On Friday, November 1, 2019, 01:31:39 AM PDT, Zenaan Harkness <zen@freedbms.net> wrote:

On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 01:50:31AM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
> >> And I can conceive of no possible AP system "which cannot be turned
> >> against honest people".
>
>> Is it forgotten that...
>
>> - No one but a troll, random or intentional, will list innocent people.

>Some trolls stole the power to print unlimited fiats.

Not merely "trolls", but a collection of trolls called "government".

>In the theoretical AP system:

 > - The listing is anonymous.

 > - The funding is anonymous.

  >- The assassin/ collector of the funds is anonymous.

So what is your point?

>How could a sociopathic "unlimited fiats printer" troll, not love and
adore such a system?

I think you are implicitly assuming this "troll" somehow CONTROLS that system,  But you didn't explain how,  Or how he would stay in such a position of control,.

I notice that virtually EVERYTHING you say about AP is stilted, distorted, and ultimately unsupported and wrong,  I point that out, and yet you don't defend your claims, you merely make more of them.


>> - No assassin, but pure psycho or profiteer, will murder innocent people.


>Some mercs are pure profiteers, without consideration for the lives
they take.

In today's (non-AP) world, that's presumably correct, 

>The most successful assassins are like this.

>The most successful assassins, shall therefore be the most successful
at seizing the profits from AP.

"seizing the profits from AP"?   First, who said anything about "profits"?  Abd to the extent that these "successful assassins" do the work that the AP system has determined that the donors want to see done, what's wrong with that?

I could write a parody paragraph, saying that the corner grocery store "seizes all the profits" from people doing shopping for groceries,.

You didn't bother to explain why what you were describing was bad,

>> That leading AP implementations are likely to have
>> message boards, research wikis, etc that will
>> decry as no-go's any honest people listed.
>> That there is no point to such listings.

>The most successful assassins are not empathic rainbow embracing
flower girls, they are cold blooded, emotionless killers who get the
job done for the listed price, and stay anonymous.

The most-successful grocers are emotionless grocery-sellers who get the job done for the listed price, and stay unknown to most shoppers.

>The most successful hierarchy climbers sieze control of the fiat
printing,

Well, CURRENTLY let's say that's the way things are,  In the current, NON-AP world.   But yet again, you don't bother to explain why you think that kind of situation would continue in the AP-active world.  

See, you have a pattern:   In an apparent mis-guided attempt to criticize AP, you keep citing examples from the pre-AP world, a "list of horribles", and somehow think that reciting them will rub off on the AP idea.    I can easily see through that, and I think other people can, too,  

>> at any arbitrary sociopathic cost, and therefore need by

the only "funder/ gambler" (anonymous) for the sole listing they list
themselves (also anonymously).

>Again, for a fiat printing troll, what's not to love?

And again, you postulate this hypothetical 'troll', and somehow you automatically place him in a position of control over that system.  You don't explain why he would get there, when the AP system (inherently not requiring the existence of a monopoly) would be virtually impossible to monopolize and control.   You don't explain why he would stay there, either.

Effectively, it sounds like you believe you can simply concoct a scenario, filled by fictional people, in fictional positions, doing fictional things,  declare them 'bad', and use that to assert somehow that 'AP is bad'.    How so?


>> And that in any society, whether today without AP,
> or tomorrow with AP, both of those cases are so
> rare as to be background noise.

>Assumption.
>alse assumption.
>Sociopaths are sociopathic for a reason (they're sociopathic, and in
this nature stop at nothing to achieve their power and fiat
printing).

What's your point?  Who, exactly, will be able to accomplish those FICTIONAL acts you are asserting?  

> Just as "News at 11:
> A Gun Murder" is but noise compared to most accidental
> and preventable deaths. (Stop watching the news, it is
> programming your brain to believe, and do, fake shit.)