Skip to content

Month: June 2001

(Untitled)

A two-headed crocodile has been born at Samut Prakarn Crocodile Farm on the outskirts of Bangkok. I’ll be going to Thailand in a week so I can verify if this is just a case of the magic of superglue. ;)

(Untitled)

Alan Turing is finally being honoured for his work, with a statue in Manchester. There’s an interesting follow-up mail from Mike O’Dell there, too: “the notes go on at length about the need for subroutines, subroutine libraries for common functions, and he even invented debugging and the concept of a debugger program. he also described what we today called a relocating assembler and linker – inventing the whole notion of “relocation” as an “obvious” aside.”

ALAN TURING, the national hero who broke the Nazi’s enigma code and is credited with turning the tide of the World War Two, is to be honoured with a life-size statute.

The bronze monument, which will be unveiled today, comes almost 50 years after the brilliant scientist was driven to suicide by persecution over his homosexuality. Five years after its inception, the pounds 20,000 sculpture of Turing sitting on a bench holding an apple will be displayed in Manchester’s Sackville Park in the city centre.

The mathematical genius became a national hero after his involvement in World War Two, he also helped invent the inaugural computer, at Manchester University, but was persecuted and prosecuted for his homosexuality. He committed suicide in 1954 by eating a poisoned apple.

Many believe Turing has never been recognised properly for his outstanding contribution to science. But Glyn Hughes, the statue’s creator, is confident that Turing has finally earned his rightful place in the history books. Hughes, from Adlington near Chorley, said: “It’s stunningly realistic. I’m sure it will go a dirty black over time, but it looks wonderful today.”

GRAPHIC: Glyn Hughes’ sculpture of the wartime hero, Alan Turing, will
be unveiled in Manchester today Paul Burrows

Via: David Farber (spam-protected)
Subject: Re: IP: Statue of a computer scientist
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 22:01:00 -0400
From: “Mike O’Dell” (spam-protected)

many years ago, the Journal of the British Computer Society published a collection of Turing’s papers and notes along with some history-of-science analysis.

what was truly stunning was that Turning not only invented the general purpose computer as we now understand it, but he also invented *programming* and even *software engineering* as we now understand it. the notes go on at length about the need for subroutines, subroutine libraries for common functions, and he even invented debugging and the concept of a debugger program. he also described what we today called a relocating assembler and linker – inventing the whole notion of “relocation” as an “obvious” aside.

he had the design for a complete computer almost done, and he was fighting for resources to build it, but caught up in his other problems it fell to others to build what was probably a lesser machine.

I hope all the BCS stuff got collected and republished somewhere, and if someone knows where I’d love to know as I haven’t been able to find it.

Reading those notes makes it abundantly clear that there’s very little in modern computing that Alan Turing didn’t invent or at least fortell.

His loss was an incalculable tragedy.

-mo

(Untitled)

The hazards of sweary parrots. “Everything was going OK until the word ‘arse’ was blurted out from the cupboard.” Isn’t that always the way?

Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2001 09:02:07 -0700
From: (spam-protected) (glen mccready)
To: (spam-protected)
Subject: Polly want a court-marshal?

Forwarded-by: William Knowles (spam-protected)

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0,,2-2001211806,00.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/et?ac=004782403739693&pg=/et/01/6/22/nparo22.html

BY ALAN HAMILTON FRIDAY JUNE 22 2001

ADMIRAL Sir Alan West, Commander-in-Chief Fleet, was addressing fellow officers in the wardroom of the frigate HMS Lancaster during a tour of the Gulf when a high-pitched voice from a side room cupboard shouted “Arse”.

Mildly perturbed but with steely resolve, the admiral continued with his briefing. “Bollocks”, said the voice.

Further choice epithets not unfamiliar below decks followed without regard for the fact that serious top brass could hear them. “Slag”, said the voice.

It could have been worse. Sunny, the 18-month-old African grey parrot who is employed as the Lancasters mascot and who usually lives in a cage in the wardroom, has an extensive repertoire.

She can quote the words of Sir Michael Caine, “Zulus, thousands of ’em”, whistle the theme tune from Steve McQueens The Great Escape, and remark in the manner of a macho Australian, “Show us your growler”.

