Just Wondering

From: "Rev. Ivan Stang" <stang@subgeniusNOSPUM.com>
Date: Mon, Jun 7, 2004

If you say stuff to fucked up people that they can't fully understand,
they will understand it wrongly. If you're unlucky, they will TRANSLATE
it, so that others can understand it the way THEY do. JUST BEING
HELPFUL...

The only way to keep the fucked up from understanding you wrongly is to
NOT TALK TO FUCKED UP PEOPLE IN THE FIRST PLACE.

But how can you tell in advance who is fucked up? YOU CAN'T.

A solution, if one can afford it, might be to studiously avoid talking
to PEOPLE in GENERAL, unless they have already proven themselves to be
at halfway un-fucked-up, at least in the IMPORTANT ways.

But that seems instead a good way to go broke fast, make lots of
enemies, and end up pretty much alone.

*OR IS IT? *

And, IF it is, could that not in SOME cases possibly mean MORE SLACK
for the newly self-exiled hermit?

I mean, CONSIDERING?

--
4th Stangian Orthodox MegaFisTemple Lodge of the Wrath of Dobbs Yeti,
Resurrected (Rev. Ivan Stang, prop.)
PRABOB

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Cardinal Vertigo <vertigo@alexandria.cc>

ghost wrote:
> You could run a series of questions at them, like in "Do Androids Dream of
> Electric Sheep" to determine if they're fucked up or not.
>
> But soon that process would become your sole means of social interaction.

Nah, it's just the introductory process. Once you find a non-fucked-up
individual you can proceed with "normal" social interaction.

--
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is
not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public." Theodore Roosevelt, twenty-sixth
President of the United States

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Rev. Ivan Stang" <stang@subgeniusNOSPUM.com>

Cardinal Vertigo <vertigo@alexandria.cc> wrote:
> Rev. Ivan Stang wrote:
>
> > If you say stuff to fucked up people that they can't fully understand,
> > they will understand it wrongly. If you're unlucky, they will TRANSLATE
> > it, so that others can understand it the way THEY do.

> Next time on "Stang gets fropped and talks about the Church of the
> SubGenius..."

As I was saying.

(((NAH, JES' KIDDING, VERTIGO! I know you're joshing. Sort of. ))

((Actual response:))

Oh, yeah, that too, I guess, now that you mention it. Something much
more specific and mundane actually inspired that particular eternal
verity, however.

I was losing sight of the ONE ACTUAL eternally correct rule, which
ALWAYS applies, namely "Fuck 'em if they can't take a joke."

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "ghost" <ghost@ghost.net>

"Rev. Ivan Stang" <stang@subgeniusNOSPUM.com> wrote:
> If you say stuff to fucked up people that they can't fully understand,
> they will understand it wrongly. If you're unlucky, they will TRANSLATE
> it, so that others can understand it the way THEY do. JUST BEING
> HELPFUL...
>
> The only way to keep the fucked up from understanding you wrongly is to
> NOT TALK TO FUCKED UP PEOPLE IN THE FIRST PLACE.
>
> But how can you tell in advance who is fucked up? YOU CAN'T.
>
> A solution, if one can afford it, might be to studiously avoid talking
> to PEOPLE in GENERAL, unless they have already proven themselves to be
> at halfway un-fucked-up, at least in the IMPORTANT ways.
>
> But that seems instead a good way to go broke fast, make lots of
> enemies, and end up pretty much alone.
>
> *OR IS IT? *
>
> And, IF it is, could that not in SOME cases possibly mean MORE SLACK
> for the newly self-exiled hermit?
>
> I mean, CONSIDERING?

You could run a series of questions at them, like in "Do Androids Dream of
Electric Sheep" to determine if they're fucked up or not.

But soon that process would become your sole means of social interaction.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: nenslo <nenslo@yahoox.com>

Cardinal Vertigo wrote:
> > You could run a series of questions at them, like in "Do Androids Dream of
> > Electric Sheep" to determine if they're fucked up or not.
> >
> > But soon that process would become your sole means of social interaction.
>
> Nah, it's just the introductory process. Once you find a non-fucked-up
> individual you can proceed with "normal" social interaction.

