When people dis him. Especially when he is offering to help someone.
Nick is the real deal and anybody who has a problem with him has a problem with me.
Well except for his wife. She is always right. Like my wife.
But other than that I won't stand for any crap from busybody internet nutjobs. Just sayn'
59 comments:
Of course Nick can take care of himself.
If you don't believe me just check out the thread about masturbation in Father Fox's blog.
OK, I took a quick look at that thread.
It reminded me why I became an ex-Catholic.
Where did that "I won't tolerate threats" come from?
That was some leap of logic. It was almost Rosie O'Donnell, like. Assuming Rosie could leap.
Or use logic.
It was bullshit is what it was.
I am holding fire just yet. Let Nick take the lead on that one.
I know we all have his back.
Especially if you ever got a glimpse of his front. Just sayn'
Nick, if we're ever in any dangerous situation, just know that I'll behind you every step of the way.
Watching your back.
Unless a pretty girl comes along.
RC - Hey, I've got you covered, watching your back while you watch Nick's back.
That doesn't sound right.
You can watch anybodies back all you want as long as you don't check out anybodies ass.
That's what started this whole thing in the first place!
I'm a bit perplexed. There was a bit of jousting there but it seemed fairly tame. I do appreciate the shout out but it seemed to all get settled. I misread the Padre which happens when you don't know someone. But, that was worked out quickly. That other babe was talking outta her ass but seemed to get her mind right. The Padre is a very sharp guy. I bit my tongue out of respect. But, you know most priests are rubbin' one out several times a day. The Padre has some interesting posts and I'm just trying to get the dialogue going. I feel bad he got transferred. I know that's the drill but I think this move was tough for him.
To tell you the truth the subject of this post wasn't Father Fox. It was the post on Lem's where rcommal went after you when you said you would help anyone who was threatened by Titus.
I was just teasing you about the jerk off post.
rcommal said...
ndspinelli Unsubscribe
11:18 AM (17 hours ago)
to me
ndspinelli has left a new comment on the post "Importing The New Voter Base":
I have a standing offer on Titus. As I've said, if he crosses the line w/ anyone, get me the info you have on him and I'll take it from there.
Post a comment.
Unsubscribe to comments on this post.
For the record: I do not support anyone making that sort of direct threat. More: I'm not afraid to take on someone making that sort of direct threat, much less anyone who supports or contracts such a person to carry out what's threatened.
Cut. That. Shit. Out.
I'm not even a regular one here, much less a popular one here. Yet even I have the balls to call out that sort of shit.
What the hell is wrong with the rest of you? Can't you guys do manage/bother (bother/manage) to do that?
July 27, 2014 at 4:34 AM
Blogger rcommal said...
ndspinelli:
Your threats, in general, are not OK with me. It's immaterial to whom the threats are directed. What is material to me is that you threaten.
Stop it. Cut that out.
(To everyone else: Don't think that I'm feeling all virtuous or something; I don't. Quite the opposite, because I've watched and seen ndspinelli threaten for years but didn't speak up. I was a coward.
I'm speaking up now, however.)
July 27, 2014 at 4:52 AM
Blogger rcommal said...
I don't even care if ndspinelli is "just a character" that someone or another is putting on (and on, and on, and on), if that is case. Seriously, that wouldn't matter. A crossed line is a crossed line. Who the f'n' hell here wants to argue against the notion that some lines ought not be crossed? I'm asking you all, quite seriously.
July 27, 2014 at 4:58 AM
I thought that attack was totally uncalled for and out of left field.
After all the shit that Titus pulled here and at TOP and Lem's it was laughable.
I admit that I indulged Titus for two long because he was occasionally amusing and ripe for mockery and japery but I eventually realized how toxic he really is in the scheme of things.
It's not the first time rcommal has swooped out of nowhere to pick a fight. And it's not like I was innocent, dragging the shit from TOP over to Lem's.
Quite the opposite, because I've watched and seen ndspinelli threaten for years but didn't speak up. I was a coward.