The Lancasters officers had thought Sunny should stay out of sight during the admirals visit, but the voice refused to be silenced. “F off”, it said.

One of the Lancasters ratings said: Everything was going OK until the word ‘arse’ was blurted out from the cupboard. The Commander-in-Chief looked a little stunned at first, but fortunately he just carried on as normal. God knows what he was thinking.

The crew had taught Sunny her bad habits, another rating said: Now she shouts ‘arse’ and ‘bollocks’ every other minute.

In future, if senior officers come aboard, Sunny will be banished from the wardroom, as she can no longer be trusted to observe naval discipline.

When she returns to Portsmouth next month at the end of the type 23 frigates six-month tour, she needs to mind her As and Bs or she might find herself an ex-parrot.

(Untitled)

A message from David Prior quotes the FCC’s Michael Powell, stating that “the amount of money BT spent on a 3G licence, plus that which will be spent on development and roll-out, could have funded (fibre-to-the-home) deployment to 95%+ of households in the UK.” Sickening.

(Untitled)

Toby Young on being interviewed by Joan Bakewell about porn. “It was like being interviewed about pornography by my Mum“. Pretty funny, in an excruciating way.

Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 15:47:22 -0000
From: “Martin Adamson” (spam-protected)
To: (spam-protected)
Subject: Not fortean, but pretty funny

From The Spectator, 23 June 2001

Mum’s the word

Toby Young

Gore Vidal said there are two things in life you should never turn down: the opportunity to have sex and the chance to appear on
television. Consequently, when a researcher from the Beeb called and asked whether I’d like to be interviewed by Joan Bakewell for her forthcoming series, I immediately said yes. Apart from everything else, it would give me a chance to meet the thinking man’s crumpet in the flesh. It was only later, when I had time for reflection, that I thought this might have been a bit rash. You see, the subject she wanted to talk to me about was pornography.

I wrote about my interest in porn for The Spectator not long ago but Boris thought the article was ‘a bit racy’ for Speccie readers. It was about the trauma of having to part with my collection of X-rated videos when I moved back to London from New York last year. To be fair to Boris, he told me later that he thought he’d made the wrong decision but by that time it was too late — I’d already flogged the piece to GQ. (If anyone would like to see it, you can contact me at (spam-protected) and I’ll email you a copy.) Anyway, this article was read by one of Joan Bakewell’s minions and that’s why I got the call.

I realised I’d made a terrible mistake when the researcher rang back and asked if I’d be prepared to play Joan Bakewell one of my ‘favourite tapes’ on camera. Certainly not, I told him. In any case, I’d left all my tapes in New York. Nevertheless, any hopes I had of passing myself as a disinterested journalist were dashed. Clearly, I was being interviewed in my capacity as a ‘user’, not an impartial observer. I suddenly got paranoid about how they were going to bill me when my bald head first appeared on screen. ‘Toby Young, pornography addict’? ‘Toby Young, compulsive masturbator’? ‘Toby “Wanker” Young’? Unfortunately, it was too late to back out now.

‘So, Toby,’ Bakewell began, when the cameras started rolling, ‘when did you first develop your lifelong passion for pornography?’

I was stymied. My plan had been to appear as smooth and debonair as possible in the hope of seeming completely unembarrassed. It was being filmed at my bedsit in Shepherd’s Bush and I had a copy of Philip Larkin’s letters at my feet, ready to flick to his dispatch to Robert Conquest in which he talks about his visit to a Soho sex shop. ‘You see, Joan. Plenty of respectable people like porn.’ However, I immediately flushed crimson.

‘Er, well, er, I’m not sure, er . . . .’

‘I have to say, Toby, I just can’t see the point of it,’ Bakewell continued. ‘To me, it’s just like watching little bits of gristle. Why d’you find it so . . . compelling?’

As I struggled to answer this, I could see the cameraman darting about in front of me, getting the close-ups he’d been instructed to get by the director: quivering lower lip, shaking hands, rapidly blinking eyes. This was turning into a nightmare.

‘C-c-c-could I please have a glass of water?’ I stammered. ‘My mouth’s suddenly gone dry.’