Sure, if by that time you are not TOO OLD AND WORN OUT TO EVEN SPEAK.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Joe Cosby <http://joecosby.com/code/mail.pl>

"ghost" <ghost@ghost.net> wrote:
>"Rev. Ivan Stang" <stang@subgeniusNOSPUM.com> wrote:
>> If you say stuff to fucked up people that they can't fully understand,
>> they will understand it wrongly. If you're unlucky, they will TRANSLATE
>> it, so that others can understand it the way THEY do. JUST BEING
>> HELPFUL...
>>
>> The only way to keep the fucked up from understanding you wrongly is to
>> NOT TALK TO FUCKED UP PEOPLE IN THE FIRST PLACE.
>>
>> But how can you tell in advance who is fucked up? YOU CAN'T.
>>
>> A solution, if one can afford it, might be to studiously avoid talking
>> to PEOPLE in GENERAL, unless they have already proven themselves to be
>> at halfway un-fucked-up, at least in the IMPORTANT ways.
>>
>> But that seems instead a good way to go broke fast, make lots of
>> enemies, and end up pretty much alone.
>>
>> *OR IS IT? *
>>
>> And, IF it is, could that not in SOME cases possibly mean MORE SLACK
>> for the newly self-exiled hermit?
>>
>> I mean, CONSIDERING?
>>
>You could run a series of questions at them, like in "Do Androids Dream of
>Electric Sheep" to determine if they're fucked up or not.
>
>But soon that process would become your sole means of social interaction.

The problem with that to me is I'm always afraid that I'll ask them
the "turtle in the desert" question and they will answer it in a
completely android way but they will convince me that THEY are right
and I am wrong.

Are androids contagious?

--
Joe Cosby
http://joecosby.com/
"I think the bottom line is that nature abhors a peasant."
-- nu-monet

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: nenslo <nenslo@yahoox.com>

"Rev. Ivan Stang" wrote:
> If you say stuff to fucked up people that they can't fully understand,
> they will understand it wrongly. If you're unlucky, they will TRANSLATE
> it, so that others can understand it the way THEY do. JUST BEING
> HELPFUL...

Fucked up people do not base their world view on a reasoned weighing of
fact. EVERYTHING they take in runs through their fuck up filter and
becomes fucked up itself. As I have clearly demonstrated with an
alleged subgenius regular contributor to this n.g., when you present
them with facts which clearly disprove their assertions, the fucked up
will simply invalidate you with an emotionally based ad hominem label.

> The only way to keep the fucked up from understanding you wrongly is to
> NOT TALK TO FUCKED UP PEOPLE IN THE FIRST PLACE.
>
> But how can you tell in advance who is fucked up? YOU CAN'T.
>
> A solution, if one can afford it, might be to studiously avoid talking
> to PEOPLE in GENERAL, unless they have already proven themselves to be
> at halfway un-fucked-up, at least in the IMPORTANT ways.
>
> But that seems instead a good way to go broke fast, make lots of
> enemies, and end up pretty much alone.
>
> *OR IS IT? *
>
> And, IF it is, could that not in SOME cases possibly mean MORE SLACK
> for the newly self-exiled hermit?
>
> I mean, CONSIDERING?

Seems to work for me.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Frere Jean Bleu <FrJBleu@ifrance.com>

I have slack from being a hermit.

I would have been a psychologist if it wasn't for the people.

Fr J B

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Rev. Magdalen" <magdalen@subgenius.com>

Rev. Ivan Stang wrote:
> But how can you tell in advance who is fucked up? YOU CAN'T.
>
> A solution, if one can afford it, might be to studiously avoid talking
> to PEOPLE in GENERAL, unless they have already proven themselves to be
> at halfway un-fucked-up, at least in the IMPORTANT ways.
>
> But that seems instead a good way to go broke fast, make lots of
> enemies, and end up pretty much alone.
>
> *OR IS IT? *

The key is to not keep people around for talking to. You gotta keep 'em
around for LOOKIN' at. That's what makse X-Day so great!! Can I get a
Praise "Bob"???

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "nu-monet v6.0" <nothing@succeeds.com>

Rev. Ivan Stang wrote:
> If you say stuff to fucked up people that they
> can't fully understand, they will understand it
> wrongly...

There are two problems in your reasoning, the first
being the assumption that *anyone* could *ever* get
it "right". Think of the old game where you pass a
message to someone, who then passes the message to
someone else, etc., the last person having a totally
screwed up idea about what you originally said.

But even the *first* person you tell will *always*
GET IT WRONG. Guaranteed.

For example, if you say to someone "Give me the ball",
you have already filtered what you are going to say,
chosen *abstract* words to say it, attempted to get
your listener's attention, expressed what you say
orally in such a way you *think* that they will hear
*and* understand you, *and* used non-verbal cues to
*help* indicate what you mean.

