Mailvox: Boomer tales

A reader tells a familiar tale of Boomer entitlement:

A couple of regulars at the bar/kitchen I work came in the other day with a pack of friends. One of their friends was a girl who had been previously eighty sixed so a bartender calmly informed her she had to leave. Immediately the leader of the pack went berserk and started pacing up and down the aisle barking obscenities before storming out with her little birthday clan, trying to take as many people she could with her.

This person is a school administrator for the district. She knows all the bartenders since they were kids. Her and her husband are well known in the community. Where the hell do they get off acting like that?

The most demoralizing fact is just to think of the ungodly salary she makes comprised entirely of tax loot. Loot collected from the service industry, from the oil field, my family’s bread and butter. Then she comes into my workplace and when even slightly contradicted flips out and tries to rob customers and tips right out of me and my coworkers’ pockets. The Boomer “education” aristocracy at its very infantile finest.

It will not surprise me if one day in the not-too-distant future, there are bounties paid for people like that.

The victory of the secret king

A Peterson cultist named Dan Poynton wants me to know that he won another imaginary argument with me. No, make that TWO imaginary arguments!

I interacted with you & your youtube watchers a while back re one of the many Peterson videos you’ve made, which you will have probably forgotten.

I just want you to know that I know what you’re up to. You blocked me from making comments. Apart from this obviously being an admission that you’d lost any argument between us, I also thought it was extremely cowardly. And I admit, with your obvious intelligence and strength of character,  I was really shocked. I mean, why would you block an obviously lesser-IQ individual like myself, who was interacting with both you and your fans with civility and informed/considered posts? Totally unnecessary and I was never expecting such an early admission of defeat on your part.

Anyway, I’ve stopped listening to you recently, because I realise your material is actually quite “evil” (to use your word), and my attraction to it is not a healthy thing. However, I can’t resist anything you put out re JP, because your derangement and anger over this man is first-class entertainment. And I’ve realised that you’ve become so deranged now (re this issue, not with many others, about which I have often enjoyed listening to you) that you’ve almost abandoned logic altogether.

Below is my post, which I presumed only you would see, but perhaps you didn’t:

There is now no doubt: Vox Day is an utter idiot. In his deranged Peterson fury, he’s incapable of even saying anything logical. I’ve enjoyed Vox’s other stuff at times, but the man is just another high-IQed idiot who specialises in fallacious rhetoric (despite his lofty claims to the contrary).

However, I actually believer you CAN’T be so stupid as to not realise this. You’re an intelligent guy, Vox. You’re deliberately misleading your fawning fans with rhetorical – and often completely false – polemic, and this is dishonest and displays your obvious lack of integrity.

You’ll no doubt now block my email address – don’t worry, I don’t care, and it will only be a further admission of your dishonesty and derangement.

I just think it’s funny that he insists I’m the dishonest, angry, deranged one when Jordan Peterson is in rehab for drug addiction barely a year after he claimed he wasn’t taking any medications due to his magic diet.

If I ever run for Emperor of Man, my platform will include mandatory euthanasia for gamma males at the age of 18, with a second round at 25 just in case we missed any of them. I expect I’ll win 100 percent of the female vote with that policy.

Mailvox: the illusionists

A lawyer writes to confirm my observations of his profession:

Your recent talk about lawyers hits close to home and is in most cases true. I’m an attorney who works in public contracting. I went to a third-tier law school and am not working for some prestige firm. I’m currently in a litigation defending against a party who has retained a big K Street law firm where all of the attorneys went to so-called “good” schools–we’re talking Ivys and the next level down.

In drafting an opposition to a stay request, I obviously did my due diligence and read the cases referenced by the other party for myself. After all, these cases are cited as precedent in support of their claim. The interesting thing was, the cases either weren’t appropriate analogues to the current situation, or in one instance, the main case the other side relied upon stood for the opposite proposition of what they claimed it did.

Unbelievable. I really need to start charging more.

In my experience, about 90 percent of legal briefs are written by lazy people attempting to bluff other people they assume are even lazier. In most – not many, most – of the legal arguments I have personally read or heard presented in court, there are multiple shameless attempts equivalent to asserting that there are twelve lights when there are only four or to claim that -1 is actually equal to +1. These attempts are easily disproved, of course, but only if your anticipation of their arguments and your preparations for dealing with them are adequate.

