<< OFFER MADE ~ MAIN ~ IRAQ INVADED, RESISTANCE FIGHTS BACK >>
LIKE CRETANS DO
Chris Sheil really doesn’t like people from Crete:
To a publisher, lunatics are one ideal type, to be distinguished from cretans, fools and morons. Most of us are a reasonable mix of these categories, says Eco, but publishers sort according to the pure types. Cretans press ice-cream cones into their foreheads and walk into revolving doors the wrong way, and are of no interest. Fools don’t say that cats bark, like cretans do, they talk about cats when everyone else is talking about dogs. This means fools are always in demand to break social ice, but as they have no creativity, they’re also of no interest to publishers.
Morons are a publisher’s nightmare. Anyone can spot a fool, not to mention a cretan, yet morons are tricky.
So is spelling. Earlier mentions of Chris and his language issues here and here.
Fools don’t say that cats bark, like cretans do, they talk about cats when everyone else is talking about dogs.
And here I thought people who (metaphorically) talk about cats when everyone else is talking about dogs are called “visionary artists with the unique gift to break through society-imposed boundaries of thought”. Glad to have Chris clear that up for me, they’re just fools after all.
Chris is gonna lose his entry keycard to the reality-based universe over this, isn’t he?
“Cretans press ice-cream cones into their foreheads and walk into revolving doors the wrong way, and are of no interest.”
?! Sheil is having some sort of breakdown, isn’t he? No, seriously. What the hell?
Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2005 07 04 at 01:28 PM • permalinkUpdate: oh that was written last year. So I see he already had his breakdown. Much is explained.
Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2005 07 04 at 01:30 PM • permalinkIs this doing anything for the Cretan tourist industry?
“Come to Crete, just turn right at Europe…”Posted by richard mcenroe on 2005 07 04 at 01:37 PM • permalinkThese are the people who claim the right to rule because of their obviously superior intellect and ability!
Posted by nofixedabode on 2005 07 04 at 02:01 PM • permalinkYou know, once or twice and I’d think it was an honest mistake. But three times? I think he’s got a problem with Cretans.
Posted by Bruce Rheinstein on 2005 07 04 at 02:45 PM • permalinkSomebody call the Racial Discrimination Commissioner!
First Chris came for the Cretans, and I did nothing, for I was not from Crete. Then he came for the Maltans, and I did nothing, for I was not from Malta. Then he came for the Lesbians, and I did nothing. Except watch. ‘Cuz they weren’t dude-lookin’ Lesbians, but those smokin’ porn-movie Lesbians. That was so freaking hot.
“He obviously just doesn’t have access to one of those dictionary thingees!”—rinardman
No no! Chris (identity thief) Shiels does have access, he just gets confused with the meanings.
Surely now, though, he’s doing it on porpoise.
Posted by Tony.T.Teacher on 2005 07 04 at 11:12 PM • permalinkI just hope the Moops don’t hear about this.
btw, Dave S - you have my vote for post of the year!
Posted by Art Vandelay on 2005 07 05 at 12:11 AM • permalinkThe power of the INTERNET is proven once again. But I have to wonder if chris will pull a “flute” over this.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2005 07 05 at 01:01 AM • permalinkCretans press ice-cream cones into their foreheads and walk into revolving doors the wrong way.....I saw that at the Adelaide Fringe Festival- it was a stunning and confronting, yet deeply moving performance, a critique on the cost of conformity in John Howard’s neocon gulag, and the dearth of grants to performing artists who are reduced to using cheap confectionery when they’d really like to make a statement involving small pets, a woodchipper, large, pliable fruit and boyscouts bound in duct tape.
On post #31, cs said:
Perhaps, but the problem with that reasoning is that I wasn’t blasting anyone on the cited occasion.
From the linked blog post, 1st sentence, 2nd paragraph, you said:
Here I’m going to explain why the subject of the Templars means that Dan Brown is probably a lunatic.
Explaining why someone “...is probably a lunatic…” (even in the “lunatic genius” sense) is not blasting that person? Perhaps not, but you walk a very thin line there.
BTW, cs, it’s interesting to see that “cretin” is now spelled correctly on your very old post. I must be a seer. Quick, someone call the National Enquirer!
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2005 07 05 at 08:02 AM • permalinkAs I just said JeffS, spelling errors should be corrected when they are pointed out, in the interests of maintaining common standards. I have frequently had cause to thank tim (and even Miss Haaris) for dedicated proofreading efforts on my behalf.
This principle should be distinguished from substantive changes to posts, which good practice would suggest should be acknowledged.
You could also note in your blog that you “exercised your editorial rights”, just to keep the record straight. Given your tendency to use words like “moron”, “lunatic”, “
cretancretin” when describing other people, we wouldn’t want anyone to think that you were covering up anything, now would we?And especially since ethical bloggers specifically note that a blog was updated for one reason or another, substantive changes or not.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2005 07 05 at 08:23 AM • permalinkI disagree. It is tiresome to read of trivial changes, such as spelling and typo corrections - which is one reason why they are not noted in later editions of newspapers, magazines, books etc. Perhaps you could mount a case in this instance, given my mispelling of cretin has been the subject of three posts here at spleenville. However, I would argue that anyone who writes posts on spelling errors in the blogosphere must be a moron.