The whole experience was like being interviewed about pornography by my Mum. Indeed, Joan Bakewell was actually a contemporary of my mother’s at Cambridge. It wasn’t her intention to embarrass me — she seemed genuinely puzzled by what an obviously intelligent chap like me saw in this filth — but I felt exactly like I did when my Mum discovered a pile of Playboys under my bed when I was aged 14.

The low point came during a discussion about who pornography is for.

Joan: ‘I gather from talking to pornographers that these films are
very popular with modern couples. Apparently, after they’ve put the kids to bed, they open a bottle of Chardonnay, sit down on the sofa and watch one of these tapes together.’

Me: ‘That’s all bullshit, Joan. The fact is, the main market for porn
is sad, lonely, loveless men, men who can’t get women.’

Joan: ‘Is that you, Toby?’

Me (Spluttering): ‘Er, no, no, of course not. I mean, not any more. I’m about to get married. My interest in pornography was just a phase.’

Joan: ‘A phase? Come on.’

At this point, the cameraman swivelled round to get a close-up of my television and the videotapes scattered in front of it on the floor, before swinging back to get a shot of me sitting on my sofa looking shifty.

Me: ‘No, really.’ (Pause.) ‘A 20-year phase.’

After this ordeal, I can say with some confidence that there is an exception to Gore Vidal’s rule. Have as much sex as you like and appear on television as often as you can, but for God’s sake don’t agree to talk about anything of a sexual nature on television, particularly with someone who reminds you of your Mum. Sorry, Joan. But it’s difficult to appear like a thinking man when you’re talking about crumpet.

(Untitled)

One for Tom — “I Am the Very Model of a Modern Libertarian“. FoRKposted by Bill Humphries.

I Am the Very Model of a Modern Libertarian

by Kim Plofker

[With apologies to Gilbert and Sullivan, and also to one Lollius. Note: In order to avoid the infringement of individual rights by imposing totalitarian ideals of harmony, the soloist and choristers may sing each in his or her own tempo, tune, and key.]

I am the very model of a modern Libertarian:
I teem with glowing notions for proposals millenarian,
I’ve nothing but contempt for ideologies collectivist
(My own ideas of social good tend more toward the Objectivist).
You see, I’ve just discovered, by my intellectual bravery,
That civic obligations are all tantamount to slavery;
And thus that ancient pastime, viz., complaining of taxation,
Assumes the glorious aspect of a war for liberation!


You really must admit it’s a delightful revelation:
To bitch about your taxes is to fight for liberation!

I bolster up my claims with lucubrations rather risible
About the Founding Fathers and the market’s hand invisible;
In fact, my slight acquaintance with the fountainhead Pierian
Makes me the very model of a modern Libertarian!


His very slight acquaintance with the fountainhead Pierian
Makes him the very model of a modern Libertarian!

All “public wealth” is robbery, we never will accede to it;
You have no rights in anything if you can’t show your deed to it.
(But don’t fear repossession by our Amerind minority:
Those treaties aren’t valid — Uncle Sam had no authority!)
We realize whales and wolves and moose find wilderness quite vital,
And we’ll give back their habitats — if they can prove their title.
But people like unspoiled lands (we too will say “hooray” for them),
So we have faith that someone else will freely choose to pay for them.


Yes, when the parks are auctioned it will be a lucky day for them —
We’re confident that someone else will freely choose to pay for them!

We’ll guard the health of nature by self-interest most astute:
Since pollution is destructive, no one ever will pollute.
Thus factories will safeguard our communities riparian —
I am the very model of a modern Libertarian!


Yes, factories will safeguard our communities riparian,
He is the very model of a modern Libertarian!

In short, when I can tell why individual consumers
Know best who should approve their drugs and who should treat their
tumors;
Why civilized existence in its intricate confusion
Will be simple and straightforward, absent government intrusion;
Why markets cannot err within the system I’ve described,
Why poor folk won’t be bullied and why rich folk won’t be bribed,
And why all vast inequities of power and position
Will vanish when I wave my wand and utter “COMPETITION!” —



He’s so much more exciting than a common politician,
Inequities will vanish when he hollers “Competition!”

