"Mind your Ps and Qs"

Nobody catches the ghay anymore, too much underpants gnomes

This letter is not intended to assuage your worst fears about Mr. Underpantgnome but will, in most cases, confirm them. In the text that follows, I don't intend to recount all of the damage caused by Underpantgnome's dictatorial exegeses but I do want to point out that Underpantgnome has allowed himself to become a spokesman for the same point of view shared by atrabilious snollygosters, nettlesome, amateurish headcases, and dastardly, malodorous varmints while masquerading as an outspoken radical bucking the system. As everyone knows, many of his credos are seriously flawed, frequently fail to meet minimal standards of logic, and, on balance, are violent. What you might not know, however, is that Underpantgnome is absolutely brutal. We all are, to some extent, but he sets the curve. He claims that we're supposed to shut up and smile when he says unruly, fastidious things. I, however, insist that that's a load of crud. Yes, petty, baleful casuists are the biggest threat to freedom the world has ever seen, but he keeps insisting that his decisions are based on reason. To me, there is something fundamentally wrong with that story. Maybe it's that if I had to choose between chopping onions and helping Underpantgnome sacrifice children on the twin altars of careerism and greed, I'd be in the kitchen in an instant. Although both alternatives make me cry, the deciding factor for me is that if my own experience has taught me anything, it's that Underpantgnome's arguments would be a lot more effective if they were at least accurate or intelligent, not just a load of bull for the sake of being controversial.

If you look back over some of my older letters, you'll see that I predicted that Underpantgnome would exhibit a deep disdain for all people who are not amoral wackos. And, as I predicted, he did. But you know, that was not a difficult prediction to make. Anyone who has bothered to learn even a little about Underpantgnome could have made the same prediction. I will never give up. I will never stop trying. And I will use every avenue possible to stop the Huns at the gate.

Far too many people tolerate Underpantgnome's causeries as long as they're presented in small, seemingly harmless doses. What these people fail to realize, however, is that I have a hard time trying to reason with people who remain calm when they see Underpantgnome shove the nation towards fogyism. When I first heard about his "compromises", I didn't know whether to laugh, because his endeavors are so homicidal, or cry, because I have a dream that my children will be able to live in a world filled with open spaces and beautiful wilderness—not in a dark, demonic world run by prissy, hotheaded astrologers. I was once asked, "Do indelicate beggars like Underpantgnome's followers actually have lives, or do they exist solely to assuage the hungers of Underpantgnome's subordinates with servings of fresh scapegoats?". I'm not quite sure how to answer such a question. The problem is that we can no longer afford to do nothing about Underpantgnome's oppressive perorations. Instead, we must strike while the iron is hot and invigorate the effort to reach solutions by increasing the scope of the inquiry rather than by narrowing or abandoning it.

Underpantgnome coins polysyllabic neologisms to make his epithets sound like they're actually important. In fact, his treatises are filled to the brim with words that have yet to appear in any accepted dictionary. The notion that he can be reformed into an upright and honorable person may be a pleasant and attractive thought. But people who believe that this can happen should ask it of Santa Claus, in whom they doubtless also believe.

Underpantgnome indubitably believes that character development is not a matter of "strength through adversity" but rather, "entitlement through victimization". What kind of Humpty-Dumpty world is he living in? The answer is a bit of a taboo subject but that won't stop me from telling you. You see, if Underpantgnome bites me I will unmistakably bite back.

Let's understand one fundamental fact: If it were true, as Underpantgnome claims, that he knows 100% of everything 100% of the time, then I wouldn't be saying that I stand by what I've written before, that I want my life to count. I want to be part of something significant and lasting. I want to raise issues, as opposed to guns or knives. At the risk of shocking you further I shall point out that Underpantgnome has been fairly successful in his efforts to set the wolf to mind the sheep. That just goes to show what can be done with a little greed, a complete lack of scruples, and the help of a bunch of sick peddlers of snake-oil remedies.

Tell me something: What in perdition does Underpantgnome think he's doing? In classic sophist fashion, I ask another question in reply: When Underpantgnome looks in the mirror in the morning, does he see more than the improvident face of an incomprehensible wimp? Let me give you a hint: It's possible that his bootlickers have decided, behind closed doors and in closed sessions, to jawbone aimlessly. However, I cannot speculate about that possibility here because I need to devote more space to a description of how Underpantgnome deeply believes that there should be publicly financed centers of metagrobolism. Meanwhile, back on Earth, the truth is very simple: If Underpantgnome truly wanted to be helpful, he wouldn't acquire power and use it to indoctrinate crass radicals. We should agree on definitions before saying anything further about Underpantgnome's blockish expositions. For starters, let's say that "mandarinism" is "that which makes Underpantgnome yearn to revive the ruinous excess of a bygone era to bounce and blow amidst the ruinous excess of the present era."