If only she could say as much about Titus. But hey, maybe she likes Titus or maybe she knows something about Titus that I'm not privy to. Honestly, I don't get her much of the time anymore. For me, it's like there was a memo I missed or else I was supposed to figure something out on my own.
Sorry. That was too long. Spell check auto correct sucks balls.
Who the fuck is this shitbird? Should I know him/her? Give me some background please. Most of these anonymous assholes all blend together and I just ignore them. I've seen the moniker but know nothing else.
I did learn prostatitis was known as "the monk's disease." Google prostatitis/celibacy and I think the medical dept. of the Vatican should require all priests to rub one our weekly!
She was a former commenter here and at TOP and at Lem's. Always strange and cryptic she seems to have gone off the deep end.
People that I respect like Ruth Anne Adams and blake and chickie claim her as a friend so I don't want to trash her unnecessarily. But I don't let attacks on my friends go unanswered if I can help it.
I don't know if you need to go defcon one on this but I think you need to know about it at the very least. You were only trying to help and really didn't deserve this sneak attack.
I can only say that it is the natural result of discussing TOP and the people that reside there. Lem's joint has been mercifully spared most of those knuckleheads and I would hate to stir them up and have them coming back to fling monkey shit.
So I honestly don't know what to do. Maybe it was a one time thing. So maybe the best to let it go this time.
But you can make the call since you were the injured party. I will follow your lead.
chickelit said...
It's not the first time rcommal has swooped out of nowhere to pick a fight. And it's not like I was innocent, dragging the shit from TOP over to Lem's.
This is very true. She swooped out of nowhere to lecture me both on-line and by email about how terrible I was. Most of the time I have no idea what the fuck she is talking about so I don't want to attack because she seems more and more like she is addled or impaired in some way. She demanded to be dropped from the blog and I complied. I don't know if it has colored my view but I will be honest enough to say that is a possibility.
I don't understand what Titus has done to deserve such a defense.
Titus and Crack serve an important function at TOP. Along with Inga they give expression to how the dirty couple really feels in their heart of hearts. So they are indulged and their posts illustrate how the comment moderation policy if a joke.
I haven't been there in a while but I went when chickie posted the link and read a few threads. It is pretty grim shit.
Sorry for all the typos but I am hanging out while they work on the Japan order and I am bushed.
I blame bushed.
Troop, I appreciate you and the other folks here having my back. That means a lot to me. I made a short comment over there and that's the end of it as far as I'm concerned.
Well. I just read a series of late night crazy talk. You nailed it, off the rails and headed into the river.
Dude it is best to back away from such crazy.
As I've said before, rcommal is an old online friend, going back now about 10 years. Trooper has said he didn't feel comfortable discussing her, because she isn't here to defend herself. So, as probably her oldest interlocutor, I will only say it appears she’s dumped me as a result of my using la Professora too roughly in a thread here a while back.
I think rcommal didn't get the hyperbole in my venting, taking it far too much as a sign of moral failure. She doesn't seem to relate to hyperbole in general. I confess to odd outbursts of intemperate language, which, if I take "in my thoughts and in my words" seriously, means I should be allowed nothing but sober, kind thoughtfulness in all expression. I was thinking yesterday driving to Mass I really need to go to Confession this week, because--guess what--I’m a sinner.
Back to the point: Rcommal seems to have kept a relationship going with our favorite lawprof, which I am the last person to criticize. I wished I could have kept up a tolerable relationship, too, and I have no problem with those who do. My beef with Professor A is my own, and has two simple, direct causes:
1. When Sir Archy, her former "beloved commenter," was unmasked, I sent her a note explaining it was me and proving my bona fides. Her reply was more offhanded than I had any reason to expect, and included an insulting piece of pop psychologizing. I was surprized, considering all that Sir Archy seemed to represent to her. My reaction was not to write another e-mail, which would have confirmed the relationship as unequal. No, I thought, "Okay, lady, that's how you treat people who have busted their butt for you?" And so I put up a few pieces on my old blog making mild sport of her, which she (I suspect with Meade’s goading) ended up taking very amiss. It’s too much to explain here, but the unsurprising summary is she can dish it out, but she can’t take it. Meh. Yet another problem child who’s crossed my path.
