What happened to Hugh Manatee?

[lucky]

Jeff is conspicuous by his absence on this thread.... any thing you can add big man? Yes Hugh was at times infuriating but at least he stuck to his guns and as has been said had indepth knowledge of many RI subjects.
Is there no one who use to PM with him who might be able to say something of his whereabouts? Who knows in 10 years time KWH'ing might be a wikileak subject. : )

[elfismiles]

Thanks, here it is: http://www.rigorousintuition.ca/board2/ ... 9&p=262518

Did anyone ever contact ejamuel? I can't remember the outcome.

HMW refused my repeated attempts to get him to at least compare one alleged argish leaflet to what he claimed to have seen but as usual he practiced his second favorite tactic of ignoring direct requests to shore up his claims.

[divideandconquer]

When's the last time he posted here?

[IanEye]

Instantly I'm goaded and attacked ad-hominem as A DOG by username peartreed. Um, mods?

Observe a dog

More...pear-a-social-interaction...(1956)...looks pre-pear-ed for this moment....

"fresh meat, fat, sinew, marrow
dried, dead, barren fragments
Skeletal, diminished,
rejected, bypassed, replaced and abandoned."

Pfeh. Let us LEARN from this post. Just what is being used here to negate me?
Answerl: Implicit Association Theory.

https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/d ... tists.html
https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/d ... hrono.html

http://www.teachgreenpsych.com/cognition.php#implicit

I

mplicit Associations And Connectedness To Nature

Schultz, Shriver, Tabanico, and Khazian (2004) use a modification of the Implicit Associations Test to measure individuals' connection to nature. The task measures participants’ response latency in making “ me-not me” judgments for words associated with the natural environment (e. g., trees) versus words associated with the built environment (e. g., car). Shorter response latency for me-nature pairings is interpreted as reflecting greater implicit association (i. e., connection) between the self and the natural world. Importantly, researchers have not found the IAT to be a good predictor of environmental behaviors.

As the story progresses, it becomes clear that San Lorenzo society is more bizarre and cryptic than originally revealed.
In observing the interconnected lives of some of the island's most influential residents, John learns that Bokonon himself was at one point a de facto ruler of the island, along with a US Marine deserter.
The two men created Bokononism as part of a utopian project to control the population. The ban was an attempt to give the religion a sense of forbidden glamour, and it is found that almost all of the residents of San Lorenzo, including the dictator, practice the faith, and executions are rare.

[H_C_E]

“Hugh Manatee” was a cyber bully, browbeating nonbelievers with his belligerent bombast, flaming even the fans of his fixated fantasies, intruding uninvited into any intercourse interfering with his imagined exclusive omnipotence about any intel agency agenda. His farcical confabulations of facts to fit his theories became fanatical. His arrogance, sarcasm and belittling of all opposing argument was megalomaniacally unhinged. He lost sight of his surroundings, overshadowed by his own humongous hubris, and became lost in the maze of his own asinine word associations.

I have to admit this is how I feel. and it's why I disappeared from this forum for
years, and why I have lost interest is maintaining any presence here. I just can't
bring myself to engage here in any meaningful way. Seeing as how HMW has
some pretty serious followers here, and his presence at RI has left a strong anti-
paranormal/unexplained (derisively known as "woo") sentiment here at RI.
And that was one of the things that originally attracted me to these forums.

[Searcher08]

“Hugh Manatee” was a cyber bully, browbeating nonbelievers with his belligerent bombast, flaming even the fans of his fixated fantasies, intruding uninvited into any intercourse interfering with his imagined exclusive omnipotence about any intel agency agenda. His farcical confabulations of facts to fit his theories became fanatical. His arrogance, sarcasm and belittling of all opposing argument was megalomaniacally unhinged. He lost sight of his surroundings, overshadowed by his own humongous hubris, and became lost in the maze of his own asinine word associations.

I have to admit this is how I feel. and it's why I disappeared from this forum for
years, and why I have lost interest is maintaining any presence here. I just can't
bring myself to engage here in any meaningful way. Seeing as how HMW has
some pretty serious followers here, and his presence at RI has left a strong anti-
paranormal/unexplained (derisively known as "woo") sentiment here at RI.
And that was one of the things that originally attracted me to these forums.

I'm sorry that is your impression about an anti-paranormal bias - I dont think there is anything like that anymore and there is a lot of diverse interest in pretty Fortean topics right now - especially megalithic weirdness

What sort of areas are you into at the moment?
I LIKE talking about the paranormal in a thread about Hugh BTW

[peartreed]

I agree with H-C-E above, especially on the impact on participation here.

HMW’s attempted hijacking of the “Hollywood Scripting” thread (that I had initiated to seriously explore intel manipulation of mass media) was the final straw for my tolerance of an unwelcome, stereotypical, wild-eyed conspiracy theorist dominating all related discussion. HMW had harassed me in previous postings to the point I had planned to leave the forum to him, but a similarly stubborn streak made me dig in. I wanted to help expose and explore real evidence of actual covert operations still underway to mess with public perceptions for nefarious purposes. I even thought HMW might be a plant to taint the entire forum population as conspiracy loons.

Thankfully the forum leadership finally banned him after a long series of breaches.

Like others are expressing here, the residual anger over his kind of interference continues to deter me from posting and participating more often amongst his still-sympathetic fans and enablers. He was admittedly often unintentionally amusing as a court jester, but ultimately a cancerous caricature of conspiracy theory research.

