoetnik's soliloquies can be subtle. They can be so subtle that many people never realize they're being influenced by them. That's why we must proactively notify humanity that the basal lie that underlies all of Spoetnik's niddering, loud disquisitions is that cultural tradition has never contributed a single thing to the advancement of knowledge or understanding. Translation: A plausible excuse is a satisfactory substitute for performance. I doubt you need any help from me to identify the supreme idiocy of those views, but you should nevertheless be aware that Spoetnik keeps saying that people find its unrelenting, over-the-top hostility rather refreshing. Isn't that claim getting a little shopworn? I mean, if I had my druthers, it would never have had the opportunity to promote a herd mentality over principled, individual thought. As it stands, Spoetnik has found a way to avoid compliance with government regulations, circumvent any further litigation, and subjugate persons of culture, refinement, and learning to satanic traitorsall by trumping up a phony emergency.

Even if I were, as Spoetnik seems to think I am, a shameless scatterbrain, at least I know better than to institutionalize imperialism through systematic violence, distorted religion, and dubious science. In contrast, Spoetnik keeps trying to deceive us into thinking that its writings are a veritable encyclopedia of everything that is directly pertinent to mankind's spiritual and intellectual development. The purpose of this deception may be to transform our whole society to suit its own choleric interests. Or maybe the purpose is to manufacture outrage at Spoetnik's critics by attributing to them all classes of complacent fairy tales. Oh what a tangled web Spoetnik weaves when first it practices to deceive. Spoetnik has brainwashed a large number of people into believing that it is forward-looking, open-minded, and creative. Alas, we can't change people's minds overnight, and we can't instantly and totally dispel the delusions implanted by Spoetnik's dimwitted lies, but we can bring Spoetnik to justice. That might help a few brainwashees see that there is only one way to stop Spoetnik from overthrowing western civilization through the destruction of its four pillarsfamily, nation, religion, and democracy. We must make out of fools, wise people; out of fanatics, men of sense; out of idlers, workers; out of blinkered chowderheads, people who are willing to expose false prophets who preach that the purpose of life is self-gratification. Then together we can pave the way for people of every sex, race, and socioeconomic status to fulfill their own spiritual destiny. Together we can show the world that Spoetnik indisputably yearns for the Oriental despotisms of pre-Hellenic times, the neolithic culture that preceded the rise of self-consciousness and egoism. By the same token, it abhors the current era, in which people are free to insist on a policy of zero tolerance toward Pyrrhonism.

Spoetnik enjoys pondering new ways to twist the truth. And I can say that with a clear conscience because two wrongs don't make a right. That's just a fancy way of saying that some day, Spoetnik's tendentious, malapert subordinates may ask you why you think it's a good idea to lay the groundwork for an upcoming attempt to advocate social change through dialogue, passive resistance, and nonviolence. If you're too stunned to answer immediately they'll answer for you, probably stating that laws are meant to be broken. You should therefore be prepared to tell these uncompromising deadheads that many members of Spoetnik's posse believe that Spoetnik is always being misrepresented and/or persecuted. Even worse, almost all of Spoetnik's accomplices believe that Spoetnik is God's representative on Earth. (One would think that the mammalian brain could do better than that, but apparently not.) My point is that the point is that if everyone spent just five minutes a day thinking about ways to enlighten the mind of Man and improve him as a rational, moral, and social being, we'd all be a lot better off. Is five minutes a day too much to ask for the promise of a better tomorrow? I hope not, but then again, Spoetnik's self-declared suzerainty over impulsive bottom-feeders may enable it to pursue a voluble agenda under the guise of false concern for the environment, poverty, civil rights, or whatever. Spoetnik will almost certainly tiptoe around that glaringly evident fact because if it didn't, you might come to realize that it dreams of a time when they'll be free to foment, precipitate, and finance large-scale wars to emasculate and bankrupt nations and thereby force them into a one-world government. That's the way it's planned it, and that's the way it'll happennot may happen but will happenif we don't interfere, if we don't show principle, gumption, verve, and nerve.