For their part, they must first hear you, understand
the abstract words you selected, understand the
context and non-verbal cues, they must *assume* they
are able to comply (what ball?), *desire* to comply,
and make some effort to comply--actually doing what
you said.

The possibilities for screwing up here are immense.

And that is just a simple task. Now imagine if you
say to them to "Pull the wool over your own eyes!"

92% won't get it at all, and will laugh because they
don't get it. 7% will have heard it before, and will
ignore it because of that--"disregard, Will Robinson".
And the last 1% OR LESS will go, "what did he mean by
that?"

Of that latter group, only a fraction will actually
try to figure out what you mean. The great majority
of that 1% will just shrug and forget.

Which brings up the OTHER problem in your reasoning:
THAT YOU GIVE A SHIT.

You should not give a shit whether they "get it"
or not.

--
"Money can't buy you happiness,
but when you're poor, you can't
buy shit, and nobody will loan
you happiness."
--nu-monet

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Joe Cosby <http://joecosby.com/code/mail.pl>

"nu-monet v6.0" <nothing@succeeds.com> wrote:
>Rev. Ivan Stang wrote:
>>
>> If you say stuff to fucked up people that they
>> can't fully understand, they will understand it
>> wrongly...
>
>There are two problems in your reasoning, the first
>being the assumption that *anyone* could *ever* get
>it "right". Think of the old game where you pass a
>message to someone, who then passes the message to
>someone else, etc., the last person having a totally
>screwed up idea about what you originally said.
>
>But even the *first* person you tell will *always*
>GET IT WRONG. Guaranteed.

Well that presupposes that YOU had it right in the first place.

And you may not have. In which case, the rest of them ARE right.

--
Joe Cosby
http://joecosby.com/
"I think the bottom line is that nature abhors a peasant."
-- nu-monet

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Rev. Ivan Stang" <stang@subgeniusNOSPUM.com>

Well, see, all I'm really trying to do anyway is PROTECT them, FROM ME.
If I keep away from them, they will be probably better off, is the
theory.

It's like refraining from feeding the wild animals at a national park,
because it screws up the animals' ability to survive in their regular
wild environment -- which is their JOB.

By "fucked up people," I of course mean those persons differently
fucked up than myself. "The differently fucked" I believe is the polite
term currently.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "HdMrs. Salacia the Overseer" <SeventhSqueal@SlowOnTheUptake.edu>

Well, there comes a time, when, after having behaved and behaved (all stiff
like and polite) in the company of someone because you just weren't sure
where they stand that.....the time comes when one needs to BREAK THE ICE or
suffer from quiet desperation acting nicey nice in an absurd dance of
normalcy.

And sometimes...the fucked up people ARE JUST ASKING TO GET THEIR MINDS
FUCKED. And someone like "Bob" can provide such a service and ask $30 for
it.

Sure! There are those times that upon hearing THE TRUTH the Fucked up People
can't deal and slam one with slanderous lawsuits according to their
interpretation of THE TRUTH (which is way off anyway). But at least you can
RELAX, SLACK OFF, BE YOURSELF and let your expensive lawyer deal with the
Fucked Up Normals 'cuz he or she speaks their language and knows how to
mollify or humiliate the hysterics into dropping the whole lurid freakshow.

HTH,
~Salacia

--
The above post has been presented for entertainment purposes only.
Reader's discretion is advised.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Unclaimed Mysteries <theletter_k_andthenumeral_4_doh@unclaimedmysteries.net>

Rev. Ivan Stang wrote:
> If you say stuff to fucked up people that they can't fully understand,
> they will understand it wrongly. If you're unlu
(snip)

I RESENT THIS VICIOUS PERSONAL ATTACK.

--
It Came From C. L. Smith's Unclaimed Mysteries.
http://www.unclaimedmysteries.net

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Alliekatt" <howmuchspudscouldaspudsuckersuck@ifaspudsuckercouldsuckspuds.com>

"Rev. Ivan Stang" <stang@subgeniusNOSPUM.com> wrote:
> But how can you tell in advance who is fucked up? YOU CAN'T.
>
> A solution, if one can afford it, might be to studiously avoid talking
> to PEOPLE in GENERAL, unless they have already proven themselves to be
> at halfway un-fucked-up, at least in the IMPORTANT ways.
>
> But that seems instead a good way to go broke fast, make lots of
> enemies, and end up pretty much alone.
>
> *OR IS IT? *
>
> And, IF it is, could that not in SOME cases possibly mean MORE SLACK
> for the newly self-exiled hermit?
>
> I mean, CONSIDERING?

