Subjects of discussion

by **professorpan** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 5:05 pm

I think many people don't understand that forums like this are *not* equivalent to an open marketplace. This forum is privately funded, and was set up by Jeff, and as such he can say what should or should not be discussed. It's really that simple. If Jeff hates NASCAR, and declares the topic off-limits, then shut up about how much you love Dale Earnhardt Junior's fast car. If you want to talk about NASCAR, there are plenty of places to do it. Go there. Have fun. If I ran a forum, and someone kept posting about how the moon landings were fake, I'd have no problem saying "I'm not allowing any more discussion of whether the moon landings were fakes." Sorry if you think that's the crux of the entire political and social fraud perpetuated upon the residents of the flat Earth and it's your sole mission to convert every last person to save them. Sorry. Go away. If the be-all and end-all of your life revolves around pushing your pet theories in forums where they are not welcome, it might be time to question your priorities.

by **Hugh Manatee Wins** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 6:13 pm

(Even eBay is being used as a mouse-maze to study how people behave online or in "electronic environments." I aways suspected that the Beanie Baby collecting/trading fad in the 90s was a behavioral experiment. lol. -HMW)* <a href="http://www.media.mit.edu/research/ResearchPubWeb.pl?ID=52">www.media.mit.edu/researc...b.pl?ID=52</a> Research Group Projects and Descriptions eRationality eRationality Principal Investigator: Dan Ariely In the eRationality group we study how people behave and make day-to-day decisions, particularly in electronic environments. We investigate rationality, semi rationality, bounded rationality, and just plain irrationality. We wish to build tools that reformulate the options available to people so that they can maximize their own happiness. Acting on Advice from Computer Agents Dan Ariely Agents (human or computer) provide their users with recommendations. This project investigates whether the type of agent making the recommendations (human vs. computer, collaborative vs. individual) influences the decision strategy that people utilize. Specifically, we examine whether the type of agent used influences decision makers' price/quality tradeoffs, risk attitude, willingness to compromise or to follow their gut feeling, or their likelihood of becoming more sensitive to social influences. Arbitrary Coherence in Behavioral Economics Dan Ariely Economic theories of valuation generally assume that prices of commodities and assets are derived from underlying "fundamental" values. For example, consumer microeconomics assumes that the demand curves for consumer products (e.g., chocolates, CDs, movies, vacations, or drugs) can ultimately be traced to the valuation of pleasures that consumers anticipate receiving from these products. The current work suggests that preferences are initially malleable but become "imprinted" (precisely defined and largely invariant) after the individual makes an initial decision. Prior to imprinting, preferences are "arbitrary," meaning that they are highly responsive both to normative and non-normative influences. Following imprinting, preferences become "coherent," meaning that they are more precisely defined and largely fixed in subsequent decisions. The model predicts that consumers will respond to changes in conditions in a coherent fashion, as if supported by demand curves derived from fundamental preference, even when their initial valuations are arbitrary. Auction Behavior Dan Ariely As online auctions become more popular, it is important to understand better the process by which people set their bids and the factors that influence them. In this project, we use a survey methodology to survey real bidders on real, online auctions and to try to understand the factors that influence their willingness to bid, and the magnitude of these bids. Behavioral Economics Dan Ariely, Kristina Shampan'er, Leonard Lee and Nina Mazar The standard model of of human behavior is a model of rational actors. This model is widely accepted by individuals, policy makers, and businesses. In this work we are attempting to challenge some of the basic assumptions of economics and rationality. The primary focus of the project is consumer preference, trying to better understand the forces that define the demand in the marketplace. Expiring Coupons for e-Markets Dan Ariely and On Amir Conversion rates (ratio of visitors to buyers) on the Internet are amazingly low. In our current work, we suggest that one of the most noted advantages of electronic commerce—low search costs—also turns out to be a major reason for low conversion rates. We claim that the low search costs associated with finding products and information about them can cause indecision and procrastination. Moreover, the possibility of finding additional information after a decision has been made has a high potential for regret, which also increases indecision to buy. We are interested in exploring how to overcome these indecision problems. We suggest that imposing deadlines can act as a psychological device that will promote more decisive actions. The mechanism upon which we focus is one where discounts, but not product offers, have a limited lifetime (in the form of expiring discounts). Inferring Values from Others in Online Auctions Dan Ariely One of the defining characteristics of online auctions is the information bidders can get from other bidders during the process. In the current project, we are trying to understand how bidders make inferences, what the inferences are based upon, and how accurate their inferences are. Psychology of Labor Dan Ariely The standard model of labor in economics assumes that work is aversive and that the employer, therefore, has to pay the employees money to compensate them for the disutility they incur when producing labor (expending time and effort). While this basic model approximates the provision of some types of jobs (smelling shoes to diagnose odor problems, collecting garbage, lifting bricks), it seems to mischaracterize the motivations people have in taking jobs requiring more intellectual abilities, thinking, or creativity. Professors, physicians, teachers, and engineers are but a few examples of professions that fulfill aspects of one’s life that are not captured by the standard model. Over the next few years, our goal is to develop new frameworks, based on the psychology of labor, from which to understand the complex and important problem of compensation and its relationship with motivation, effort, and loyalty. Psychology of Money Dan Ariely, Kristina Shampan'er and Nina Mazar Money is a wonderful invention. It lets people specialize, save, and trade. At the same time, money is very abstract, making it very hard to think about the "shadow value" of money (all other possible uses for money). In this project, we are investigating the ways in which individuals think about money, and in particular about the ways in which the psychology of money deviates from standard utility. MIT Media Laboratory Home Page | Research Main Index