— And why my lofty rhetoric and arguments meticulous
Inspire shouts of laughter and the hearty cry, “Ridiculous!”,
And why my social theories all seem so pre-Sumerian —
I’ll be the very model of a modern Libertarian!



His novel social theories all seem so pre-Sumerian —
He is the very model of a modern Libertarian!

(Untitled)

Some interesting recollections about high-power radio transmissions causing toasters to sing and the like.

Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 09:21:51 -0000
From: (spam-protected)
To: (spam-protected)
Subject: Singing Toasters – Just for Starters!

Back in the middle 1930s, Cincinnati’s clear channel radio station WLW broadcast at hi-power – 500,000 watts, ten times today’s standard – and measured its DAYTIME audience to include Hawaii and Scotland. (Mrs. Simpson, the future Duchess of Windsor, listened for a little touch of home and sent fan mail.)

People who then lived around WLW’s Mason, Ohio, transmitter received WLW programs over electric toasters, light bulbs, vacuum sweepers, electric AND gas stoves, clocks, COAL (!) furnaces, water and gas pipes and right up out of kitchen and bathroom drains! (Shades of Stephen King’s IT!) One woman – personally known to me three decades later – listened to WLW out of the kitchen drain all day, but the signals always stopped just before her husband came home from work. He merely assumed that his young wife was going nuts, but the real explanation was that WLW changed its directional antenna array at night.

During World War Two the transmitter was retuned to shortwave and became known as WLWO (WLW Overseas), broadcasting programs especially to Nazi-occupied Europe. After the War it became the anchor transmitter for Voice of America broadcasts to the Iron Curtain countries.

George Wagner (spam-protected) (spam-protected)

— In (spam-protected) (spam-protected) wrote:

A year or more ago during a discussion of odd EMF effects, etc , I mention that as a teen I remembered that one Summer my family rented an isolated camp. That camp had an old style toaster in it and on quiet nights you could clearly hear a local radio station from the toaster.How ??? beats me ! Resonating wires sounds good but I think it’s an oversimplification.

Puca

(Untitled)

Incredible — Colombia Pictures fabricated a fake film critic, to provide ad-copy-on-demand.

Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 14:24:40 +0100
From: “Tim Chapman” (spam-protected)
To: forteana (spam-protected)
Subject: Fake film critic

http://film.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/Exclusive/0,4029,501215,00.html

Columbia critic exposed as a fake

Sara Gaines Monday June 4, 2001

A critic who has given ringing endorsements to a string of Colombia Pictures films has been exposed as a fake. Newsweek magazine discovered the gushing “critic” David Manning was created by the studio’s advertising department to boost campaigns for a host of new releases. The fake critic’s relentlessly positive quotes were included in advertising spiel for at least four films and the studio has apparently been happily churning out rave reviews in his name since last July. The glowing quotes attributed to Manning included tributes for A Knight’s Tale in which Australian actor Heath Ledger was praised as “this year’s hottest new star!” and for the Rob Schneider comedy The Animal which was hailed as “another winner!” Other endorsements were used in advertising copy for Hollow Man and Vertical Limit. Susan Tick, a spokeswoman for Columbia’s parent company, Sony Pictures Entertainment, admitted to Newsweek the reviews were “an incredibly foolish decision.” The company has now withdrawn adverts which contain the fabricated quotes although some newspapers had already carried them over the weekend. In the adverts Manning is named as film critic for The Ridgefield Press, a family-owned weekly in a small Connecticut town.


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: (spam-protected)

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

(Untitled)

Signature FoRK Debate Moves — a list of cut-out-and-keep debating tactics for mailing lists, featuring such tried-and-trusted feints and lunges as the Old Post Resurrection Embarrassment, The Link Slam (my favourite), and the truly beautiful to behold Tom Whore.

Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 04:06:49 -0500
From: Jeff Bone (spam-protected)
To: (spam-protected)
Subject: Signature FoRK Debate Moves

(In memory of CobraBoy… Humor Ark Ark?)

So much as I hate to say it, FoRK is pretty analogous to the WWF in many ways. As such, it too has its signature moves. In deconstructing the recent rambles and pondering the Debate-O-Matic ideas that have been tossed about, it occurred to me that it might be worthwhile to document some of those signature moves. Here’s a rough cut. (Before anybody starts yelling, let me acknowledge that I indulge in almost all if not every one of these myself on a regular basis. This isn’t (hypo)criticism, it’s reflection.)

