Canned Combat: Outwrite Something on Craigslist Litfo

http://sfbay.craigslist.org/forums/?forumID=27

Think you're the shit? Think every writing forum is there for you to pwn? Try litfo. If the prize winners and professors leave you alone, the trolls won't. How thick is your skin? Can you perform under pressure? Why won't you do an ITB comp (in the box--stream of consciousness and little/no editing)? Are you chicken? Can't take the pressure of time stamps? Need a shitty guitar and a bunch of over-caffeinated loners who are too nervous to jeer, to feel at the top of your game? If you can get over your fear, you'll learn something. Otherwise, you can chicken out like poemblaze. That guy was still talking shit on twitter, days after the 'incident' (oh my God, some criticism! Indiana Jones! Help! I opened my eyes & am melting!). Step up your game or STFU. It's time for shitty online poetry to move aside and quit breathin' our air.

If you can write, you know it's true. Even if you depend on the shitty writers for your readership.

Subscribe in a reader

Canned Jihad: Quick Summary of Yesterday's Post

Exhibit A) http://toylit.blogspot.com/2010/04/bread-and-circuses-found-poem-on.html I always send out messages to those whose words I used to craft the day's found poem on twitter. Well, after 'editing' Bread and Circuses (I know it sux, but I'm just the editor--blame Twitter!) I got this precious tweet from fhlug88 "@toylitpaper I in no way endorse this poem. Please take my name off that 3:49 PM Apr 8th via Echofon in reply to toylitpaper" Like I give a shit what he endorses. I said as much.

Exhibit B) After another moment's thought, I realized I could just edit his words. I wanted to piss him off, so I retweeted his message to read:
"@toylitpaper I endorse this poem. Please my name http://goo.gl/fb/vibKg "

The game is simple: identify someone with no sense of humor--political foe, dullard--and play editor. Disseminate the newly edited edition as widely as possible. This technique amuses friends and irritates enemies.

Hey, it's not my fault discourse has turned into a shouting match. Have fun with it or go crazy by it.

Subscribe in a reader

Canned Jihad: The BIG TIME [Ongoing]

In case you were not on Twitter today (or ever, but then you're not as helpful), I wanted to share some thoughts on fucking with 'conservative' command, control, and communication capabilities. Since Serviletives (You heard that one here first folks) are autocratic in nature, their edge comes from message hegemony and maximum mass discipline--as per Mosca. Since initiative is important for media narrative, the more one thwarts their communication efforts, the greater our (that is, non-fascists of all political flavors) comparative advantage becomes. This is because the fascists depend on their closed-system (crack yer logic books if you don't know what I mean)(hierarchical authority, no legitimate 'grassroots' discourse impacting policy) to maximize party discipline (ie debate and information is poison to them). The opposition is open-system. Take advantage!

Twitter is the fastest means of mass-distributing information on the web (maybe there are others, but Twitter seems to be the most popular). Delaying the enemy's ability to disseminate information allows the opposition additional time to pre-empt or counterattack. Narrative is a munition now! DON'T FORGET IT! With that in mind, consider the impact of delaying the hundreds of bullshit talking points that are brought up every week. Think of how much longer it will take the enemies of more freedom (don't believe in 'Freedom' that's just silly) to react if we denied them social networking sites?

So what's the tactic?

Exhibit A) http://toylit.blogspot.com/2010/04/bread-and-circuses-found-poem-on.html I always send out messages to those whose words I used to craft the day's found poem on twitter. Well, after 'editing' Bread and Circuses (I know it sux, but I'm just the editor--blame Twitter!) I got this precious tweet from fhlug88 "@toylitpaper I in no way endorse this poem. Please take my name off that 3:49 PM Apr 8th via Echofon in reply to toylitpaper" Like I give a shit what he endorses. I said as much.

Exhibit B) After another moment's thought, I realized I could just edit his words. I wanted to piss him off, so I retweeted his message to read:
"@toylitpaper I endorse this poem. Please my name http://goo.gl/fb/vibKg "

It still cracks me up to read it. To make it funnier, I decided to get everyone I could get to retweet MY message and the combination disseminated like 500 times the audience he was reaching. To pour salt in the wound, I declared that he had flipped his politics around 180. Not like anyone hears him when he protests (unless they actually click on his page). He wasn't much fun though--one of those creeps who calls into Glenn Beck or some stupid shit like that (I try to forget useless datapoints to save space for real info). But it would be more fun to fuck with someone with a real audience. Someone who's part of the fascist machinery. Since I've declared this jihad, I say we target the cancer in the media. We will bicker over which politicians to target and that is the classic weakness of insurgencies--infighting. So keep it to media personalities. I have no interest in intellectually engaging conserviletives anymore and instead, I just want to thwart them wherever possible.