The level of sheer sloppiness across the board is absolutely incredible. I would NEVER hire a lawyer and expect him to even do the most basic reading of the primary material; in most cases they simply don’t do it. This is a crucial flaw, because often the significance of a particular phrase or passage don’t leap out at you until the fifth or sixth reading. With the exception of contract lawyers, who are genuinely detail-oriented individuals who actually read the relevant documents, most lawyers are rhetoricians who rely upon their verbal skills to manipulate emotions and win the day that way. And they are almost invariably unprepared for the non-lawyer who actually sits down and does the relevant research involved.

It is said, not inaccurately, that the law is nothing more than a mutually-agreed-upon illusion. And from that, it correctly follows that even the best lawyers are little more than smooth-talking illusionists with professional credentials.

Eventbrite is converged

Never even bother trying to work with any company that has a Trust & Safety department. We had the Big Bear’s fall comedy tour all set up and ready to open for ticket sales tomorrow on Eventbrite when Trust & Safety leaped in at the last minute to shut it down:

I recieved a reply today from our content management team and regretfully they are not allowing us to proceed. Per email below.

[Redacted], after doing some research on Owen Benjamin I would not consider him appropriate for Eventbrite and his content would be considered a violation under our policies. Even if his event listings would not contain violative content, we also consider off-platform behavior of our creators within our evaluation.

The SJW thought police are an absolutely virulent corporate cancer. They literally work to prevent the organization from doing business with anyone of whom they disapprove. This is the second time this year that a company I have been repeatedly assured will be reliable and professional has turned out to be the exact opposite.

Fine. We’ll build our own platforms. Again, and again, and again, if necessary. And we’ll be sure to keep the corrupt little creatures out.

Mailvox: a complete failure to grok

There are few things more depressing to an intellectual known for coining terms than seeing people attempting to turn around what they perceive as a perjorative and trying to apply it to you, particularly when in doing so, they demonstrate that they have no idea what the Hell you meant by it in the first place. I’m sure everyone will be astonished to learn that a recently departed commenter couldn’t bear to leave without a parting wall of text.

You’ll probably say you don’t really give a damn, and perhaps just “fuck off”, but you and some of the comment cohort did to me what you know is typical of SJWers.

STAGE ONE: Locate or Create a Violation of the Narrative
STAGE TWO: Point and Shriek
STAGE THREE: Isolate and Swarm
STAGE FOUR: Reject and Transform
STAGE FIVE: Press for Surrender”

I was not posturing.  I was not attacking. I engaged in a conversation on items about math and science mentioned by another commenter.

My point was that there are limits to the accuracy in mathematics to understanding things just as there are in language, but some people are as dogmatic about math as some are about science and some about religion. They stretch the bounds of the discipline beyond its limits and dogmatically attack any found guilty of heresy.

It’s your site and your comment section. It should reflect what you want it to.

But y’all did to me exactly what you criticize the SJWers for.

Snidely Whiplash noted a violation of the accepted narrative, pointed a finger and invited the swarm to do their work, and you were the amenable authority.

Bringing up Plato’s analogy and Buddah’s parable was not pretension or posturing. They were on point to the comment I was responding to.

Azure Amaranthine responded on point.

You and the others took the SJWer path of personal attacks and annihilation.

 It is effective…

If you’d said I was getting the thread off topic or the like, it would have been one thing.

But y’all went straight to personal attacks, telling me to get the fuck out, and then deleting comments and threatening expulsion from the group….  again typical of the SJW crowd….

I like your book.  I bought it after the mention on InfoWars.  That also led me to your blog, and I’ve like what little I’ve read of it.

I’ll probably continue reading your thoughts in the posts, but life’s too short to spend time in a SJW clone room.

Not a hospitable place for engaging in ideas.

You should work on your tolerance level.

This sort of thing is why I try to avoid talking to people in real life. I don’t care, I just want people like this to go away and never attempt to communicate with me again. There is no narrative here and this guy was never part of the group in the first place. He was an unwanted, uninvited, undesirable interloper who wandered into the wrong place and was rightly rejected as soon as he identified himself.

