This topic is about how your blog is “plaguing” the anarchism subreddit, and now you’re threatened with a ban “to spare of you of the temptation of wasting time on this board with bantering.”
If their actual purpose is to seek truth, then they should be overjoyed that the author is “more than glad to explain and discuss” his claims. However, you’re immediately rewarded with more namecalling, like “amateur” and “aberration.”
I get the impression that your blog’s purpose is to be “some hanging fruit” they can beat on like a piñata, to train their ideological muscles.
(Ironically, the anarchism subreddit has always described itself as “Unremorsefully Anti-Capitalist and Anti-State”. Capitalism is considered more of a “plague” on that subreddit. Yet, to my knowledge, anarcho-capitalists aren’t banned, no matter how they flood their posts with mises.org links. And if some moderator does ban them, please tell me; my understanding is that’d be scandalous.)
Might have something to do with your utter lack of arguments in the first place. After all–we cannot argue against you if you do not provide an argument for us to counter. Your blather and blatant assertions have no substance behind them.
I am giving you the option of offering a substantial response, or being removed. The forum is private property and as an admin I am responsible for keeping it under control. This is your last warning: fail to offer any substantive response, and you’re gone. There’s no need for pointless banter on here.
Except he has done neither here, and therefore will be excised until he changes his tone. The same goes for you. So don’t even pretend that this is about suppressing the “truth”, the latter a notion it seems db0 cannot countenance…
I do SEO for a living. I know the difference between a quality backlink and crap. It’s the difference between getting paid or not. People pay for things they value, they causally toss around things that have no cost (backlinks from parasite blogs).
There are. Go to the first 5 posts.
Your blog is rubbish. We discuss here. If you want to defend yourself, post here. If not, begone. No one cares about your blog, and they barely care about your half-baked posts.
It’s called sarcasm, & when I said “plaguing” I meant that very little people had seriously challenged DB’s post’s, & most of the comments on his blog were more or less in agreement with the content, usually.
By hanging fruit I also meant in an intellectual sense: content that, I saw, as not being objected enough in a more public sphere (reddit, for instance), & my intent was not to bring about some silly bickering war between the author’s & other’s here, but to open dialouge.
I am greateful that DB & other’s showed interest enough to register here, though. I don’t think anyone can say nobody tried, at least.
I am disappointed he didn’t stick around long enough to actually define the terms & definitions of his arguments, which was entirely the point of this thread.
Even more annoying is that digging through his blog, I have yet to come across a single page where he explicitly defines his arguments, & tells the world of what “assumptions” the free-market is based upon
He only stopped by to successfully drop two more links. There are lots of bloggers who do this. Guys like you and I are too busy with here and other projects to work on our blogs like that, lol
He’s a troll
Oh yeah, notice he threatens his first commenter with a ban for trolling (aka pointing out his hypocrisy).
"Market Anarchists would have us believe that a free markets within a very particular society would work for the best result and thus, we as humans should aim for this particular society structure. "
This is entirely false.
While Market Anarchists do believe that free markets within a very particular society would work for the best result, that is not why they believe we as humans should aim for this particular society structure. They believe it because it’s the only morally consistent society.
Libertarianism is the belief that the means justify the ends. What the ends are is entirely irrelevant.