What's going on with Epik and Rob Monster?

[MapleDots]

I'm catching the tail end of this, seems to be some kind of controversy...

https://domaingang.com/domain-news/rob-monster-off-twitter-after-christchurch-massacre-controversy/

Must be something odd to evoke this type of a response from one of our members.

 

[Slanted]

Well, if you feel I have bugs in my definition then maybe you can help me.

Yes, I could. If you want a reading list about epistemology, I'll give you one.

Also, the question was directed at Rob. Just wondering why you are answering it.

Because I found your posts about "truth" utterly ridiculous, and I wanted to vivisect them. It's a hobby.

In another post, a question was directed at you and Rob answered it.

If you want a private conversation with someone, why are you posting in a public thread? People here comment on whatever they please.

A "genuine dispute" is one that is supported by facts.

Which side of the dispute is backed up by the facts? Both sides? Even though they contradict one another? How does that work?

A fact is what stares at you in the face.

Such as the earth being flat and unmoving? And the sun circling the earth as the moon does? Or a video of a massacre appearing to be CGI? Those "facts", as you call them, seem untrue to me.

But unless you back up your assertions with facts, you can not be expected to be taken seriously.

OK. Please back up this assertion:

Ideas are not truth until facts make those ideas indisputable.

Back that up with FACTS, please. Otherwise, as you yourself say, you can't "be taken seriously".

I am wondering if even you know what the definition of truth is.

Philosophers have argued about that definition for millennia. Apparently you think there is a simple definition they should all agree with. How cute!

You yourself ended up defining truth in such a way that nothing is true until it is disputed, and once it is disputed it ceases to be true. So nothing could ever be true. I LOVED THAT. It made my day!

If you can't tell what a fact is then I feel sorry for you.

I'm fine.

Ideas are not truth until facts make those ideas indisputable.

Evidently some people dispute that the earth is round, that men walked on the moon, etc. So by definition those claims are not indisputable, since they ARE disputed. I would regard them as true, notwithstanding lingering disputes. But according to what you've said, we are still waiting for the roundness of the earth and the moon landing to become true. That won't happen until more facts come to light, you say, which will somehow render these ideas indisputable. How or when that occurs is a mystery to me.

The truth should be challenged to be shown it is in fact the truth. If new facts come to light then truth may need to be reevaluated in light of new facts.

Finally something coherent.

Truth is not arrived at by a democratic consensus

Agreed.

Rob, is this you actually posting?

You're a conspiracy theorist too apparently.

 

[TCK]

Yes, I could. If you want a reading list about epistemology, I'll give you one.

If you feel I need help, then please do so.

Because I found your posts about "truth" utterly ridiculous, and I wanted to vivisect them. It's a hobby.

Which ones? And why? Not fair to make a blanket statement. Very lazy.

If you want a private conversation with someone, why are you posting in a public thread? People here comment on whatever they please.

Don't mind you answering. Just wondered why it took a few posts to get the person the question was directed at to answer. It just seems that in one breath you are in disagreement with Rob but then seem to be working as a team. Nothing wrong with that.

OK. Please back up this assertion:

What assertion is that? That you should back up your assertions with facts? Let me ask you, do you enjoy spending time arguing something that facts show the opposite?

Philosophers have argued about that definition for millennia. Apparently you think there is a simple definition they should all agree with. How cute!

Just pick up a dictionary.

Evidently some people dispute that the earth is round, that men walked on the moon, etc. So by definition those claims are not indisputable, since they ARE disputed. I would regard them as true, notwithstanding lingering disputes. But according to what you've said, we are still waiting for the roundness of the earth and the moon landing to become true. That won't happen until more facts come to light, you say, which will somehow render these ideas to become indisputable. How or when that occurs is a mystery to me.

Is it a "genuine dispute", though? If the facts are what they are?

 

[NameLlama]

I guess truth in a practical sense could be things that you can test for yourself and confirm, if you have the right tools, intelligence, reasoning..
And things that you know many others (trustworthy, intelligent people) have confirmed.. Even better if they provide their evidence and reasoning to you.
These things might not be 100% certain, but close enough to assume truth for practicality?

For example:
Someone tells you..that two stones of different mass dropped from a height without resistance will fall at the same speed. SO you go check and you're able to confirm it over and over.
Well, there is still a chance that there is some trick being played on you, right? You could be fooled somehow, some other forces at play. But you see no evidence for that, and it would be pretty silly to believe that something in the universe is tricking you just so that you will believe two objects are falling at the same speed.
So you could say that what you were told is "true" if you want, but you could also make a kind of silly argument that it is only..highly probable that it is true..as what are the chances you are being fooled?
Then they could tell you more, explain laws of physics, provide more tests for you, more evidence, more reasoning. Soon you have some understanding of how the physical world functions, and it is true to you because you can test a lot of it yourself.