by **Qutb** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 6:15 pm

I agree, and I'll like to post something I wrote for the "please read" thread which I didn't have time to post before it was locked: Does Jeff have to spell it out for you guys? He clearly stated that he's in agreement with Canadian hate speech laws, not cowed by them. You folks are, in effect, saying he's a liar, and a coward. Don't you think that's incredibly rude, on his forum? I discovered Jeff's blog in late 2004, and I was spellbound by it. Jeff was the first writer I had come across who treated traditional "conspiracy" subjects seriously and intelligently while coming from a "leftist" perspective. That's still what makes RI fairly unique (though there are other blogs with a similar perpective, none of them are as popular as RI, and no other writer as prolific as Jeff). Most leftists are very skeptical of this stuff, or reject it outright. Some of the subjects Jeff has brought up, such as ritual abuse, have traditionally been relegated to the far right end of the spectrum, with the exception of a few radical feminists. All the more honor to Jeff for taking an open-minded look at this stuff. I've learned a lot from his writings, and from further researching subjects that he brought up. My view of the world has changed quite a bit. For instance I had never contemplated a connection between the UFO phenomenon and fascist politics before I discovered RI. For those who have paid attention, Jeff's political sympathies have never been a secret. He doesn't introduce every blog post with a "workers of the world unite!", but it's always been fairly apparent that he's leaning to the left side of things. Why any of you should be surprised that he doesn't endorse holocaust revisionism is beyond me.

by **Hugh Manatee Wins** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 6:55 pm

The NewsGroup Personality (Based on the Major General's song from Gilbert and Sullivan's "The Pirates of Penzance") I am the very model of a Newsgroup personality. I intersperse obscenity with tedious banality. Addresses I have plenty of, both genuine and ghosted too, On all the countless newsgroups that my drivel is cross-posted to. Your bandwidth I will fritter with my whining and my sniveling, And you're the one who pays the bill, downloading all my driveling. My enemies are numerous, and no-one would be blaming you For cracking my head open after I've been rudely flaming you. I hate to lose an argument (by now I should be used to it). I wouldn't know a valid point if I was introduced to it. My learning is extensive but consists of mindless trivia, Designed to fan my ego, which is larger than Bolivia. The comments that I vomit forth, disguised as jest and drollery, Are really just an exercise in unremitting trollery. I say I'm frank and forthright, but that's merely lies and vanity, The gibberings of one who's at the limits of his sanity. If only I could get a life, as many people tell me to; If only Mom could find a circus freak-show she could sell me to; If I go off to Zanzibar to paint the local scenery; If I lose all my fingers in a mishap with machinery; If I survive to twenty, which is somewhat problematical; If what I post was more mature, or slightly more grammatical; If I could learn to spell a bit, and maybe even punctuate; Would I still be the loathsome and objectionable punk you hate? But while I have this tiresome urge to prance around and show my face, It simply isn't safe for normal people here in cyberspace. To stick me in Old Sparky and turn on the electricity Would be a fitting punishment for my egocentricity. I always have the last word; so, with uttermost finality, That's all from me, the model of a Newsgroup personality.

by **Hugh Manatee Wins** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 9:15 pm