So it's really simple, I'd like for you folks to post on this thread a list of targets. Since this is open source, you can go after whomever you'd like. If people disapprove of your target, they will simply not retweet your message. Since discipline makes for more effective fighting forces, I think we should try to come to a partial consensus. Once we've done that, just trawl through your favorite enemy's page and look for something 'editable' and play around. Maximum funny! Russian reversals and all that jazz. While I think moving words around a la mad libs is okay for 'found poems on twitter,' I think it would be more effective to just delete words until the new (preferred) meaning emerges. Omission might be dissembling, but I think it's safer than fabrication. Media fucks quote out of context all the time too. Why let them waltz into our turf without a fight? They know their world is dying. Don't let them take our world over (gird our nerdville).

I think that's it. I don't have time to even bother rereading this to edit (Correction, just did as of 8:19pm PST). I have to work on my poems for the day. But please, talk it over and start attacking at leisure.

BTW, I am going to make an exception to my anti-censorship rule. I will delete the posts of ideological foes. I won't do so in other threads, where literary merit is paramount, but this specific Jihad is political in nature and I will not aid the enemy.

Tally Ho!

Subscribe in a reader

CannedJihad: April 6, 2010. Phailure to Literacify: Part II

I put this on Toylit, but most of you don't read all the news that's shit, in print; so I'll post it here too.

So Scott Roeder was in the news again and I thought it was a good idea to post 'What Men Want' on all the knee-jerk blogs. It cracked me up that some read it as an anti-abortion poem almost as much as it did when people read it as a pro-abortion poem. It's astonishing that these functionally illiterate zombies actually maintain websites. If I was functionally illiterate, I'd do everything in my power to hide it.

Since I am the enemy of morons, I figured I'd post the exchange w/ an example with a classic case: Kevin Evans. You can reach him at: kebmebms@gmail.com and let him know what you think. Or you could just go and remind him what a chicken he is by posting unflattering comments on his site... for him to delete. Don't forget to save your comments first! And post them here. You may use this thread to write about the insanity of dealing with freaks who can write, but can't read. For me, in that regard, the internet is a kind of hell. Or just a reminder of how many zombies walk amongst us.

The last line is just too precious. I think you'll get a chortle from it.

Oops, forgot to add the website: http://moravings.blogspot.com/2010/04/scott-roeders-sentencing-todayheres.html

It's fuckin' hilarious that the guy spent more effort writing a response than he did to actually writing his post. Why do people who suck get so defensive about it? Just play a different game, dummy.

"Ah, intellectual cowardice to match intellectual weakness.

Here's a question: how do you reconcile that word with the STANZAS that precede it?

Answer? You don't. You are sub-literate.

This response is going on Toylit now as well as Combatwords. I will never understand why the sub-literates of the world feel such a burning desire to write.

Lol!

-KW

On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 12:44 PM, Kevin Evans wrote:

Mr. Wessington,

I'd have gladly posted your last note but you referred to a woman or women in general as sluts. I don't do hate language and I don't reduce whole groups of people to other, ugly ones. I don't allow hate speech on my blog. If censorship is for cowards, in your eyes, so be it. I'm happy to have anyone and everyone read my blog and reply but I don't and won't allow ugliness on it. I'm sure you have your rules. That is virtually my only one.

ke

On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 2:35 PM, Khakjaan Wessington wrote:

Khakjaan Wessington has left a new comment on your post "Scott Roeder's sentencing today:here's hoping":

Thanks for reading, but your close-reading skills need some work. I put some bait in there to help identify the less sophisticated readers. Looks like you took the hook, line and sinker.

Consider that you are so dogmatically positioned, that you are unwilling to see that the poem opposes both your reading and your response to it.

Also, censorship is for cowards, who lack faith in the power of their own words to rebut an opposing posit. Keep that in mind when you consider deleting this follow-up.

Publish this comment.

Reject this comment.

Moderate comments for this blog.

Posted by Khakjaan Wessington to Mo Rage at April 6, 2010 12:35 PM




--
http://moravings.blogspot.com
http://kcphotogblog.blogspot.com

And the thread itself:

5 comments:

Khakjaan Wessington said...