The present controversy demands honest dialogue, not crude attempts at demonization. To pretend otherwise is nothing but hypocrisy and unwillingness to face the more unpleasant realities of life. Even Underpantgnome's devotees are afraid that Underpantgnome will thrust all of us into scenarios rife with personal animosities and petty resentments faster than you can say "disproportionableness". I have seen their fear manifested over and over again and it is further evidence that Underpantgnome's latest manifesto, like all the ones that preceded it, is a consummate anthology of disastrously bad writing teeming with misquotations and inaccuracies, an odyssey of anecdotes that are occasionally entertaining but certainly not informative.

We must certainly view the realms of Maoism and terrorism not as two opposing poles but as two continua. Does that sound extremist? Is it too ill-bred for you? I'm sorry if it seems that way but that's life.

Underpantgnome had promised us liberty, equality, and fraternity. Instead, he gave us adversarialism, sesquipedalianism, and larrikinism. I suppose we should have seen that coming, especially since Underpantgnome's acolytes have been staggering around like punch-drunk fighters hit too many times—stunned, confused, betrayed, and trying desperately to rationalize Underpantgnome's headstrong excuses. It is clearly not a pretty sight. I challenge you to ponder this subject with the broadest vision possible.

Ardscoil Ris wrote: »

This letter is not intended to assuage your worst fears about Mr. Underpantgnome but will, in most cases, confirm them. In the text that follows, I don't intend to recount all of the damage caused by Underpantgnome's dictatorial exegeses but I do want to point out that Underpantgnome has allowed himself to become a spokesman for the same point of view shared by atrabilious snollygosters, nettlesome, amateurish headcases, and dastardly, malodorous varmints while masquerading as an outspoken radical bucking the system. As everyone knows, many of his credos are seriously flawed, frequently fail to meet minimal standards of logic, and, on balance, are violent. What you might not know, however, is that Underpantgnome is absolutely brutal. We all are, to some extent, but he sets the curve. He claims that we're supposed to shut up and smile when he says unruly, fastidious things. I, however, insist that that's a load of crud. Yes, petty, baleful casuists are the biggest threat to freedom the world has ever seen, but he keeps insisting that his decisions are based on reason. To me, there is something fundamentally wrong with that story. Maybe it's that if I had to choose between chopping onions and helping Underpantgnome sacrifice children on the twin altars of careerism and greed, I'd be in the kitchen in an instant. Although both alternatives make me cry, the deciding factor for me is that if my own experience has taught me anything, it's that Underpantgnome's arguments would be a lot more effective if they were at least accurate or intelligent, not just a load of bull for the sake of being controversial.

If you look back over some of my older letters, you'll see that I predicted that Underpantgnome would exhibit a deep disdain for all people who are not amoral wackos. And, as I predicted, he did. But you know, that was not a difficult prediction to make. Anyone who has bothered to learn even a little about Underpantgnome could have made the same prediction. I will never give up. I will never stop trying. And I will use every avenue possible to stop the Huns at the gate.

Far too many people tolerate Underpantgnome's causeries as long as they're presented in small, seemingly harmless doses. What these people fail to realize, however, is that I have a hard time trying to reason with people who remain calm when they see Underpantgnome shove the nation towards fogyism. When I first heard about his "compromises", I didn't know whether to laugh, because his endeavors are so homicidal, or cry, because I have a dream that my children will be able to live in a world filled with open spaces and beautiful wilderness—not in a dark, demonic world run by prissy, hotheaded astrologers. I was once asked, "Do indelicate beggars like Underpantgnome's followers actually have lives, or do they exist solely to assuage the hungers of Underpantgnome's subordinates with servings of fresh scapegoats?". I'm not quite sure how to answer such a question. The problem is that we can no longer afford to do nothing about Underpantgnome's oppressive perorations. Instead, we must strike while the iron is hot and invigorate the effort to reach solutions by increasing the scope of the inquiry rather than by narrowing or abandoning it.

Underpantgnome coins polysyllabic neologisms to make his epithets sound like they're actually important. In fact, his treatises are filled to the brim with words that have yet to appear in any accepted dictionary. The notion that he can be reformed into an upright and honorable person may be a pleasant and attractive thought. But people who believe that this can happen should ask it of Santa Claus, in whom they doubtless also believe.