With something like climate change, other people do the study for you..
So if you deny it is true, deny all the evidence and thousands of people who study it and confirm it is happening, then it is like saying "Yeah, instead I believe in the 0.000000001% chance that they are either all conspiring together and lying and faking evidence, or that they are all misinterpreting the evidence..and I know that because..um..crackpot youtuber told me..or a scientist paid off by fossil fuel companies told me.."
Why do some choose the least likely scenario and deny it? I don't know.
It's hard to believe that someone could go out and really want to find the truth about it and still deny. So how to convince people in this case?


I guess math is a kind of pure truth. We agree on the axioms of mathematical logic, and then we build up lots of true things from those.


Apparently, many people don't care about the definition of truth, or they only care about their own truth.. Why else do we have people going around saying they are 100% certain that their religion is the one true religion? Is it testable? How do they know? I don't think they can know.


By the way.. Some conspiracy theories turn out to have truth to them, but if you're just picking random shit to try and discern the truth of, what is the chance, of all the theories ever dumped out there, that the one you chose is worth looking into? Some tiny chance. So why would anyone wasate their time on rather pointless things like.. 'the Challenger explosion didn't kill anyone'.. Maybe look into something that seems seriously shady and that already has a group of reputable people trying to convince the world of it..?

 

[Kate]

As a matter of fact, though, Rob has expressed willingness to welcome far-left organizations and their domains at Epik. ANTIFA was 1 example that Rob mentioned to me at NamesCon when we discussed these issues. And he has repeated that invitation to accept far-left domains here in this thread.
...
(2) If Epik invites ANTIFA or similar far-left groups to move their domains to Epik, do you really think they will say yes? If Epik is known as the registrar of Gab.com, then none of the "cool kids" on the left will want anything to do with Epik.

I think it makes sense that they wouldn't want to lend Epik moral and financial support at this point.

The problem is that Epik is not a neutral registrar, because it has blended with some of its alt-right customers. Like you said:
"Rather, I came to the conclusion that some of the public identifies Epik with Gab and with alt-right politics to such an extent that repositioning Epik as a mainstream brand will be difficult. "
I agree with this.

That's what you get when you are too welcoming to fringe customers. Epik has become the ambulance chaser of domain registrars.

After all the crazy stuff I have seen in this thread I would be really worried if I had domains at Epik. Nasa did not send man to the Moon. Dinosaurs roamed the Earth six thousand years ago. The Earth is fixed, not moving, Notre Dame burning was not an accident etc. NZ shooting possibly a hoax etc.

Rob promotes every far-right conspiracy theory. This is not being neutral.

Maybe one day, Rob will hear a whisper from God telling him that electricity is an invention of the Devil and he will pull the plug.
Or he will suddenly have a revelation that domainers are agents of the Antichrist. Sounds far-fetched maybe, but no more ridiculous than other stuff he has said.

Rob should have left you run the show, because you are trying hard to salvage the brand, but he can't help it, it's unfortunate that he does not value the brand so much, and is happy to burn bridges with people, alienate customers.
And he lost you.

And you know, modern far-right parties have foreign-born employees and candidates too, non-White people that they use as a foil. While they pay lip service to diversity we know where they really stand. Again, if Rob respects his Muslim employees he should not stab them in the back.
The contradiction is unsustainable.

 

[kam]

To get to truth, I think one has to get to the first cause, i.e. what existed before nothing existed. For some the first cause was a "big bang". However, what caused the big bang? As one follows the chain of first cause, you eventually get to a root first cause.

Whether your leap of faith is a "big bang", or "God", either way one's truth about matter ame into existence is a leap of faith. The main difference is whether you believe the event was intentional.

For me, God is the foundational truth. The Big Bang is an attempt to explain away God. How matter and life came into existence is a foundational truth. I find it categorically implausible that matter, life and consciousness in all their complexity can exist as a product of randomness.

On a more practical level, there are people who research conspiracies. In some cases, they found compelling proof of a deception. This deception is sometimes highly organized. JFK famously talked about the monolithic and ruthless conspiracy shortly before being assassinated.

If one searches further, one finds that while there is a Satan. He is the father of lies and the author of confusion and deception. Indeed, the greatest conspiracy of all is that Satan actually exists and that he is the God of this world, iconically symbolized on the US dollar bill as the Eye of Horus, or all seeing eye.

Since the fall of man in the Garden of Eden, Satan has been God of this world. He is operating behind the scenes at the top of the monolithic, ruthless and worldwide conspiracy. He has earthly rewards to offer, and has convinced much of humanity that earthly rewards is all there is when it is not.