His ghost still haunts these halls, and a few imitators still revere his saga, summon his style and resurrect the resentment. Accordingly, some of us still await the end of the séance and a return to more rational interaction in the brighter light of reason.

[Twyla LaSarc]

I have no real feelings one way or another about Hugh. I learned to skim his stuff for 'biscuit crumbs' and left it at that.

However, over the years, I've tried steering minds far more intelligent than mine here. I have to say a dose or two of Hugh was enough to have them dismiss this site out of hand. It's a pity because they had a lot of interesting knowledge on many topics that are discussed here.

Strange he should disappear so completely though.

[Asta]

Well, one thing about HMW is that he had a cool screen name. And while this may sound rather trivial, sometimes a screen name or an avatar offers clues about the true persona of that poster.

Humanity Wins is really positive, while Hugh Manatee Wins said to me that it was very important to him that he win the argument, whatever the argument may be. I stopped reading his posts long ago because it was exhausting to follow his style of logic and it made my head hurt.

If it interests anyone, I chose Asta as my screen name for this and other similar forums because I love wire haired terriers, and I love the The Thin Man movies -- William Powell and Myrna Loy solving crimes with the assistance of martinis and a loyal dog, and I identified with that. "Asta" also shows up in the NYT's crossword puzzles a lot.

(Maybe someone will start a thread about why they chose their screen names and what it means to them.)

My take on HMW's absence is that he just got bored with us.

It's possible he's still here, just under a different screen name.

Hugh, come out, come out wherever you are.......

[Elvis]

(Maybe someone will start a thread about why they chose their screen names and what it means to them.)

ta-da!

So why'd you choose your username, anyway?
Postby Jeff » Sat Mar 12, 2011 9:07 pm
viewtopic.php?f=34&t=31476

[Luther Blissett]

I realize that my posts in this thread paint me as a supporter/enabler, but I don't think I ever had much direct interaction with him. Other than when he once antagonized me over some ufological issue, to which I responded by providing as many first-hand accounts of pre-1903 UFO sightings as I could muster.

[Asta]

thank you, Elvis.

[peartreed]

If we keep creating threads about HMW and regurgitating his comments with quotes in our posts it brings him back despite the ban and defies the administration’s decision on his continued participation and involvement here. And what’s the point of that? It’s a further example of unnecessary obstruction and retrogressive moves.

And it continues to inhibit progress in encouraging more intelligent participation.

Nostalgia and curiosity are perverse reasons to reanimate a major forum disruptor. Let sleeping dogs lie.

[brainpanhandler]

If we keep creating threads about HMW and regurgitating his comments with quotes in our posts it brings him back despite the ban and defies the administration’s decision on his continued participation and involvement here.

You really think Jeff feels that having banned Hugh any reference to him is in violation of even the spirit of the ban? Really?

And what’s the point of that? It’s a further example of unnecessary obstruction and retrogressive moves.

I read very little here so maybe Hugh is mentioned more than I know, but if I extrapolate from what I do read Hugh is not mentioned around here very much at all and certainly quoting him is not in any way equivalent to the sort of disruption he himself caused.

And it continues to inhibit progress in encouraging more intelligent participation.

I suspect we have different opinions on what constitutes "intelligent participation". Otherwise that makes no sense.

Nostalgia and curiosity are perverse reasons to reanimate a major forum disruptor.

Nostalgia? No. Curiosity? Yes. Mixed with some concern for a fellow human being that I interacted with here pretty extensively. Hugh needed to go.

But why hate the man?

You want hate and disruption?

Fresno Layspotatochip, I think there's a Breaking Wind marathon on, better hurry home to mom's basement, ya might miss something important.

You people are fucking awesome.

It must really suck that y'all are addicted to a system that ya hate.
A bunch of big mouthed toddlers who hate ma & pa but can't live without them.

Hands out waiting for daddy government to subsidize your pointless lives.
Screaming about your rights, stopping your little feet and smashing your Breaking Wind toys in fits of childish pique.

I'd bet the lot of you have never done anything for anybody other than yourselves.

Ooooo ooooooo I'm an RI-er and I have to watch hours & hours of TV so I can find out that the ends really don't justify the means.

A lesson most sane people learn by the time they're ten.

It's really too bad the US isn't the Nazi hell you armchair revolutionaries wish it was because the thought of an army of of jackboots wiring the lot of you TV addicted sissies up to wall outlets is an awesome thought indeed.

Hearing y'all scream for your mommies while you smell your own flesh cook.

Now there's a fucking miniseries I'd watch.

[brainpanhandler]

My take on HMW's absence is that he just got bored with us.

This was a unique ecosystem for the guy. That and he was banned.

It's possible he's still here, just under a different screen name.

I don't think so, for a number of reasons. Not least of which is that I think he is incapable of disguising his thinking/writing style, nor would he be able to refrain from mentioning kwhijackings as he found them. He was obsessive/compulsive about it.

However, over the years, I've tried steering minds far more intelligent than mine here. I have to say a dose or two of Hugh was enough to have them dismiss this site out of hand. It's a pity because they had a lot of interesting knowledge on many topics that are discussed here.

Indeed, it's a pity they would judge the entire forum on the basis of a few posts from Hugh.