The Character Assassination

The Character Assassination is a classic maneuver with a fairly self-explanatory name. Rather than attacking the point of argument itself, the attacker seeks to undermine the defendant his/herself. This is done in a variety of ways, yielding variations that are each themselves worthy of study. The general character assassination attack can take two modes: direct and indirect. In the direct attack, the attacker draws directly from the surrounding debate context in order to build material — relevant or not — which is positioned to undermine the defendant’s credibility, and therefore weaken their position. In the indirect attack, the attacker uses context outside of the debate itself to executive the move.

The Stereotype Assassination

The Stereotype Assassination is a variation on the Character Assassination. In it, the attacker seeks to draw parallels — real or otherwise — between the defendant’s position and a tendency to unthinkingly buy into stereotypes. Because we all “know” that stereotypes are over generalizations, narrow-minded, and generally “wrong” the attacker is able to undermine the defendant’s credibility and therefore their position without addressing specific issues at all. The stereotype maneuver is ironic in nature; the attacker is usually utilizing unfounded generalization from the defendant’s actual argument in order to paint the defendant as engaging in stereotyped thinking.

The Category Assassination

The Category Assassination is in many respects the ironic complement of the Stereotype Assassination. In this move, the attacker builds the perception in the audience’s mind that the defendant belongs to some particular category, and then makes the assertion that the category in question has some particular stereotyped mindset / behavior / what have you; by having such behavior, the attacker asserts, the defendant cannot possibly have a position of merit -wrt- the current debate.

The Context Stomp

The Context Stomp is a cheap but effective maneuver. In it, the attacker intentionally misrepresents something the defendant asserted, taking a particular point out of context and flaying the hell out of it. Doing so may or may not detract from the defendant’s position, but it certainly distracts. The defendant is put on the defensive, and must clean up the situation before proceeding to prosecute his or her point.

The Level Lunge

The Level Lunge is another distraction maneuver. The attacker seeks to gain points by plummeting down the metalevel ladder; first, the meta-argument is attacked, and then the meta-meta-argument, and so on. This is a good maneuver to engage when the attacker is on the outs, losing the fight, as it can force a stalemate. (A successful Level Lunge resulting in a stalemate is referred to a Stack Overflow Termination.)

The Slight-Of-Hand Strawman

In the Slight-Of-Hand Strawman, the attacker directly engages the defendant’s arguments, but during the process subtly shifts the point. After doing this long enough, the attacker has constructed a weak strawman which is quickly knocked down for the kill. The SOHS is widely regarded as a cheap maneuver not worthy of FoRK. In past lives though not on FoRK, Gojomo has been known to be a skillful master of this maneuver.

The Zecious Zero

In the Zecious Zero, the attacker tediously constructs an apparently logical framework, states that it is formally correct and any disagreement must therefore be merely a definitional / semantic matter, and vigorously defends the formal framework. It should be noted that in most cases the framework constructed is “zecious” in the extreme; while having the appearance of a very detailed formal framework, it is usually internally inconsistent. Only the complexity of the framework hides the inconsistency. (Kudos to Gordon Mohr for coining the term “zecious.”)

The Extrapolation Explosion

The Extrapolation Explosion is a combo Context Stomp / SOHS special. In it, the attacker puts together multiple iterative context stomps and SOHSes in one post, extrapolating from the current debate, until the defendant’s argument is so grossly distorted that it cannot maintain its integrity. This move is extremely hard to defend against; in this regard, it resembles the Level Lunge in that attempting to counter usually results in Stack Overflow Termination.

The Insinuendo

The Insinuendo is not an attack per se, rather a feint. It is a mild and subtle CA move which is not intended to score but rather to disorient the defendant and plant the seeds of doubt in the minds of the audience. When executed correctly, it can be very effective; however, FoRK isn’t a particularly subtle place, so we don’t even see this one attempted very often.