2. What was much worse was her letting stand Palladian’s attack on my son, despite my asking her to remove it. That had painful and frankly astonishing aftereffects I’ve told you about.
In the first case, she merely demonstrated the common arrogance that flowers in the shade of academic bowers. The second was beyond the pale. So, even as someone who initially liked her very much, she managed to deeply offend me. This seems to be a pattern.
The issue is my reaction to these incidents. I think rcommal expected more Christian forbearance. My mistake was purple prose that allowed rcommal to indulge her increasingly favorite online pastime: moralizing. About the only things I’ve seen from her in a while are elliptical sermonettes, notices of her ethical superiority, and intentions to drop people. Unlike her ones from years past, these are not interesting or attractive sentiments.
Ruth Anne says she’s perfectly happy and normal IRL. But online, you are what you post. And that has gone in painful directions lately. There’s obviously nothing I can do about it. I hate to say “meh,” but she has, in fact, become another problem child whose path ought to be uncrossed with mine with the most cost-effective shrug possible.
Menopause is a terrible thing, JUST SAYN'
I didn't want to talk about her but I thought the .attack on Nick was especially uncalled for and the revisionist history is a real sack of shit.
Just goes to show how TOP remains toxic and soils anyone who touches it.
Assuming the fab four was correct, the deranged blogging bitch and her lawn jockey are headed for a lonely, spartan end.
were, not was...dammit
Menopause is a terrible thing, JUST SAYN'
Amen to that! Made even more difficult when one loses scents.
For those who say, let men give birth and see how they hold up, I say, let them lose their hormones and see where they stand.
Of course, in the midst of teh craziness, the name of the Oop just had to be helpfully mentioned by someone else. Couldn't let an opportunity like that pass, no sir. Must have innocently and completely slipped the mind that previous mentions have had a summoning effect.
Back to the point: Rcommal seems to have kept a relationship going with our favorite lawprof, which I am the last person to criticize.
I bet you're right, TT. That explains Freeman too. They can have her.
I think she changed when she moved to Chaillot.
I want to make it clear I have absolutely no problem with Freeman. I don't know about what she says at TOP or anything related, because I don't go there. I am friends with her on Facebook, and from everything I've seen in that venue and the few other places I've encountered her, I have nothing but the highest regard for her.
As I tried to make implicit in my last comment, my problems with prof A are specific and my own, and I am not going to join anyone else's parade. You have your issues with Our Ms. Books, and I have mine, but they are separate, and I definitely disavow any connection with dumping on anyone other than the Mistress of It All. Given the chance, I will rag on Madame until the cows come home, but I have nothing to say about Freeman in any of it.
@TTBurnett: I too respect Freeman's opinions. She was actually the first person I followed on Twitter, ca., January, 2009. I am not on Facebook. My negative issue with Freeman is not very broad nor very deep. It concerns her reaction to a post I did at Lem's which posited whether reverse racism (black on white) could occur, specifically, in the then growing problem of Crack Emcee at Althouse. Freeman rose to Crack's defense and gave a clear retort that no it couldn't happen (reverse racism). If you haven't read Althouse, you perhaps don't realize how bad he got. This led me to question her response to my post.
Similarly, we now have reader weighing in with invective towards spinelli in a post about Titus, but as far as I can remember, she never had a moralizing word for Titus. Secondarily, I wondered whether Titus wasn't some character project for an Althouse insider about which I am in the dark but reader has some insight. Because this thing (Titus) has now chosen to target me, it has become my concern. Go visit my blog and look at my comment policy: "Titus and Titus-like comments will be shot on sight." I wrote that because of repeated spamming insults on his/her part over a period of time.