However, I would argue that anyone who writes posts on spelling errors in the blogosphere must be a moron.
There, we disagree…..if the person making the spelling errors questions the intelligence of other people without objective evidence. Don’t throw rocks if you live in a glass house.
And if you find all of this tiresome, invest in a dictionary, and then use it. If you can’t afford one, try an on line version. That will at least demonstrate that you don’t have sloppy thinking from sloppy writing.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2005 07 05 at 08:45 AM • permalinkChris’ protestations of insubstantive changes are invalid because he is either talking about a person afflicted with cretinism or he is talking about a native or inhabitant of Crete.
Considering libel laws, it’s no wonder Chris has changed the spelling. I believe he should also apologize to the islanders of
Crete.Posted by Some0Seppo on 2005 07 05 at 09:16 AM • permalink(one of my most popular ever, if I do say so)
The public does love to laugh, doesn’t it?
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2005 07 05 at 09:33 AM • permalink....as dumb as George Bush.
Yup. Throwing rocks in a glass house, all right.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2005 07 05 at 09:40 AM • permalinkThe correct cliché is: “People who live in glass houses should not throw stones.” While to be promoted to ‘rock’ status could be taken as flattery, I feel bound to point out that a reasonable adaption would be “Throwing stones in a glass house.” If you must be so moronic as to fling clichés, fling accurate clichés.
Get back to you later on the ethics issue.
Don’t bother getting back later.
The VRWC pointed and laughed, NOW you use the spellchecker.
Too late.Posted by Pedro the Ignorant on 2005 07 05 at 10:08 AM • permalinkThe problem with a guy like cs is that, while not dumb (and possibly even of average, or slightly above-average intelligence), he is not nearly as bright as he thinks he is. And certainly not bright enough to be clever, at least not with any consistency. There is nothing wrong with this, I mean, half the population is below average intellectually, but it does lead to some rather embarrassing attempts at logic, argument, and debate, even worse attempts at humor. This is because unlike a person with a health dose of insight, they aren’t aware that they are often spouting drivel. They also tend to throw words like moron, lunatic, cretin, etc. around with regularity, which is possibly a form of projection. They are also often successful in certain fields, like academia, journalism, etc., as they are great at mimicing others, shouting it loudly, and attracting the attention of like-minded people who actually believe (falsely) that he or she has anything original or important to say.
I’m pleased to be considered above average by the Jerry the Great. In the interest of accuracy, and to avoid accusations of plagiarism, allow me to point out that my definitions of moron, lunatic, cretin etc are actually Umberto Eco’s definitions, (happily, another above average). See tim’s link to the source post.
cs, earlier, you called people here fascists. Now, you’re resorting to calling us “morons”. Nice, cs, if you can’t respond to an argument, you insult people. In debating circles, that’s known as “losing”.
I do look forward to your thoughts on ethics. Be sure to have a dictionary handy, audit your conscience, and better air out your soul.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2005 07 05 at 10:48 AM • permalinkJF, are you suggesting that cs is the kettle calling the pot really, really, dark?
8^D
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2005 07 05 at 10:51 AM • permalinkPW:
In debating circles, that’s known as “losing”.
In lefty debating circles, it’s known as “putting the barely human right-wingers in their place”.
cs:
Gimmie a break. How many times have I been called a “moron” here? And many people would correct mispelling, but only a moron would do it with a straight face on this thread. QED.
QED, indeed.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2005 07 05 at 11:05 AM • permalinkHow many times have I been called a “moron” here?
That’s because you say stuff that is demonstrably false, or that tries to elevate your opinions to the status of fact. Meanwhile, your evidence that the people you call morons actually are morons is…umm, maybe you can get back to us on that.
Oh, right, they are because you say so.
Nearly everything you’ve posted in this thread is confirmation of nofixedabode’s sardonic comment in #6.
That’s just ridiculous PW. I rule nothing, and don’t claim to rule anything. That’s demonstrably false, a piece of nutcakery elevated by you to the status of fact. What drugs are you taking?
I’m glad there are people around to chat with here, but can we lift the standard just a little? C’mon, we can do it.
nofixedabode in #6:
These are the people who claim the right to rule because of their obviously superior intellect and ability!
cs in #65:
I rule nothing, and don’t claim to rule anything.
And no sense of humor either. Takes a general sardonic comment regarding lefties as a description of his personal ambitions.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2005 07 05 at 12:02 PM • permalinkJeffS, you’re a trier, and I’m slowly bonding with you, but you’ll need to pay closer attention if we’re ever going to become lovers. PW said to me: “Nearly everything you’ve posted in this thread is confirmation of nofixedabode’s sardonic comment in #6.” I didn’t “Takes”, as you crudely write, anything. PW applied it to me, numbskull.