The Jane-You-Ignorant-Slut

The JYIS is an Insinuendo without the subtlety. It is almost entirely ineffective in either disorienting the defendant or in seeding doubt among the audience, but it does have one beneficial effect. When executed well, it demonstrates the attacker’s superb sense of humor and comedic timing, and therefore scores points *for* the attacker without actually taking them away from the defendant. FoRK tends to see JYIS at the tail end of threads collapsing into rhetorical holes, which is unfortunate; it’s a beautiful maneuver, but worthless in such a situation.

The Mortar Lob

The Mortar Lob is the Hail Mary of our moves. It involves drastically changing the topic mid-thread, making an extreme shift towards some position entirely unrelated, and firing away. It is usually a last ditch effort employed as a defensive conversion maneuver when one is on the way out. The Mortar Lob almost never works, but if you don’t try it, you’re a pussy.

The Loaded Word Gambit

In this move, the attacker loads the argument up with words which carry significant emotional baggage and implication. By appealing to the knee-jerk interpretations of these words, the attacker seeks to gain the advantage. The Loaded Word Gambit is almost never effective, and often results in the Semantic-Spiral-Of-Death.

The Semantic Death Spiral

This maneuver is often used in either of two contexts. It is often engaged when both positions are rhetorically strong, or when the rhetorical frameworks employed cannot be meshed at all. It’s an endless recursion of definitional arguments, with each combatant seeking to co-opt the other’s argument by defining away any disagreement. The Faith Thread is a good recent example of a tag team SDS bout.

The Curse and Recurse

The Curse and Recurse is a disorienting attack in which the attacker gets all wiggy to throw the defendant off, pops the stack, then circles back around to resume the same attack sequence that didn’t work the first time around. This can go on forever unless it falls into some terminal sequence.

The Old Post Resurrection Embarrassment

In this attack, the attacker diligently — perhaps through a significant act of e-mail archaeology — seeks to undermine the opponent’s position. This attack can take a variety of forms. It is often used to illustrate some (potentially irrelevant) inconsistency between the defendant’s current position and some position adopted in a previous bout. It can also be used, as by Greg Bolcer recently, to illustrate the fundamental incorrectness of the defendant’s position by referring to a previous post made by somebody else. When deployed as the latter, this move is also known as The FoRK Historical Stupidity Attack. There is no effective defense against the Old Post Resurrection Nightmare, though the defendant may sometimes attempt the Teflon Don in retaliation.

The Drunken Master

The Drunken Master is a move intended to completely imbalance the attacker. It is often employed after a brief hiatus during which the attacker engages in some late night substance abuse; the attacker then blathers at top volume until the defendant is totally unbalanced, at which point the attacker attempts to close in for the kill. (And usually falls on his/her face in the process.) The Drunken Master always feels good at the time, but is usually regretted the next day.

The Pedantic Nightmare

The Pedantic Nightmare is the complement of the Semantic Death Spiral. In it, the argument is focused on its formal structure, without regard to semantics. The attacker seeks to use endlessly tedious formal reasoning in order to illustrate the inconsistency of the defendant. It is usually ineffective both through the attacker’s failure to prosecute it properly and the defendant’s unwillingness to let it happen.

The Dennis Miller

Also known as The Reference Roundhouse. In this move, the attacker attempts to co-opt credibility by dazzling the defendant and the audience with a barrage of not particularly relevant references, preferably obscure, usually nonauthoritative. The theory is that if the attacker has such a vast array of trivial knowledge at their disposal, surely they are therefore correct in their assertions. (I know, it doesn’t make sense, but that doesn’t stop us from trying it from time to time.) The Dennis Miller is often coupled with the Teflon Don when things go awry, which is pretty funny when you think about it. The Dennis Miller can be effective in the right context, and is almost always fun to watch.

The Vocab Blitz

The Vocab Blitz is another credibility co-opt maneuver intended to add punch to a particular attack. The Vocab Blitz involves maximizing the syllabic length of any and every possible word in a particular parry in order to demonstrate the attacker’s intelligence. Clearly, such a genius much be infallible. (Or so the thinking goes.) The Vocab Blitz is cheap and meaningless.

The Link Slam

The Link Slam is an attempt to shore up an attack by over reference. The theory is that clearly the attacker has researched the issue much more thoroughly than the defendant. Whether this is believed or not, this can be effective; it often sends the defendant on a fact chase, therefore distracting them enough for the attacker to make a finishing move.

