- Joined
- Apr 15, 2019
This is the only part that Fagrick views as a positive
Patrick Sean Tomlinson / @stealthygeek / "Torque Wheeler" / @RealAutomanic / Kempesh / Padawan v2.5 - "Conservative" sci-fi author with TDS, armed "drunk with anger management issues" and terminated parental rights, actual tough guy, obese, paid Quasi, paid thousands to be repeatedly unbanned from Twitter
- Thread starter Caverlock
- Start date
-
🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2017
Considering how much he gets penetrated, you would think he would get out of the closet.
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2019
nah after seeing DSP get off the hook I think you can skate through the system without much scrutiny.
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2017
These are two different circumstances.
DewsLit
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2019
He'd deny being a flaming faggot while sucking a cock.
"MMmmh... No child, SHlurpp ...infant, Mmh, I'm not the homo, baby child, YOU are! SSHhhlrrppp.."
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2018
I don’t think Rick or Nik’s fraudulent PPP loans will be scrutinized much considering they’re not that large. People getting busted for PPP fraud we’re getting loans for hundreds of thousands or millions.
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2017
As I said before, they're working their way down. I remember seeing one case where it was around $65k but that was in the early cases so probably not as efficient as going after larger fraudsters. They could have gone after smaller cases to get people to confess to lessen their fines and shit that they'll have.
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2020
That lawyer had all the charisma of a dead fish. The judge even commented that he was, at one point, making his opponent's case for him.
- Joined
- May 21, 2019
The scifi community has been reddit incarnate for at least a decade now. Though really, the publishing industry and authors as a whole have all been severely pozzed in recent years. These tend to be very sheepish people who parrot everything that's trendy in mass media and academia while pretending they're original or creative thinkers.
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2020
A decade? Why not several decades? The only sci-fi authors I can safely say have ever had conservative, or even moderate, views, would be Robert Heinlein or Philip K. Dick.
Fantasy feels less pozzed. I wouldn't necessarily say it's all Tolkien and Lewis levels of based, but it's more than just the author's sooperiyah fyootchah wish fulfillments.
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2021
Amidst all the chaos of the lawsuit etc. I just want to remind everybody that Patrick S Tomlinson is still very fat.
- Joined
- May 21, 2019
When I say reddit incarnate or pozzed I don't strictly mean all forms of leftism so much as the specific types of shrill social media-addled strains of neoliberal progressivism and socialism where anyone who so much as sneezes the wrong way is literally Hitler. It's no secret that mainstream publishing has had a left wing bias for decades, especially since a lot of it is done in New York, but even ostensibly left-leaning authors from the 50s, 60s, or 70s would be crucified for publishing some of their most famous books today.
Ira the Weatherman
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2019
Man, try the 90s. Fight Club was written by a gay Pacific Northwestern hippie and it'd probably be condemned as Nazi incel insurrectionist revenge fantasy if it were published today by the likes of Pat, even though he has a bad case of the Tyler Durdens of his own.
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2021
Might I recommend Jerry Pournelle, John Ringo, Larry Correia, David Drake, and David Weber?
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2017
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2021
I think it’s been pointed out already but it will happen. It will filter down. There’s no doubt about that. The government can and do spend millions chasing thousands in unpaid tax to send a message. They don’t let anything go.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2019
So I'm not claiming to be an author here, but Rick is. Since one of the things all skilled writers are capable of doing is taking an idea for a character that they have in their heads and accurately communicating it to an audience, I think it's only fair to analyze the character Rick has adopted in that final phone call and see if Rick actually understands human character enough to create the one he means to.
Rick clearly wants his character to be a tough guy. He wants his character to be in charge. Unphased by adversity. Superior.
Right off the bat, we're challenged by his use of the word 'child' as an insult. Real tough guys are capable of taking on other tough guys. Someone competent at dealing with formidable foes doesn't need to minimize their adversary. They'd feel it beneath their dignity to go around picking on someone far beneath their skill level. Think of the movie 'Nobody.' Ex-super-CIA-operative Hutch Mansell's house is broken into by a couple of thieves. He has the skill to assess their capabilities, recognize that the gun they have is unloaded, and conclude that they are desperate, small-time crooks. If he used his full skills on them, he would absolutely destroy them. He allows them to escape unharmed, even when later in the movie he proves he can take out much more dangerous enemies. Hutch doesn't need to denigrate his enemies to be better than them. He's already at the pinnacle. In fact, the entire movie can be seen as his quest to find an opponent who presents a genuine challenge and requires him to perform at the top of his game to win.