Oh, my. cs is indulging in blame deflection, placing the action of “takes” onto PW, when in fact cs responded to PW’s orignal assertion in #63 in first person. Tsk, tsk.
Still, he did deny any desire to rule the world. I’ll give him that much.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2005 07 05 at 12:39 PM • permalinkI’m glad there are people around to chat with here, but can we lift the standard just a little? C’mon, we can do it.
This coming from the fellow who slings “cretan[sic]” around like it’s a pronoun.
You want the standards to be lifted? Start it yourself. Don’t go blaming Eco for your name-calling.
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2005 07 05 at 12:48 PM • permalinkRob, I didn’t blame Eco, I used him as my source. Perhaps you should also stick to spelling.
Perhaps you should stick to misspelling.
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2005 07 05 at 03:13 PM • permalinkThat’s just ridiculous PW. I rule nothing, and don’t claim to rule anything. That’s demonstrably false, a piece of nutcakery elevated by you to the status of fact.
I based my comment on the fact that you have repeatedly claimed that GWB is a moron, with the only evidence I’ve been able to scrounge up in your comments being that he doesn’t act, talk and think like you do. Hence, while you don’t actually rule anything (and aren’t we all glad about that), you enjoy condescending toward those who actually do rule. The implication of that is that you must be thinking you could do things oh-so-much better, if only you were in charge.
That’s why nofixedabode’s comment applies perfectly to you. The fact that you need this explained just adds to my perception that you’re one of those people who simply lack the basic introspective skills to realize how far they’re into intellectual outer space.
Well, maybe it doesn’t apply perfectly. NFA said that people like you “claim the right to rule”...I’d say you’re more the type who simply takes this idea as given. That would certainly explain why you’re so upset that people actually vote for guys like Dubya and Howard that you’re willing to label a majority of the population as “cretins”. If you honestly don’t realize how much this type of anti-democratic thinking makes you sound like a kook of the worst order, there’s frankly not much reason to take you seriously on anything.
BTW, since you asked what drugs I’m on, my hallucinogen of choice is sleep deprivation.
Flute has closed comments on that post. Isn’t it ironic that this is an accepted thing to do by blogs such as Troppo, backpages, roadtosurfdom and John Quiggin. For arguably the same reasons and effect as Andrea’s temporary bannings.
“anyone can operate a jetplane - they are very simple things”—Brownie
http://dailyflute.com/?comments_popup=745#comment-3814
Pfft!!
Yes I did Gary, mainly to limit spam once discussion had dried up, or because the size of the thread had become too large to manage and a fresh one required. Perhaps I closed one or two where I judged the discussion had gone on for long enough and had become too silly to continue, although I can no longer remember. My way of dealing with deliberately annoying or purely vexatious comments was to delete them, a drastic measure limited to around a half-a-dozen commenters. You can read all about it here, under rule 10.
Gary, I wasn’t being evasive on the first reply, as you were plainly wrong, given that BP doesn’t operate at all any more, let alone close threads.
And I’m unconvinced that my other friends are engaged in anything dishonest. Effectively banning everyone from further comments on a single thread by closing it is scarcely comparable in its punitive effects to banning a particular person from commenting on an entire blog. I only recall ever trying to ban one person (master tim), but it was an immediate failure (fortunately for my spelling).
“Gary, I wasn’t being evasive on the first reply, as you were plainly wrong, given that BP doesn’t operate at all any more, let alone close threads.”
Get off it Chris, I know I’m not coherent in regards to the written word but it was obvious what situation I was referring to. Cognitive dishonesty or evasiveness take your pick.
Now back to your original comment, if you had argued that knowledge such GWG’s PHD’s do not alway translate to analytical skill. Then you would have valid point to be acknowledged by reasonable people.
Instead you went the Michael Moore root, possibly to not open your self up to questions about your own lack of (as demonstrated above) analytical skills.
it was obvious
Except that it didn’t apply to BP, obviously.
GWG’s PHD’s
Huh?
your original comment
You mean the one at Flutey’s, I suppose. Well I do think GWB is dumb, not a rare condition among politicians, and this is not to say that he doesn’t have a folksy charm that appeals to some people and a ruthless streak. But to have gone against so much contrary advice to bog the US army in a war it appears unable to win for a stated reason that didn’t exist at the cost of many traditional allies and thousands of lives is, well, very dumb indeed - moronic even.
“Except that it didn’t apply to BP, obviously.”—Christopher Sheil
Obviously it did apply to Back pages when it was active.
“Huh?”—Christopher Sheil
Sorry my mistake I was referring to his degrees from Yale and Harvard.
When Academics complain that there profession has lost respect only have to look at the conduct such as your Chris. Deliberately missing the point of others as a debate tactic only entrenches the view the the place is full of carpet baggers.
Page 1 of 1 pages
Members:
Login | Register
| Member List
I remember some cretan telling me that all cretans are liars.