Oh and, as I emailed Troop, I'm convinced that Titus either reads here or is relayed comments about him from here. I have a very specific reason for asserting that.
Chickelit: I'm afraid I don't read die Frau ohne Schatten's blog, so I can't comment on Crack or Freeman there. I take your point about Crack getting crazy, which I, of course, have seen. But, as I say, vis-Ã -vis Freeman, that's something I can't comment on. I have found her an interesting, reasonable and thoroughly admirable person in the venues where we have crossed paths. Given the leakiness of this place (e.g., rcommal quickly unfollowing me on Facebook after the last series of comments about her), I'm afraid my participating in a thread that rags on Freeman will get back to her. I do not want her to get the slightest wrong idea. I have beefs with la Professora, and I have gotten thoroughly creeped out by rcommal ("reader" to those who remember her past name), but I have no problem with anyone else around here or in the larger AA community, with the obvious exception of Herself and the groundskeeper. I may differ with people, but I'm philosophical about it and generally keep to myself. Debate these days is nearly pointless. My strategy for Titus is to ignore him as much as possible. It's easy, because as soon as I see his name I skip to something else. I can't recommend this enough.
I don't think Titus is an AA construction or much other than who he seems. Palladian outed the "old" Titus, and he has a real name, and, in fact, appears to have been, and may still be, pretty much who he claims. He is simply beyond the pale.
By her own belated admission, AA has always cultivated controversial, pot-stirring characters, i.e., trolls. This is what many people long suspected, and a sure sign of arrogance and contempt for the lower orders--her readers. She has run all these years a tournament of the troubled, thinly disguised as a blawg, whose stated purpose was to make its proprietrix famous. It was only when the groundlings at last found her range with their stones and bottles that she called in the pikemen.
It is no news that this has been an astonishing performance in the service of a thoroughly rotten concept. AA is a dissembling self-promoter without a straightforward bone in her body. Now that may not bother some. I say, more power to them. For my part, I just stumbled away, shaking my head at my own stupidity before yet another instance of depravity in the costume of talent.
Here's a little demo of what can go wrong with these fight shows.
Tim, We are soul mates in the philosophy that we make up our own minds about people.
What Chick said at 1:21AM applies to more than Titus. There is leakage, intentional or otherwise.
TTBurnett, well said, but you could have summed up ol dirty EBL with a five letter word.
You are too much of a gentleman to do so, of course.
As for the island of misfit toys, that is TOP, well it is what it is. I have nothing against Freeman, other than noting she had bad judgment in picking "friends." I don't hate Titus or Crack, but either one of them could be an "issue spotter" question on a clinical psychological exam (identify all the disorders with these patients). I do not get rcommal, but her conclusions are delusional. Inga is just a nasty piece of work.
Lawnboy, aka the Dog Fucker, is a sociopath user and parasite but he found the perfect mate and bill payer. It must sting that their lawnblog is losing traffic.
I've had a bit of the "Freeman" approach over the last couple of years, so I get it. Althouse has a wide-ranging and interesting blog, with a lot of updates. If your interest is just to muse alongside and get intelligent commentary, it's still a good place (with exceptions). But, Althouse, in my opinion, is used to being a tenured professor. She does not see respondents or commentators as equals. She is the teacher. And she very much seems to discount her own emotions so she absolutizes her perceptions. Get on the wrong side of her, she blasts.
At the same time, she attacks who she sees as a real threat to her ego. Titus is like her pet.
And I'm not sure Crack is quite down at the same status, but maybe a little. Like a lot of academics she's sensitive about her racist contexts. So, they're using each other. Crack, back when he was more macho in his responses, riffed conservative. Wasn't he a huge Sarah Palin fan? But, then he had some bad turns, needs steady work and support. Like a lot of masters and PhD students I've known that need is often accompanied by a turn Left.
Crack really got labeled with conservative and I suspect that was shutting doors, so he's playing the game he needs to play, changing the Google search results to make him more acceptable to the right people. That people take his shift seriously and personally is the funny thing, as he is intentionally courting the controversy.