In contrast, Rick clearly feels incapable of dealing with anyone stronger, more intelligent, or more capable than a child. The more Rick feels threatened, the greater his insecurity becomes, so he tries to age-regress his opponent from a child to an infant. Hutch considered adults with weapons to be too weak an opponent to engage with; Rick only feels comfortable fighting with babies. Conversely, that means that anyone more skilled than an infant (i.e., anyone who has learned to talk) can defeat Rick. Rick unintentionally portrays himself as the next-to-weakest possible contender.
Right out the gate, Rick has failed at being a superior tough guy.
Let's look at his attempts to be in charge. One thing you hear about leadership in the military is that you should never give an order that you know will be disobeyed. Authority is either based on the willing compliance of underlings, or on brute force. Compliance can be earned various ways; respect, competence, fear... But once those ways fail, the only option left is brute force, and if you don't have enough strength to overcome a disobedient underling, then it destroys the illusion of authority. If you know that you are giving an order that won't be followed, you need to be prepared to follow up that disobedience with immediate, effective punishment, or you might as well just give up. This is as true in parenthood as it is in the military (which may be why Rick hasn't figured it out, yet...)
On Twitter, Rick has the ability to block anyone he tells to shut up. This isn't a very effective punishment, as it does nothing to hurt the offender, but it does give Rick the capacity to force the person he tells to shut up to cease talking to him. Only people who want to be fooled by that facade of authority will be fooled, but it is at least something. That situation changes completely on a phone call. Rick has no capacity at all to prevent Josiah from speaking throughout the call. By repeatedly telling him to shut up, and then repeatedly being successfully defied, Rick makes himself look completely ineffective. Rick does finally figure out that he has blocking capability on a phone call when he hangs up at the end, but by then he's spent half an hour looking like a weak fool.
One other thing that I think bears analyzing is his use of the rhetorical question. There are times that asking a question can be useful in weakening an opponent's position, but used inartfully, it can backfire. The rhetorical question is useful when the only accurate answer makes the opponent look worse. Take, for example, the question, 'Who do you think you are?' If you ask that question of a police officer during a traffic stop, the obvious, accurate answer ('Someone who can arrest you and make your life miserable if I have to') strengthens the officer's position, rather than undermining it. In another situation, say a person asking it to an overbearing but powerless stranger, the obvious and correct answer might be 'Someone who thinks they are in charge when they aren't.' In that context, the obvious answer to the question undermines the opponent's position. If they try to ignore it, they look like they're delusional, if they try to lie about the answer, the truth can be used to further demonstrate their misbehavior, and if they admit the truth, they assume all the baggage that goes along with the answer (i.e., they are an egotistical, delusional bully).
During the call, Rick repeatedly uses tactic of the rhetorical question. He constantly asks Josiah questions like, 'Why do you think you can talk?' These are not the good kind of rhetorical question. The obvious answers, 'Because I'm capable,' or 'Because you can't stop me,' or 'Because we're having a conversation,' are all very reasonable and correct answers, which begs the question of why Rick asked his question in the first place. This reciprocal rhetorical question, in contrast, would be the effective kind. Why does Rick think he can shut someone up? The fact that he clearly lacks the authority or power to force compliance automatically makes him look weak. The underlying premise that he should be able to control the speech of another person makes him look like an egomaniacal tyrant. The question Rick asks turns on him an makes him look worse than he was before.
My conclusion is that Rick's writing skills are so abysmally embarrassing that he can't even write himself a convincing tough guy persona. Very sad.
Rick clearly wants his character to be a tough guy. He wants his character to be in charge. Unphased by adversity. Superior.
Right off the bat, we're challenged by his use of the word 'child' as an insult. Real tough guys are capable of taking on other tough guys. Someone competent at dealing with formidable foes doesn't need to minimize their adversary. They'd feel it beneath their dignity to go around picking on someone far beneath their skill level. Think of the movie 'Nobody.' Ex-super-CIA-operative Hutch Mansell's house is broken into by a couple of thieves. He has the skill to assess their capabilities, recognize that the gun they have is unloaded, and conclude that they are desperate, small-time crooks. If he used his full skills on them, he would absolutely destroy them. He allows them to escape unharmed, even when later in the movie he proves he can take out much more dangerous enemies. Hutch doesn't need to denigrate his enemies to be better than them. He's already at the pinnacle. In fact, the entire movie can be seen as his quest to find an opponent who presents a genuine challenge and requires him to perform at the top of his game to win.
