"thank you for following me" a direct message
Mr. Harris may have forgotten that he was following a nasty a bituminous troll, because he sent yours truly a direct message which asserted that he'd "return the favor," when I decided to let his feed on my stream, an indicator that he may have ignored my links. My synaptic connections aren't what they used to be either; I too struggle with fine print, but I try to visit my twitter page and trim the branches.
I may stop linking my DIA posts so often, however, if the moral majority is going to pressure Blogger to silence me. Where that pressure came from might be nice to know, but I am not going to let it stop me, not that I can fight Google, I know that. This software belongs to the company, and the First Amendment applies to the public square-- but Blogger succeeded in making me angrier, inadvertently, perhaps.
I am, on occasion, chastised by the establishment for lack of relevance, which annoys the holy shit out of me when it comes to social media. I wanted to talk about texts, on Linked In, with those who taught them, but down came the muzzle, "lack of relevance," without me breathing a word about my personal situation. I could not fight back, Linked In couldn't tell me anything, and yet I had to be mortified.
This isn't virtual stigma following real life prejudice? We do not have to thank followers in thousands of automated emails. Think about it. I'll leave my account. I like Medium, and think it's better for us than thousands of writer authors tweeting what we won't read. I like BeaconReader too, and for that I need twitter.
I'm mean, hurtful, and occasionally vile, but I am also challenging and divergent, and you really need to stop and think about the price people like me are asked to pay. I am in exactly the same room I was when I was punted off Poets & Writers. How many of those authors have moved on, been able to change? I am in exactly the same studio where Linda squealed to me like a pig about her orgasms, and she may have left the disability center, but I am sure the bitch has her mortgage paid off. I know she, and Josie Byzek, whom I've also offered choice words, have online access. Jimmi Shrode, who is afraid of me, may too. Jimmi is afraid of me, instinctively, and he should be, but he can walk, and has what he wants, at least until Erik dies. I'm alone; I'm in pain, and I live in an environment I never wanted to be, and all you fine players can't handle it.
Showing posts with label protected speech. Show all posts
Showing posts with label protected speech. Show all posts
Monday, March 2, 2015
Wednesday, February 25, 2015
When is it puree?
"They later reversed the policy." --Judy Woodruff on Facebook and beheading videos
Elonis v US brings together a number of tawdry elements which eventually leads to enlightenment in civil and criminal code, just as the Web is under no obligation to grant the indignation of my extensive disability and my forceful rhetoric tolerance: it is actually a reflection of my reality in the temporal world. I'm needy, and my oral stream is, can be, selfish absorption, but just as this is the case for me, so it is for Anthony Elonis-- but there are differences, and in the Elonis case, the difference is the real toll domestic violence, the possibility of it, inflicts on women, to a near universal degree, sans Janay Rice, versus Elonis need to act out with his impulse control issues (just as some of you may feel I simply derive pleasure from being malicious and have no redeeming value in my content, am far too eclectic, perhaps even nullifying, if you shouldn't be worried about my zealotry with age). Well, my hypothetical detractors have a point. Search is under no obligation to refer my content in the public domain if it is too negative. I can go back to my diary and publish a nihilist rant for kindle which would sell for nothing. Google, Poets & Writers, the literature forum, the NYT online book forum formerly with Mick Sussman which I really enjoyed and forget why I dared the emperor of American liberalism with a dirty ditty, starved as I am for fine discernment, all were within their rights, and Blogger has allowed me to throb, mostly, to its credit, because I've held at least a certain degree of puerile sentiment back, partly fear, partly the knowledge I have more ambition than that, and doing my best not to let my landlord roll me out in a straight jacket-- though it may eventually come to that.
Elonis, however, is simply puerile. But why does he need to do this on Mark Zuckerberg's digital interactive yearbook which has everyone's CV barring mine? He could write a private blog and invite other men to fantasy with semi-automatics. My outrage is due to the knowledge of my legal passivity: I was afraid to fight, one, and that a litigator would not help me, and secondly, I wasn't just screwed, I was royally so and everything in my present environment recollects it: Blogger let me find the courage to have a small effect, but what do we do when people who can take it in to their head to act if they are incited to do so? Mrs. Elonis has the right to her personal security, and bad systems that become intrenched, if targeted by violence, not only escalates tragedy, but escalates the fact that we need to teach each other about over reach. Progressives bear the brunt of my anger. They told me I could succeed and it is through hard won insight discovered that they are lying Stalinists, but the right gets some too. Property ownership is still more important than anything else-- we'll come back to this. People have the right to their rage, and to their intolerances even, and fantasies, but writing as therapy, on the merits, need not have absolute access to all platforms. I'd never write a project like this in an online yearbook-- and you don't have to read my posts when I feel a ventilation, not that I know what your kids think, though I can guess. I couldn't help laughing at Judy's language that evening. ISIS in the modern world is horrific, and ghoulishly macabre. It isn't the kind of diet we really need, however. We have the movies, and the right to bear arms.
Elonis v US brings together a number of tawdry elements which eventually leads to enlightenment in civil and criminal code, just as the Web is under no obligation to grant the indignation of my extensive disability and my forceful rhetoric tolerance: it is actually a reflection of my reality in the temporal world. I'm needy, and my oral stream is, can be, selfish absorption, but just as this is the case for me, so it is for Anthony Elonis-- but there are differences, and in the Elonis case, the difference is the real toll domestic violence, the possibility of it, inflicts on women, to a near universal degree, sans Janay Rice, versus Elonis need to act out with his impulse control issues (just as some of you may feel I simply derive pleasure from being malicious and have no redeeming value in my content, am far too eclectic, perhaps even nullifying, if you shouldn't be worried about my zealotry with age). Well, my hypothetical detractors have a point. Search is under no obligation to refer my content in the public domain if it is too negative. I can go back to my diary and publish a nihilist rant for kindle which would sell for nothing. Google, Poets & Writers, the literature forum, the NYT online book forum formerly with Mick Sussman which I really enjoyed and forget why I dared the emperor of American liberalism with a dirty ditty, starved as I am for fine discernment, all were within their rights, and Blogger has allowed me to throb, mostly, to its credit, because I've held at least a certain degree of puerile sentiment back, partly fear, partly the knowledge I have more ambition than that, and doing my best not to let my landlord roll me out in a straight jacket-- though it may eventually come to that.
Elonis, however, is simply puerile. But why does he need to do this on Mark Zuckerberg's digital interactive yearbook which has everyone's CV barring mine? He could write a private blog and invite other men to fantasy with semi-automatics. My outrage is due to the knowledge of my legal passivity: I was afraid to fight, one, and that a litigator would not help me, and secondly, I wasn't just screwed, I was royally so and everything in my present environment recollects it: Blogger let me find the courage to have a small effect, but what do we do when people who can take it in to their head to act if they are incited to do so? Mrs. Elonis has the right to her personal security, and bad systems that become intrenched, if targeted by violence, not only escalates tragedy, but escalates the fact that we need to teach each other about over reach. Progressives bear the brunt of my anger. They told me I could succeed and it is through hard won insight discovered that they are lying Stalinists, but the right gets some too. Property ownership is still more important than anything else-- we'll come back to this. People have the right to their rage, and to their intolerances even, and fantasies, but writing as therapy, on the merits, need not have absolute access to all platforms. I'd never write a project like this in an online yearbook-- and you don't have to read my posts when I feel a ventilation, not that I know what your kids think, though I can guess. I couldn't help laughing at Judy's language that evening. ISIS in the modern world is horrific, and ghoulishly macabre. It isn't the kind of diet we really need, however. We have the movies, and the right to bear arms.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)