I’m not the amenable authority, to the contrary, I am the authority that very much wants all the blathering morons to go away, stay away, and never, ever force me to bear witness to their endless attempts to explore the limits of human stupidity.

UPDATE: He’s sent another five six emails so far. This is just one of them:

Jesus —- you won’t even allow me to invite Azure to continue the discussion off-site if he wanted…

What objections could you have had worthy of deleting that comment letting Azure know where he could contact me if he wanted to discuss it…?

It was short.  Not a wall of text that might inconvenience the audience.

It used language that can’t be considered objectionable — because the gamma faggot slur that was aimed at me is still up.  I mocked it.

And it was snarky but no more so than the personal attacks you left standing in the thread.

You have to be able to recognize what you did follows the steps you outlined in the book…

And it is a SJW-type mentality in dealing with others.

The only time I can remember having comments deleted and being threatened with banning was on sites run by people on the Left…

Now I’ll descend into something childish:  Pot meet kettle…  you’re both black….

If you want to be fair, delete all the comments referring to me.  I already deleted the ones I wrote.

1984 it…

Erase all traces.  Make it never have happened.

You have to be able to see how you and the outrage mob just mirrored elements you described in your book….

In case you ever wondered, this sort of thing is why gammas are now banned on sight. I used to wonder why women were so vicious to them, but I don’t anymore.

The great dumbing-down

A regular observes a change at work:

In high school we were told the newspaper was written for a 7-8th grade level.

Last month  in our corporate meeting we were told the new standard is 5th grade.

Next step: crayon.


I don’t think it’s the Americans who are the problem, for the most part. At least, not Americans of the non-Paper variety.

Math is hard, Barbie

Uncephalized demonstrates why it is tremendously foolish to attempt to “correct” one’s intellectual superiors in taking exception to my observation about it being astronomically unlikely that any individual present at one mass shooting in the United States will be present at another one:

I’m responding to Vox’s OP: The odds against one person in a country of 320 million being in the vicinity of two such events are astronomical.

Which is flat-out wrong–unless I am making some boneheaded error, which is always possible, and why I showed my work–and leads me to think Vox didn’t bother doing the math at all before jumping to a conspiracy as his explanation. I may be in error here–I’m sure someone will quickly point it out, if so–but by my math these coincidences are far from astronomically unlikely.

Las Vegas 2017 attendance: 20,000
Gilroy 2019 attendance: 80,000

I don’t know how many attendees were actually physically present at each event at the time of the shootings, but I’ll assume two thirds, so 14,520 and 52,800.

Proportion of US population present at LV shooting: 14,520 / 350,000,000 = .000041 or .0041{02465df28c20f4aad57bcc5b49594f9c07e66389abf8fcd2ca75e40861c18fe4}

Proportion of the population NOT at LV is the inverse or 99.9959{02465df28c20f4aad57bcc5b49594f9c07e66389abf8fcd2ca75e40861c18fe4}

Likelihood of one person being at both events is then: 1 – (.999959^52,800). Which is 88.8{02465df28c20f4aad57bcc5b49594f9c07e66389abf8fcd2ca75e40861c18fe4}. The number of times this apparently happened is 3, so it’s 0.888^3, or 70{02465df28c20f4aad57bcc5b49594f9c07e66389abf8fcd2ca75e40861c18fe4}.

In other words, through purely random chance it is more likely than not that 3 people who were at the LV 2017 shooting would also be present at the Gilroy shooting.

Making similar estimates about the LV-Parkland connection: 39{02465df28c20f4aad57bcc5b49594f9c07e66389abf8fcd2ca75e40861c18fe4} likely assuming an average family size of 4, 3000 attendees of Parkland and we are looking for a direct family member involved in both events.

The Borderline-LV coincidence has the lowest odds as I run the numbers, actually quite low, at 0.046{02465df28c20f4aad57bcc5b49594f9c07e66389abf8fcd2ca75e40861c18fe4} or about 1 chance in 2200, partly because the guy was actually killed, a much lower number than “was also there”.

I don’t know enough about the San Bernardino or Toronto events to start even making assumptions.