Just be an asshole. But the right kind of asshole, like a very nice, caring
person with Tourette's syndrome who blurts out the obvious when a person
begins using fucked up communication tactics. Like using Denis Leary's
words in the voice of Eric Cartman's mom.

Like, "Geez, you seem pretty unwilling to admit when you're wrong about
something." Bam.

or, "Well, I know you think you're pretty good on that violin, but I think
what you're hearing and what you're playing are two very different things,
because what I'm hearing is causing me suffering and pain." Ba-ding.

or, "Are you always on this trip, or do you occasionally take off the
Mystical Rogue mask to relax and be a real person? It must stink under
there to be wearing it all the time." Ba-dump-bump.

or, "Do you wear deodorant sometimes? Because you smell like white people.
I mean, in Europe the climate and diet agree with us, but over here between
heat and hamburgers we end up wafting something between wet dog and ass
vinegar. And the halitosis isn't helping, you might want to drink more
liquids. You're not in chick magnet form. And quit wearing that kilt
regimental, I'm sick of seeing the prints of your sweaty balls on the
vinyl." Ka-BOOM.

Then laugh raucously and fearlessly, since their ego is of so little
noticeable value that you bulldoze over it as if it were a rat in front of
your Hummer. They will be so used to people walking on eggshells around
them that they will be speechless...especially if you're nice, and expect
them to behave accordingly, to brush it off like a being as superior as you
are. If they have any potential as a real person, it will be a fabulous
slap in the right direction.

Job done, causing you absolutely minimal consideration and pain, and
immediately filtering out the assholes. It's like a whoop ass does of
garlicin in your psychic bloodstream. If a vampire gets close enough so
much as to sniff, s/he's miles away a second later.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Joe Cosby <http://joecosby.com/code/mail.pl>

Being a Subgenius has made this point very confusing for me.

What really defines this particular species of fucked-up person is
that they really HAVE pulled the wool over their own eyes.

What makes it even more confusing is the things I like about the
chruch of the subgenius can be divided evenly between things I think
are funny because they are the exact opposite of sane and things I
think are funny because they are so right.

But I lose track of which half is which.

But THAT'S THE POINT. I think. I lost track of that, too. But
ASSUMING that's the point, then any answer is both right and wrong.

Which works out logically.

So the answer to your question? WHATEVER THE FUCK YOU WANT.

Praise "Bob".

Oops I went off on another long rambling tangent again:

I have been thinking of this since somebody else posted about
"poisonous people". I couldn't think of anything to say but it is a
subject near to me.

I really did go through at one point in my life and realize that:

A. Most of my life, I had been in circles of people who, all in all,
did me more harm than good.

B. The knee-jerk urge to 'bend a little' to accommodate people was at
the heart of it

I mean, most people I associated with, in the end I would 'bend a
little' because HEY, nobody's PERFECT. But it really doesn't take
long. I get in a circle of friends or whatever and the whole dynamic
of being around them is things that make me miserable.

So I decided that if people made me miserable, I would just get rid of
them. Close my eyes and cover my ears and make them disappear from
the face of the earth.

But that pretty much ended up being everybody.

I mean I didn't really set out to jettison EVERYBODY from my life.
But if I really honestly looked at my relationships with people, I
would very frequently find that they were, in the end, much more of a
psychological drag than anything else. Some people have a real need
to drag you down, the codependancy kind of thing, like a drug addict
who has to get everybody else using the same drug.

So I just said no, just like Nancy Reagan tol me to. I just said no
to poisonous people.

It took a lot of different forms, not just people who need to drag you
down and share the same neuroses they have; I had party friends who
needed me to go out every god damn night, macho friends who I guess I
was supposed to do that constant male hierarchy thing, people with
some cause or other that they needed to constantly preaching at me
about (like religious people, but there are a lot more religious-like
people than religious people) and so on and so on.

But one by one I looked at people around me and the truth was I was
more miserable because of them than I would be without them.

bye bye

I really wound up, from being somebody with dozens of friends to
having just a couple, two or three really, one or two that I really
spend any time with.

I don't really regret it. There are times I really feel an urge to
have a circle of people around me, but those are always times that I
am feeling insecure about life in general, usually for a particular
reason. Times I wish desperately I had an answer to a problem and I
just don't.

But those are really the worst times to have people around anyway.

So I find myself just interacting with people casually. I have
friends but not at all close friends.

I just take people exactly as they come, no more, no less.