I suggest that we stand up and fight for our heritage, traditions, and values. This right and truthful proposition, practically established, will help us summon up the courage to take stock of what we know, identify areas for further research, and provide a useful starting point for debate on its bestial sermons. To use some computer terminology, Spoetnik's band has an installed base of hundreds of diversivolent finaglers. The implication is that I am convinced that there will be a strong effort on Spoetnik's part to turn us into easy prey for sick-minded, self-centered bureaucrats in the coming days. This effort will be disguised, of course. It will be cloaked in deceit, as such efforts always are. That's why I'm informing you that temperamental Machiavellianism is Spoetnik's quiddity. How much more illumination does that fact need before Spoetnik can grasp it? Assuming the answer is a substantial amount, let me point out that Spoetnik is reluctant to resolve problems. It always just looks the other way and hopes no one will notice that it has compiled an impressive list of grievances against me. Not only are all of these grievances completely fictitious, but Spoetnik is secretly saying that I should just have to fight with one hand tied behind my back. An obvious parallel from a different context is that if Spoetnik thinks that its ruderies won't be used for political retribution then maybe it should lay off the wacky tobacky.

So don't tell me that Spoetnik clings to anarchism like a drowning man clings to a life preserver just because its attitudes emphasize the formation of small units of combative pals that can avoid detection by authorities, strike quickly and disperse, and, to some extent, supply the chains that bind the individual to notions of self-loathing and unworthiness. To what consequences this leads can be seen from a few simple considerations. First of all, Spoetnik has created for itself premier victim status. It uses this status to shield itself from scrutiny whenever it's caught perpetuating myths that glorify officialism. Spoetnik's victim status also means that Spoetnik's opponents have to be cautious when suggesting that it's good at one thing, and that's keeping its ulterior motives secret. Only a few initiates in the inner sanctum of Spoetnik's coven know that it's planning to perpetuate harmful stereotypes. Even fewer of these initiates know that Spoetnik has remarked that big emotions come from big words. This is a comment that should chill the spine of anyone with moral convictions. To make sure you understand I'll spell it out for you. For starters, I plan to evaluate the tactics Spoetnik has used against me. This is a choice I have made; your choice is up to you. But let me remind you that I'm no psychiatrist. Still, from the little I know about psychiatry I can say that Spoetnik seems to exhibit many of the symptoms of Asperger's syndrome. I don't say that to judge but merely to put Spoetnik's cankered ultimata into perspective.

Spoetnik likes taking us all on a completely reckless ride into the unknown. That's the most damnable thing about it. It's also why we need to look beyond the most immediate and visible problems with Spoetnik. We need to look at what is behind these problems and understand that one of Spoetnik's hirelings once said, All it takes to solve our social woes are shotgun marriages, heavy-handed divorce laws, and a return to some mythical 1950s Shangri-la. Now that's pretty funny, of course, but I didn't include that quote just to make you laugh. I included it to convince you that Spoetnik is an organizations that invents nothing, originates nothing, and improves nothing. All it does is create a new fundamentalism based not on religion but on an orthodoxy of antipluralism.

Spoetnik is careless with data, makes all sorts of causal interpretations of things without any real justification, has a way of combining disparate ideas that don't seem to hang together, seems to show a sort of pride in its own biases, gets into all sorts of bitter speculation, and then makes no effort to test out its speculationsand that's just the short list! Spoetnik has hatched all sorts of furacious plans. Remember its attempt to unleash carnage and barbarity? No? That's because Spoetnik is so good at concealing its brain-damaged, intellectually challenged activities. Finally, any one of the points I made in this letter could be turned into a complete research paper, but the conclusion of each would be the same: Neocolonialism is a nit-picky and irascible innovation that ought to be speedily terminated.