In this model the probability of the LV-Gilroy and LV-Parkland coincidences both happening is 0.70*0.39 = 0.27 or 27{02465df28c20f4aad57bcc5b49594f9c07e66389abf8fcd2ca75e40861c18fe4}. Just better than 1 in 4.

The very large numbers present at these festivals make for counterintuitive probabilities. The Borderline connection is the only one that even gives me pause, but even 1 in 2200 is not what I’d call “astronomically low”.

Uncephalized is correct about one thing. I didn’t bother actually doing the math beforehand because I didn’t need to do it. And I didn’t need to do it in order to have a general idea about the size of the probabilities involved because a) I am highly intelligent and b) I have an instinctual grasp of mathematical relationships. I knew the probabilities were astronomical, in much the same way you know a tall man’s height is over six feet without needing to actually measure him. The boneheaded error Uncephalized has made here is that he simply doesn’t know how to calculate the probability of independent events. But it’s really not a difficult concept. For example, if the odds of rolling a six on a six-sided die are 1 in 6, then the odds of rolling two sixes on two different six-sided dice are (1/6) * (1/6) = 1/36.

But before we calculate the probability of these two specific independent events, let’s get the base numbers right. The Gilroy Garlic Festival is a three-day event, so that 80,000 is reduced to 26,667 before being reduced another one-third as per Uncephalized’s assumption to account for the timing of the event. This brings us to an estimated 17,787 people present at the time of the shootings. Note that reducing the estimated 20,000 Las Vegas attendance by the same one-third gives us 13,340, not 14,520.

It’s never a good sign when they can’t even get the simple division right. Now for the relevant probabilities.

  • Gilroy probability: Dividing 17,787 by 350,000,000 results in a probability of 0.00005082, or one in 19,677.
  • Las Vegas probability: Dividing 13,340 by 350,000,000 results in a probability of 0.00003811428, or one in 26,237
  • Gilroy AND Las Vegas probability: Multiplying 0.00005082 by 0.00003811428 results in a probability of 0.0000000019369677096, or one in 516,270,868.

You will observe that 88.8 percent, or 1/1.13, is very, very far away from 1/516,270,868, and 0.0000000019369677096 cubed – to account for all three dual survivors reported – is even further off from 70 percent. As I originally stated, the odds against anyone having been at both events are astronomical, even if we leave out relevant factors such as the fact that 11 percent of all US citizens have never left their birth state throughout the course of their entire lives and that Las Vegas averages 24,381 visitors from California every day.

I suggest that “astronomical” is a perfectly reasonable way to describe a probability of one in 516 million cubed, or if you prefer, one in 137,604,570,000,000,016,192,784,160. I also suggest that you refrain from attempting to correct me if your IQ is sub-Mensa level. And finally, I suggest that it is not “jumping to a conspiracy” to observe obvious and glaring statistical improbabilities.

My kind of Catholic

ZhukovG perfectly expresses my perspective:

Here we are, Satan’s hosts arrayed against us and we spend more time shooting at one another than at the enemy.

If any man confess that Jesus is Lord; he is my brother, my comrade. I don’t care how he prays or the manner of his worship.

I only ask that he hold his place in the line of battle against the Powers and Principalities that have come against us.

Amen and a-fucking-men. Evil is aggressively attempting to erect the Tower of Babel 2.0, the Synagogue of Satan is shamelessly attempting to subvert language, nations, religions, and history itself, and yet various retards from every church and denomination prefer to engage in theological disputation rather than stand united against the god of this world under the banner of Jesus Christ.

Shut up and get thee to the battlefront.

Mailvox: the parrot whisperer

A Darkstream viewer shares a rather strange experience:

I have two parrots that live in my living room. Usually by around 7 they are still being a bit raucous and noisy. However, I have been playing your podcast at that time and I’ve noticed something strange.

The birds are mesmerized by the sound of your voice. Both birds get very calm, and remain well behaved and quiet. It’s really freaking weird!!!!! This is highly out of character for both of them at that time of the day.

My caique – who is a VERY high energy bird – sat quietly on my chest tonight, listening to your voice with her eyes half-open. My brown head parrot also sat quietly through an entire podcast, and into the second one. 

The Darkstream. It’s like a sea of tranquility.