All things considered I think it's an ideal way to be around people.
People are at their best when you are on their periphery.

--
Joe Cosby
http://joecosby.com/
"I'd go buy some lottery tickets or hit a
strip joint except I'm broke and too damn drunk."
--a prayer to "Bob", by nu-monet

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Rev. Ivan Stang" <stang@subgeniusNOSPUM.com>

Joe Cosby wrote:

> "Rev. Ivan Stang" <stang@subgeniusNOSPUM.com> wrote:
> >If you say stuff to fucked up people that they can't fully understand,
> >they will understand it wrongly. If you're unlucky, they will TRANSLATE
> >it, so that others can understand it the way THEY do. JUST BEING
> >HELPFUL...
> >
> >The only way to keep the fucked up from understanding you wrongly is to
> >NOT TALK TO FUCKED UP PEOPLE IN THE FIRST PLACE.
> >
> >But how can you tell in advance who is fucked up? YOU CAN'T.
> >
> >A solution, if one can afford it, might be to studiously avoid talking
> >to PEOPLE in GENERAL, unless they have already proven themselves to be
> >at halfway un-fucked-up, at least in the IMPORTANT ways.
> >
> >But that seems instead a good way to go broke fast, make lots of
> >enemies, and end up pretty much alone.
> >
> >*OR IS IT? *
> >
> >And, IF it is, could that not in SOME cases possibly mean MORE SLACK
> >for the newly self-exiled hermit?
> >
> >I mean, CONSIDERING?
>
> Being a Subgenius has made this point very confusing for me.
>
> What really defines this particular species of fucked-up person is
> that they really HAVE pulled the wool over their own eyes.
>
> What makes it even more confusing is the things I like about the
> chruch of the subgenius can be divided evenly between things I think
> are funny because they are the exact opposite of sane and things I
> think are funny because they are so right.
>
> But I lose track of which half is which.

That is EXACTLY the problem. You get to where you're not sure which is
Jeckyll and which is Hyde anymore, since they're switching back and
forth WITHOUT the drugs.

>
> But THAT'S THE POINT. I think. I lost track of that, too. But
> ASSUMING that's the point, then any answer is both right and wrong.
>
> Which works out logically.
>
> So the answer to your question? WHATEVER THE FUCK YOU WANT.
>
> Praise "Bob".
>

Right, well, "Fuck 'em if they can't take a joke," the ONLY reliable
fallback. Better than prayer. Well, especially in this religion.

>
> Oops I went off on another long rambling tangent again:
>
> I have been thinking of this since somebody else posted about
> "poisonous people". I couldn't think of anything to say but it is a
> subject near to me.
>
> I really did go through at one point in my life and realize that:
>
> A. Most of my life, I had been in circles of people who, all in all,
> did me more harm than good.
>
> B. The knee-jerk urge to 'bend a little' to accommodate people was at
> the heart of it
>
> I mean, most people I associated with, in the end I would 'bend a
> little' because HEY, nobody's PERFECT. But it really doesn't take
> long. I get in a circle of friends or whatever and the whole dynamic
> of being around them is things that make me miserable.
>
> So I decided that if people made me miserable, I would just get rid of
> them. Close my eyes and cover my ears and make them disappear from
> the face of the earth.
>
> But that pretty much ended up being everybody.
>
> I mean I didn't really set out to jettison EVERYBODY from my life.
> But if I really honestly looked at my relationships with people, I
> would very frequently find that they were, in the end, much more of a
> psychological drag than anything else. Some people have a real need
> to drag you down, the codependancy kind of thing, like a drug addict
> who has to get everybody else using the same drug.
>
> So I just said no, just like Nancy Reagan tol me to. I just said no
> to poisonous people.
>
> It took a lot of different forms, not just people who need to drag you
> down and share the same neuroses they have; I had party friends who
> needed me to go out every god damn night, macho friends who I guess I
> was supposed to do that constant male hierarchy thing, people with
> some cause or other that they needed to constantly preaching at me
> about (like religious people, but there are a lot more religious-like
> people than religious people) and so on and so on.
>
> But one by one I looked at people around me and the truth was I was
> more miserable because of them than I would be without them.
>
> bye bye
>
> I really wound up, from being somebody with dozens of friends to
> having just a couple, two or three really, one or two that I really
> spend any time with.
>
> I don't really regret it. There are times I really feel an urge to
> have a circle of people around me, but those are always times that I
> am feeling insecure about life in general, usually for a particular
> reason. Times I wish desperately I had an answer to a problem and I
> just don't.
>
> But those are really the worst times to have people around anyway.
>
> So I find myself just interacting with people casually. I have
> friends but not at all close friends.
>
> I just take people exactly as they come, no more, no less.
>
> All things considered I think it's an ideal way to be around people.
> People are at their best when you are on their periphery.