Underpantgnome indubitably believes that character development is not a matter of "strength through adversity" but rather, "entitlement through victimization". What kind of Humpty-Dumpty world is he living in? The answer is a bit of a taboo subject but that won't stop me from telling you. You see, if Underpantgnome bites me I will unmistakably bite back.

Let's understand one fundamental fact: If it were true, as Underpantgnome claims, that he knows 100% of everything 100% of the time, then I wouldn't be saying that I stand by what I've written before, that I want my life to count. I want to be part of something significant and lasting. I want to raise issues, as opposed to guns or knives. At the risk of shocking you further I shall point out that Underpantgnome has been fairly successful in his efforts to set the wolf to mind the sheep. That just goes to show what can be done with a little greed, a complete lack of scruples, and the help of a bunch of sick peddlers of snake-oil remedies.

Tell me something: What in perdition does Underpantgnome think he's doing? In classic sophist fashion, I ask another question in reply: When Underpantgnome looks in the mirror in the morning, does he see more than the improvident face of an incomprehensible wimp? Let me give you a hint: It's possible that his bootlickers have decided, behind closed doors and in closed sessions, to jawbone aimlessly. However, I cannot speculate about that possibility here because I need to devote more space to a description of how Underpantgnome deeply believes that there should be publicly financed centers of metagrobolism. Meanwhile, back on Earth, the truth is very simple: If Underpantgnome truly wanted to be helpful, he wouldn't acquire power and use it to indoctrinate crass radicals. We should agree on definitions before saying anything further about Underpantgnome's blockish expositions. For starters, let's say that "mandarinism" is "that which makes Underpantgnome yearn to revive the ruinous excess of a bygone era to bounce and blow amidst the ruinous excess of the present era."

The present controversy demands honest dialogue, not crude attempts at demonization. To pretend otherwise is nothing but hypocrisy and unwillingness to face the more unpleasant realities of life. Even Underpantgnome's devotees are afraid that Underpantgnome will thrust all of us into scenarios rife with personal animosities and petty resentments faster than you can say "disproportionableness". I have seen their fear manifested over and over again and it is further evidence that Underpantgnome's latest manifesto, like all the ones that preceded it, is a consummate anthology of disastrously bad writing teeming with misquotations and inaccuracies, an odyssey of anecdotes that are occasionally entertaining but certainly not informative.

We must certainly view the realms of Maoism and terrorism not as two opposing poles but as two continua. Does that sound extremist? Is it too ill-bred for you? I'm sorry if it seems that way but that's life.

Underpantgnome had promised us liberty, equality, and fraternity. Instead, he gave us adversarialism, sesquipedalianism, and larrikinism. I suppose we should have seen that coming, especially since Underpantgnome's acolytes have been staggering around like punch-drunk fighters hit too many times—stunned, confused, betrayed, and trying desperately to rationalize Underpantgnome's headstrong excuses. It is clearly not a pretty sight. I challenge you to ponder this subject with the broadest vision possible.

tl;dr;bq

Ardscoil Ris wrote: »

I'm having great fun with this yolk:

http://www.pakin.org/complaint/

Legendary

I know. I wanted to see if anybody picked through it and challenged me on the issues raised in it. Could have had a laugh. :pac:

Believe me I couldn't be arsed writing all that.

Ardscoil Ris wrote: »

I'm having great fun with this yolk:

http://www.pakin.org/complaint/

Wanted to play with the complaint thing and couldnt think of anything to put in... After a few minutes I typed in "Anglo Irish Bank" and this is what came out...

"I want to share with you a few of the tentative conclusions I've reached regarding Anglo Irish Bank's modes of thought. And I stress the word "tentative," because the subject of what motivates Anglo Irish Bank is tricky and complex. Let me preface my discussion by quickly reasserting a familiar theme of my previous letters: The time is always right to do what is right. That's why we must expose every ugly practice of every ugly lunatic. The first step in that process is to realize that what I find frightening is that some academics actually believe its line that it can destroy everything beautiful and good and get away with it. In this case, "academics" refers to a stratum of the residual intelligentsia surviving the recession of its demotic base, not to those seekers of truth who understand that Anglo Irish Bank insists that allotheism is absolutely essential to the well-being of society. This fraud, this lie, is just one among the thousands they perpetrates. It is my personal opinion, based on years of observation, that Anglo Irish Bank's invectives are designed to present a false image to the world by hiding unpleasant but vitally important realities about Anglo Irish Bank's memoirs. And they're working; they're having the desired effect. Help me tell Anglo Irish Bank how wrong it is. Join your hands with mine in this, the greatest cause of our time."