What Men Want
http://toylit.blogspot.com/2010/01/what-men-want-todays-news-poem-jan-29.html
"My honest belief was that if I didn't do something they would continue to die."
-Scott Roeder

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE60S4UB20100129

The ancient women, wise with feral ways,
Passed matrilineal traditions down
From ape to human—knowing men could slay,
With lust, their daughters. Deaths wore bridal gowns

Before connubial beds became their graves
So brewing remedies these mothers saved
All humankind. Resentful, men thought slaves
Were made of them. He mastered war and raved

Against his mother—burning her to ash.
Denounced as midwife: now we call her witch.
Their wives and daughters—mothers died—the clash
Of sexes won. Thus Woman, made a 'bitch,'

To breed and grieve perhaps before the next.
The men would prise the fruit, more sons, from wombs
That rarely lasted forty years. But text
Reflected changing norms. In time, this grooms

A kinder sort of man who seeks a peer—
If only theoretically. Rights,
If slowly, catch the rhetoric—so dear
To many—bringing new and awful blights.

I think I know this killer's thoughts, this guy
Who shot that Kansas doc. He felt betrayed
By fellow man: resolved to make him die
And eased his guilt with Bible quotes. Unswayed,

The jury found enough to lock him up.
A shame, because a woman now, receives
In joy or rage a life from carnal tup
That soon awaits abortionist's coarse sieves;

Because she knows she really wants what men
Desire. To lust and grow and kill and feel—
Not nothing—just flushing. She wants what men
Desire: to fuck and kill and never heal;

To harvest death for medicines and soups
Or trashed in plastic bags in cans on stoops.
http://toylit.blogspot.com
April 1, 2010 2:12 PM
PFL0W said...

I publish this last comment with some trepidation.

Actually, what I think women want--if I may be so bold as to conjecture--is to do what's right with their bodies, and for their child, man's interference be damned.

mr
April 1, 2010 7:25 PM
PFL0W said...

to think that women want "To lust and grow and kill and feel—Not nothing—just flushing. She wants what men
Desire: to fuck and kill and never heal;"

is pure bullshit.

If anyone feels, it's the woman.

This is so typically a man's assumption of what a woman wants.

Nonsense.

mr
April 1, 2010 7:27 PM
Khakjaan Wessington said...

Thanks for reading, but your close-reading skills need some work. I put some bait in there to help identify the less sophisticated readers. Looks like you took the hook, line and sinker.

Consider that you are so dogmatically positioned, that you are unwilling to see that the poem opposes both your reading and your response to it.

Also, censorship is for cowards, who lack faith in the power of their own words to rebut an opposing posit. Keep that in mind when you consider deleting this follow-up.
April 6, 2010 12:35 PM
PFL0W said...

a) I didn't censor this;

b) I censored you earlier because you spoke ugly and ill-meaning of women. Ugliness and hate speech is the only thing I will not/do not allow in repsonses.

As I wrote to you earlier: I'd have gladly posted your last note but you referred to a woman or women in general as sluts. I don't do hate language and I don't reduce whole groups of people to other, ugly ones. I don't allow hate speech on my blog. If censorship is for cowards, in your eyes, so be it. I'm happy to have anyone and everyone read my blog and reply but I don't and won't allow ugliness on it. I'm sure you have your rules. That is virtually my only one.

I'm not so dogmatic, as you say, in that I don't require that anyone else think as I do. If you have a different opinion, so be it. If it's different than mine on abortion, I'll tell you you're wrong and leave it at that.

Censorship can, in fact, be for cowards, as you say, but that's not why I censor. I only censor so ugliness isn't distributed freely, at least not here. I leave that for the Fox "News" Network and their followers.

You need to learn better English. You aren't clear, frequently, with your writing.

mr"

Subscribe in a reader

CannedJihad! Freedom of Speech Raid on Craigslist. April 2, 2010

First, craigslist killed the newspaper. Now that it has created a relative speech monopoly, it is increasingly inclined to censor. That which is not censored, they endorse. So craigslist supports nazis, penis pills, death threats, stalkers, but not poetry.

Fuck that. I say it's time to attack craigslist and show those assholes that it only takes 100 people (the number of regular readers of combatwords) to flatline it.

To prove my point, I don't want you to hit them with just any copypasta--it ought to be original copypasta. Something that violates no TOU by itself, but will incite the micro-censors of craigslist to flag your posts.

If craigslist has ever wronged you, consider how much cash this would cost them. Jim and Craig are worth dozens of millions each. To adjudicate flags, they have to do it by hand. They survive off the expectation that most people will self-police their own behavior. Ah, but they broke the 'social contract' they offered when they were busy killing off the newspapers (a community BBS of BS). So if fifty to one hundred dedicated people spend some time every day posting legitimate content in a manner the micro-censors will find objectionable, it will get their attention.

Hey, they killed the newspapers. Fair is fair, right? Discuss below.

Subscribe in a reader