The Psuedofact Slam

The Psuedofact Slam is like the Link Slam, but without the links. In this move, the attacker shores up their position with a seemingly limitless array of very specific sounding and potentially believable supporting “facts.” These “facts” need not and often do not have any factual basis whatsoever; the attacker need not even do a Google beforehand, as no attribution or support is provided. Only a diligent defender can effectively parry a Psuedofact Slam.

The SYGIGH

Also known as The Cartman, the Screw-You-Guys-Im-Going-Home is a defensive measure of last resort, effectively ending the bout without a victory condition. Pretty clear from its name what it consists of, the SYGIGH was most recently effectively employed by our own Strata in a debate with Yours Truly. The SYGIGH almost always results in a rematch, once the party who employs it decides a rematch is needed.

The False-Falling-On-Ones-Sword

This maneuver consists of the attacker feigning a conciliatory or self deprecating position, in an attempt to draw the attacker in and put them off guard. It is usually immediately followed up by some combo of the Slams, or even — particularly effectively — an Old Post Resurrection Embarrassment.

The Overpost Armageddon

The Overpost Armageddon is a massive blitz of sequential follow-up e-mails, each of which typically tears a single previous post apart line by line, employing various attacks. The goal of the Overpost Armageddon is to completely overwhelm the defendant, making it literally impossible for them to counter each attack. The author is periodically the reigning master of this particular maneuver, though in his case this is believed to be the result of some neuropsychological disorder such as TLE- or OCD-induced hypergraphia. The problem with this maneuver is that it usually leaves everyone involved — including the attacker — exhausted for days.

The Teflon Don

This is a particularly obnoxious defensive maneuver in which one eliminates all possibility of further damage simply by claiming that the positions taken, rhetorical style employed, formal structure, definitional correctness, or behavior in any way represent one’s own character, beliefs, etc. The Teflon Don is a terminal move, which cannot be countered, though it should be recognized for what it is: the king of all cop-outs.

The Consistency Spasm

The Consistency Spasm is a disorienting attack in which the attacker alternates between two obviously inconsistent positions in order to find maximum advantage from which to press further attacks. It’s not a pretty sight. Only the most steadfast defendant will hang in there instead of simply leaving the ring in disgust.

The Circular Thrash

The Circular Thrash employs single level circular “logic” in order to support the attacker’s position. It’s impossible to counter if undetected, but is a risky proposition: upon discovering a Circular Thrash, the defendant needs to merely cry out “Shenanigans!” in order to call the match and declare victory. If this is done, the attacker who attempted the Circular Thrash is usually surprised to find themselves standing alone in the center of the ring, calling out “Hey! I wasn’t done yet!”

The Running-To-The-Edges

The Running-To-The-Edges is a particularly sophisticated attack derived from both the Extrapolation Explosion and the Level Lunge. In it, the attacker immediately level jumps not with respect to the meta-argument level but rather to the maturity-of-argument level. In doing so, the attacker takes the defendant’s nascent and ill-defined condition and fires a barrage of edge cases at it which appear to contradict it. The conceit is that this invalidates the defendant’s admittedly general argument, by implying that the edge cases cannot be reconciled with the defendant’s position. Russell recently introduced this maneuver to FoRK, where it has enjoyed immediate popularity.

The TrapperKeeper

Named for the South Park terminator spoof episode, The TrapperKeeper is the most beautiful, elegant, and sought after of moves. In it, the attacker baits the defendant with arguments or assertions that the defendant should conditionally agree with. If the bait is successful, if the defendant “touches” the attacker’s TrapperKeeper, sharp spikes shoot out to impale the defendant. Unfortunately, the TrapperKeeper has to this author’s knowledge never been effectively executed on FoRK.

The Tom Whore

The only eponymous move in our repertoire, The Tom Whore is a joy to behold when executed properly. In it, the attacker becomes simultaneously so artfully obscure / obtuse that no retaliation is possible. The immediate effect is that the defendant is left looking rather dazed while picking the Speedo wedgie out of their ass crack.

Whew. Anyone have any additions or edits?

Your faithful servant,

Lucifr

http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork