03-21-2008, 02:18 AM
A social variation of Occam's Razor might be: "Given two or more interpretations of the facts, prefer the least sinister."
In the case of Chip White -- the least sinister interpretation is that, while legal, his branch of the industry exists on a fuzzy line because the models and actors, while adults, look young and the ambiguity may be harmful to society. Here it is not at all a case of sexual orientation but a case of the young appearance of the models involved. Male or female -- the line is just as fuzzy.
In the case of DesElms -- all that is known is that he is on record as having invested a large amount of his time and money in an attempt to pull a woman out of an abusive industry. The characterization that he spent X number of dollars on a hooker is just that -- a characterization intended to paint him in a certain light -- a characterization brought forth by those attempting to harrass him and by those who had an interest in attempting to annoy him. Whose business is it that he invested so much trying to help someone?
In the case of Bear's past involvement in schools now considered less-than-wonderful -- as far as I can tell, he's never been shy to explain just how he was involved in them.
But that's all neither here nor there. I don't have time to concern myself with other people's business too much ... I have my own interests to protect.
In the last year, I have stayed out of the DL world, and yet my name continues to come up on the DL boards. I can ignore it (and mostly have), or I can defend myself and my name (which I do from time to time).
Every time I come in and defend my name, some anonymous twit tries to intimidate me into silence. It won't work. Why won't it work?
Let's get pragmatic about it:
I'm almost 40. I have three teenage children (and others) I must support for some time to come. My good name is my trade. Every time some idiot puts that name in a Usenet subject line, and in the message pisses in the wind - he pisses on my trade, my value as an earner, et cetera. Neilist knows this -- this is why he is sure to put that name in the subject line -- it gets higher ranking on Google that way.
I could really care less anymore what the DL world does with its spare time. The majority of the DL world has shown me that they'd rather spend their time attacking one another and one another's private business than they would discussing DL issues.
But I do care about my good name. Every wage-earning member of society has a right to care about his good name. It's built into common law, it's built into legal documents ... it's as old as society itself.
So in simple terms -- the only way to get me to shut up is to shut up about me. A good way to get me to go away is for people to stop talking about me, and to stop feeding those who have no other desire than to smear my name across search engines.
It's not about ego -- it's about economics.
In the case of Chip White -- the least sinister interpretation is that, while legal, his branch of the industry exists on a fuzzy line because the models and actors, while adults, look young and the ambiguity may be harmful to society. Here it is not at all a case of sexual orientation but a case of the young appearance of the models involved. Male or female -- the line is just as fuzzy.
In the case of DesElms -- all that is known is that he is on record as having invested a large amount of his time and money in an attempt to pull a woman out of an abusive industry. The characterization that he spent X number of dollars on a hooker is just that -- a characterization intended to paint him in a certain light -- a characterization brought forth by those attempting to harrass him and by those who had an interest in attempting to annoy him. Whose business is it that he invested so much trying to help someone?
In the case of Bear's past involvement in schools now considered less-than-wonderful -- as far as I can tell, he's never been shy to explain just how he was involved in them.
But that's all neither here nor there. I don't have time to concern myself with other people's business too much ... I have my own interests to protect.
In the last year, I have stayed out of the DL world, and yet my name continues to come up on the DL boards. I can ignore it (and mostly have), or I can defend myself and my name (which I do from time to time).
Every time I come in and defend my name, some anonymous twit tries to intimidate me into silence. It won't work. Why won't it work?
Let's get pragmatic about it:
I'm almost 40. I have three teenage children (and others) I must support for some time to come. My good name is my trade. Every time some idiot puts that name in a Usenet subject line, and in the message pisses in the wind - he pisses on my trade, my value as an earner, et cetera. Neilist knows this -- this is why he is sure to put that name in the subject line -- it gets higher ranking on Google that way.
I could really care less anymore what the DL world does with its spare time. The majority of the DL world has shown me that they'd rather spend their time attacking one another and one another's private business than they would discussing DL issues.
But I do care about my good name. Every wage-earning member of society has a right to care about his good name. It's built into common law, it's built into legal documents ... it's as old as society itself.
So in simple terms -- the only way to get me to shut up is to shut up about me. A good way to get me to go away is for people to stop talking about me, and to stop feeding those who have no other desire than to smear my name across search engines.
It's not about ego -- it's about economics.
see how many "less sinister" explanations one can find? Helping others...no wait...it had to be a research or something...no wait...