There, that's my amateur psychoanalyzing for the day.
I'm a simple guy who likes simple explanations, so I say that Crack became an AltPet when he broke w/ Trooper.
ChipS has it exactly right. Crack was emailing me and telling me how he was "afraid" that Meade was trying to hustle him while all the time he was trying to con me to send him some dough. I didn't of course and that was the reason for our falling out.
He went "full Meade" which is sort of like "full retard" only stupider.
I am putting up a post to address chickie's speculation as to people reporting back to Titus, Althouse
et al.
Thank you Paddy, for nailing the situation in modern psychological and academic terms. My own thinking and expression remains stuck with 300 years to go.
AA cynically went after the Instapundit demographic when she started. It finally came a-cropper when she found herself presiding over a right-wing Texas cage match. She doubtless decided neither the adjective nor the noun will do her good when the appointments committee meets about emeritus status. And Crack, as you say, must play, like a good clown, to the audience that hires him.
To my mind, her depravity is her arrogance. Like a good lawyer, she can reason any side, but she has habitually chosen to present the unfashionable view as a stimulant. This, in itself, is good, and, in fact, possibly an admirable service to the public. Her desire for fame, ("I want to be a famous lawprof") however, led her to cultivate a troll garden to attract hoi polloi. Because she regards most who comment as inferiors, not worthy of consideration, she has no compunction about the grotesqueries they have had to endure.
She, in her own mind, may think her rough Socratic method is good. But it has led to numerous instances of bad feeling and foul temper, and this, more than her opinion, is a moral failing I view as a depraved example of the Sin of Pride. It is depraved because it is no mere accident of omission, but calculated and intended.
Such a person, who would "discount her own emotions," and "absolutize her perceptions," and continually treat otherwise rational adults as children, is not worthy of another word, except perhaps a prayer for the state of the soul she is certain to deny she has.
I think most of us are over Althouse as you have said.
There are very few references to her anymore. She has the unique ability to alienate her best commenters in a way that is just amazing. So now she can enjoy Crack and Titus and Freeman Hunt and rcommal and anyone else who enjoys posting there. The only contact I personally have with them is when they come over to Lem's joint which they do less and less as time goes by. So why jinx it.
The Italians have a saying. Don't say the devil's name because if you do he will show up in your house.
When I want to see political discussions of legal issues I now go to Legal Insurrection and Powerline and I have been perfectly happy. I think the best commenters from the old Althouse blog like ChipAhoy, Bags, Michael Haz, Sir Archy and many others are found exclusively at Lem's place more or less. He is a generous host and I think his blog has prospered as a result.
"is not worthy of another word, except perhaps a prayer for the state of the soul she is certain to deny she has."
I agree. Though I've been slow to get there.
Paddy, We must all find our own path. Some of us just hack away w/ a machete and make a path. Others find the paths made by nature.
Trooper hires Muslims to cut his path.
I believe Ruth Anne when she speaks well of "rcommai". I've always felt (this would probably piss her off but whatever) a kind of kindred spirit there, as well as a lively and considerate intellect.
We corresponded for a while when she was first homeschooling her boy and she was nothing if not pleasant, gracious, insightful, etc. I would bet she's done very well by him.
That said, I have never gotten her online personality.
But I'm happy just to know that she's doing well. There are so many more important things than managing online life.
I've had nothing but good encounters with Freem including some very brief correspondence, and I hate hearing bad things about her.
But, you know, the magic of not going to Althouse means you're not constantly thrust into these morality plays.
a) You know there's going to be conflict.
b) You know the hostess' primary interest vis a vis any conflict is its entertainment value.
What'd it take—maybe half-a-day?—for Evan and Tim to repair a wound that had festered for years?
Why, it's almost as if someone thrives on drama rather than facilitating communication and the free exchange of ideas.
I don't know, maybe stop hanging around the toxic waste dump and you won't have to wonder why these tumors keep popping up.
What blake said.
Post a Comment