A very interesting site run by a psychologist. Quite thorough examination of how people's personalities come out even more so online. source- <a href="http://www.rider.edu/~suler/psycyber/psycyber.html">www.rider.edu/~suler/psyc...cyber.html</a> The Bad Boys of Cyberspace Deviant Behavior in Online Multimedia Communities and Strategies for Managing it Introduction SNERT -- It's All Relative or Not Getting Known Through Anonymity Ain't Misbehaving: The Lower End of Deviance Clueless Newbies -- Culture Clash -- Mischief Graffiti -- Adolescent Antics -- Parodists Wizard Wannabes -- Deviant Enclaves Sleepers -- Ghosts -- Commercials Trouble-Makers: The Higher End of Deviance 1. See No Evil: Deviance Involving Offensive Avatars Setting Avatar Standards Pros and Cons of Setting Avatar Standards Intervening When a Naughty Av Appears ("propgaging") Second Opinions about Avatars Flashing and Prop-Dropping Hate and Violence Avatars Abusive Blocking -- Eavesdroppers 2. Speak No Evil: Deviance Involving Offensive Language Less Anonymity, Less Bad Mouthing The Purely Human Intervention with Foul Talkers "I Can't Hear You!" (the mute command) Wizard Meets the Foul Talker (gagging and killing) Time Out in the Rules Room Automated Mouthwash and Word Substitutions Unbecoming User and Room Names Breathers -- Verbal Exhibitionists -- Stalkers Guest Bashers -- Wizard Bashers -- Self Destroyers Event Crashing 3. More Complex Social Problems Revolutionaries Freedom Fighters and Other Tenacious Debaters Bible Thumpers Identity Theft, impostoring and Switching Detecting Impostors -- Intervening with Impostors Genuine Identity Disturbances -- Depressives Pedophiles -- Scam Artists Gangs -- Banning the Gang Getting to Know You (befriending the gang) Rehabilitating the Gang? Divide, Conquer, and Cutting off the Gang's Head Tough Love for the Gang (kill, three strikes, ban) 4. Techno-Crimes (Hacking) Flooding -- Crashing Password and Registration Key Hacking Inside the Hacker More on Intervention Strategies Big Brother is Watching (Presence) -- Nazis and Bleeding Hearts Talk is Good! -- Whisper -- Be Polite, Be Dispassionate Don't Argue, Don't' Bait -- Humor and Deflection Snert Rehabilitation -- Circumventing Anonymity (spooking) Bring in the Real World -- Undercover Work Blackball Lists -- Restricted Areas and Traffic Flow A Home for Bad Boys (Dodge City and the Pit) Time-Out Room and Automated Lessons Sent to the Corner (Pinning) The Kill (disconnecting) -- Killing Machines (bots) Exile (bans) -- Tracking -- Keeping Records Standardizing Interventions Formal Training of Wizards Conclusion: Sticks and Stones

by **Trifecta** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 6:04 am

Well I also wrote my response as the thread was locked, it simply asked for clarification on some other writers and sites. Makow ?..... Kaminski? .... Kurt Nimo? ..... Xmphora? .... Are they to be linked to the theme of hollow denial? The biggest question is not that millions of innocents died (as they do all the time) but the systems that have been put in place to block any rigorous exposition of the current world politic as it relates to the MYTH (caveat, all history is a myth) and control put in place to stop any significant intellectual discussions and thus truths surrounding what is obvious anomolys. Heretic to hollow denial, punishable by whatever means the controllers deam approrpriate and as long as the thought police are here to control the groupthink/hive mind, then job done. Once again, I lean far more to the areas others fear to tread, on those borders between black and white exists MU, this is the real world, not the symbolism imposed to surrender the capabilities of the mind. I will say no more on the subject, other than to ask for more specific clarity of the above names.

by **rocco322** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:35 am

Man what a drag. Seems like Qutb and Pan are the thought police around here. I'm sure I don't know the whole story, but 3 days of reading various threads leaves me with the overwhelming feeling that those two are just not very pleasant people. Though you may have been around since the good ol' days, or 'early 2004', some of us have only been here since early 2005' or later' and maybe have a ways to catch up with some of you supra intelligentistas. Instead of getting all uppity, maybe you could give us amateurs the same leeway Jeff probably gave you, and continues to give you.

by **hmm** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 11:09 am

sophistry One entry found for sophistry. Main Entry: soph·ist·ry Pronunciation: 'sä-f&-strE Function: noun 1 : subtly deceptive reasoning or argumentation You can't seriously tell me you dont know the difference between being a anti-semite/fascist/nazi/racist and discussing that subject or linking to sites containing that material for the purpose discussion or for exposing it for what it is.

by **Rigorous Intuition** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 12:27 pm

Apart from the most egregious examples of hate, lies and fascism like judicial-inc.biz and stormfront I don't want to go down the "this site is banned" road. Of your examples, I link to Nimo and xymphora on the blog and appreciate their work even if I don't always agree with them. As for Makow, I've asked people who want to reference him to consider whether it's material that's appropriate here, as nearly every Makow thread winds up locked and Fire Pitted.

by **professorpan** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 12:46 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Man what a drag. Seems like Qutb and Pan are the thought police around here. I'm sure I don't know the whole story, but 3 days of reading various threads leaves me with the overwhelming feeling that those two are just not very pleasant people.<hr></blockquote> If countering arguments or evidence I disagree with is being a "thought cop," I'll wear that badge. All I've ever done on this forum is say what's on my mind. I try hard not to get personal, even when I get falsely slandered as a bigot, a liar, and the dreaded disinfo agent. How is that being an agent of the thought police? I do think people should honor Jeff's rules. He set this board up. That's not enforcing thought, either -- it's just being respectful. And most people in the real world -- my many friends -- would disagree about my being a pleasant person. I do get unpleasant when I'm slandered and my motives are questioned, or when I'm accused of being a bigot against Christians (and no evidence is offered of that... still waiting, Floyd). I don't post here to get my feelings validated or make friends -- I'm just trying to share information and analysis. Take it or leave it, that doesn't bother me.

Subjects of discussion

Subjects of discussion

Re: Subjects of discussion

Re: Subjects of discussion

Re: Yup. Thanks, Jeff. Now for some relevent humor-

Re: The Psychology of Cyberspace. Deviant Behavior Mgmt.

hollow denial the new heretics

Re: hollow denial the new heretics

sophistry

"clarification on some other writers and sites"

Re: "clarification on some other writers and sites"

Who is online