In contrast, Rick clearly feels incapable of dealing with anyone stronger, more intelligent, or more capable than a child. The more Rick feels threatened, the greater his insecurity becomes, so he tries to age-regress his opponent from a child to an infant. Hutch considered adults with weapons to be too weak an opponent to engage with; Rick only feels comfortable fighting with babies. Conversely, that means that anyone more skilled than an infant (i.e., anyone who has learned to talk) can defeat Rick. Rick unintentionally portrays himself as the next-to-weakest possible contender.
Right out the gate, Rick has failed at being a superior tough guy.
Let's look at his attempts to be in charge. One thing you hear about leadership in the military is that you should never give an order that you know will be disobeyed. Authority is either based on the willing compliance of underlings, or on brute force. Compliance can be earned various ways; respect, competence, fear... But once those ways fail, the only option left is brute force, and if you don't have enough strength to overcome a disobedient underling, then it destroys the illusion of authority. If you know that you are giving an order that won't be followed, you need to be prepared to follow up that disobedience with immediate, effective punishment, or you might as well just give up. This is as true in parenthood as it is in the military (which may be why Rick hasn't figured it out, yet...)
On Twitter, Rick has the ability to block anyone he tells to shut up. This isn't a very effective punishment, as it does nothing to hurt the offender, but it does give Rick the capacity to force the person he tells to shut up to cease talking to him. Only people who want to be fooled by that facade of authority will be fooled, but it is at least something. That situation changes completely on a phone call. Rick has no capacity at all to prevent Josiah from speaking throughout the call. By repeatedly telling him to shut up, and then repeatedly being successfully defied, Rick makes himself look completely ineffective. Rick does finally figure out that he has blocking capability on a phone call when he hangs up at the end, but by then he's spent half an hour looking like a weak fool.
One other thing that I think bears analyzing is his use of the rhetorical question. There are times that asking a question can be useful in weakening an opponent's position, but used inartfully, it can backfire. The rhetorical question is useful when the only accurate answer makes the opponent look worse. Take, for example, the question, 'Who do you think you are?' If you ask that question of a police officer during a traffic stop, the obvious, accurate answer ('Someone who can arrest you and make your life miserable if I have to') strengthens the officer's position, rather than undermining it. In another situation, say a person asking it to an overbearing but powerless stranger, the obvious and correct answer might be 'Someone who thinks they are in charge when they aren't.' In that context, the obvious answer to the question undermines the opponent's position. If they try to ignore it, they look like they're delusional, if they try to lie about the answer, the truth can be used to further demonstrate their misbehavior, and if they admit the truth, they assume all the baggage that goes along with the answer (i.e., they are an egotistical, delusional bully).
During the call, Rick repeatedly uses tactic of the rhetorical question. He constantly asks Josiah questions like, 'Why do you think you can talk?' These are not the good kind of rhetorical question. The obvious answers, 'Because I'm capable,' or 'Because you can't stop me,' or 'Because we're having a conversation,' are all very reasonable and correct answers, which begs the question of why Rick asked his question in the first place. This reciprocal rhetorical question, in contrast, would be the effective kind. Why does Rick think he can shut someone up? The fact that he clearly lacks the authority or power to force compliance automatically makes him look weak. The underlying premise that he should be able to control the speech of another person makes him look like an egomaniacal tyrant. The question Rick asks turns on him an makes him look worse than he was before.
My conclusion is that Rick's writing skills are so abysmally embarrassing that he can't even write himself a convincing tough guy persona. Very sad.
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2020
Dan Simmons wrote a short story about a time traveller that went back in time to warn people about Eurabia 15 years ago on his now-dead website and people still have their panties in a twist.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
Seriously? What about Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle? Or Orson Scott Card? Or more recently, Larry Correia?
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2017
HP Lovecraft hated Republicans yet Demoncrats today hate him because he was a "scientific" racist. The Left will always find a reason to hate someone.