Well, they can do whatever they want, as long as they keep it out past
MY periphery.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: Just Wondering
From: Joe Cosby <http://joecosby.com/code/mail.pl>
Newsgroups: alt.slack
Date: Mon, Jun 7, 2004 11:25 PM
Message-ID: <3dcac0phe94k6n0tq7364nnag3lv9erp6e@4ax.com>

On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 22:30:04 -0400, "Rev. Ivan Stang"
<stang@subgeniusNOSPUM.com> wrote:

>> So the answer to your question? WHATEVER THE FUCK YOU WANT.
>>
>> Praise "Bob".
>>
>
>Right, well, "Fuck 'em if they can't take a joke,"

Or even better: "JUST FUCK'EM!"

--
Joe Cosby
http://joecosby.com/
"As I grow shorter, she grows longer, she takes up more room, she worries about little details, she
busies herself with unimportant, trivial tasks. She makes less and less of an effort to deceive me. But
her hour of triumph will be that in which I cease to be. Then she can consider her troubles over and
done with, and leave, shutting the door behind her."

- Cocteau on death

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "abNorm Nihil" <abnorm.nihil@comcast.net>

"Rev. Ivan Stang" <stang@subgeniusNOSPUM.com> wrote:
> The only way to keep the fucked up from understanding you wrongly is to
> NOT TALK TO FUCKED UP PEOPLE IN THE FIRST PLACE.
>
> A solution, if one can afford it, might be to studiously avoid talking
> to PEOPLE in GENERAL, unless they have already proven themselves to be
> at halfway un-fucked-up, at least in the IMPORTANT ways.
>
> And, IF it is, could that not in SOME cases possibly mean MORE SLACK
> for the newly self-exiled hermit?

Self-exile is quite refreshing. Accepting my anti-social tendencies is the
best thing I ever did.

I interact with so few people that I usually don't have to worry about which
ones are fucked up. Another similar phenomenon is the Assholes vs.
Jackasses. I've learned that I'd rather take abuse from a completely
abraisive Asshole than listen to some Jackass who thinks he understands
something he clearly doesn't. The Assholes are generally quick and to the
point, while the Jackasses tend to ramble on for hours if given the
opportunity.

--
Rev. abNorm Nihil
Screaming Monkey Institute of Latent Eremitical Studies
"Higher Slack Through Misanthropy"

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: nenslo <nenslo@yahoox.com>

abNorm Nihil wrote:
> Self-exile is quite refreshing. Accepting my anti-social tendencies is the
> best thing I ever did.

I have developed a policy of never conversing with anyone who is not on
the other side of a cash register.

> I interact with so few people that I usually don't have to worry about which
> ones are fucked up. Another similar phenomenon is the Assholes vs.
> Jackasses. I've learned that I'd rather take abuse from a completely
> abraisive Asshole than listen to some Jackass who thinks he understands
> something he clearly doesn't. The Assholes are generally quick and to the
> point, while the Jackasses tend to ramble on for hours if given the
> opportunity.

Man, you sure got that right.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "fenian" <fenian@start.ca>

Gibba gabba gibba gabba hey hey hey?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Whosetitanelbow <crgre02+usenet@newsguy.com>

"Rev. Ivan Stang" <stang@subgeniusNOSPUM.com> schreef:

> If you say stuff to fucked up people that they can't fully understand,
> they will understand it wrongly. If you're unlucky, they will TRANSLATE
> it, so that others can understand it the way THEY do. JUST BEING
> HELPFUL...
>
> The only way to keep the fucked up from understanding you wrongly is to
> NOT TALK TO FUCKED UP PEOPLE IN THE FIRST PLACE.
>
> But how can you tell in advance who is fucked up? YOU CAN'T.

Exactly, which is why I have almost totally shut the fuck up.

--
``The nuclear bomb, does that bother you?...I just want you to think big,
Henry, for Christsakes.'' -- R.M. Nixon

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Anachron" <nospam@noway.com>

> Next time on "Stang gets fropped and talks about the Church of the
> SubGenius..."

Was that a sermon?
Praise Bob.
--
Anachron

Up one level
Back to document index

Original file name: Just Wondering.txt - converted on Saturday, 25 September 2004, 02:05