The atheists and skeptics may brush the idea of a Satan aside as nonsense. And yet pedophilia, infanticide, licentiousness, and the general "do as thou wilt" mindset that pervades much of humanity, has a first mover as well, and that first mover is Satan, who desires for every human to die in their sins.

The Creator God, YHWH, who is sovereign over all, knows the end from the beginning and is outside of space and time, did provision a savior to atone for the sins of man. Jesus Christ, lamb of God, celebrated on Passover, was the final sacrifice. He rose again on the 3rd day and his reward is eternal life.

The Bible is my authority. I am confident that it is the inspired word of God. The prophets of the OT and apostles of the NT were able to document it. Mankind preserved it, word for word, to the present day. The Bible happens to give us a very clear duality of the works of the spirit and the works of the flesh:

The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, gentleness, and self-control. (Galatians 5:22-23)

On the other hand, we have the carnal state of man:

Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, envy, drunkenness, carousing. (Galatians 5:19-21)

I get that there are those who believe that they can through sheer force of will be more like the former and less like the latter. The point is that much human behavior can be explained by this duality. When someone finds the truth, I believe they finally begin to understand why the world works the way it does.

The search for TRUTH is ultimately a search for MEANING, i.e. why are we here. This search is ultimately a search for GOD. As stated prior, I believe there is absolutely nothing in this life, or on this earth, that is more noble or worthwhile than the search for that universal and all-encompassing truth.

Hope that helps someone.

Do you know the Bible has changed supernaturally?
The lion shall lie down with the Lamb VS wolf shall dwell with the lamb.

Some Youtuber having fun calling pastor

D-wave computer chip tap into another parallel universe and grab their resources back.

Well. Many crazy stuffs are now happening all around the world .
But I trend to not share them actively. Because I don't want to be labeled as "mentally ill".

You have to understand that not every person have an open-mind to accept the truth (Crazy stuff).
People trend to remain the same. When you share the truth, you are indeed try to fighting against their personal core values. they will do everything essential to uphold their personal core values.

They are not ready to accept the Truth so don't try to share the truth (Crazy stuff) to the general public or otherwise they will attack you and your company. That is what most of the people will do when they try to uphold their personal core values.


All the best,

Kam

 

[Cal2]

The most interesting read I've come across for trying to understand 'truth', including 'absolute truth/s', is in a book called The Happiness Purpose. A link:

http://rlaexp.com/studio/biz/conceptual_resources/authors/edward_de_bono/happiness_purpose.html

The key part is titled 'Truth', which is a little over 1/2 way down the page.

 

[NameLlama]

 

[MapleDots]

Regardless of whether Rob Monster is right or wrong in his opinions he is entitled to have them but the real question is....

Can the man, Rob Monster be separated from the company Epik?

Can the company, Epik be separated from the man Rob Monster?

If I was Rob the first thing I would do is post all Epik things under an Epik banner and keep my personal opinions to myself.

If he felt it absolutely necessary he could make an alter ego (does not have to be secret) and use it to post his personal opinions. It is unfortunate that Robs name has the word monster in it because some people will use that against him, but it could be used in a positive if one got creative enough.

As the Epik brand name grows Rob will be forced to become homogenized or he will be forced out by a board of directors somewhere. The absolute best case scenario would be to completely sever the two alter egos and never have them meet again.

All that said, if a company has a single spokesman then eventually that spokesman becomes the company and the two are forever inseparable. We see that with Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Warren Buffet etc. With a few wrong words these people could have done irreparable harm to their companies.

So Rob needs to decide if he is a crusader or a company leader. Publically I don't think he can do both especially if the crusades evoks discussions about religion or conspiracies, those discussions can never be won. In fact if I had 10 customers and started this topic I would probably alienate half of them and they would never use my company.

When representing a company each word has to be carefully chosen, reviewed and taken into consideration as to how it could be interpreted by the public. How many times do we see companies hastily releasing a statement and then having to retract it.

The lessons are already there if we just learn to listen.

 

[Kate]

As the Epik brand name grows Rob will be forced to become homogenized or he will be forced out by a board of directors somewhere. The absolute best case scenario would be to completely sever the two alter egos and never have them meet again.

He owns 80% of the shares so I don't think he can be forced out. And I don't think he will change. What he can do is sell his shares and let somebody else steer the company toward a more mainstream market positioning.
Or continue to drag Epik into the alt-right universe until the brand is completely devalued, then it will be sold to Steve Bannon or Alex Jones for a fraction of its potential worth.

 

[Rob Monster]

He owns 80% of the shares so I don't think he can be forced out. And I don't think he will change. What he can do is sell his shares and let somebody else steer the company toward a more mainstream market positioning.
Or continue to drag Epik into the alt-right universe until the brand is completely devalued, then it will be sold to Steve Bannon or Alex Jones for a fraction of its potential worth.

You can probably look at this two ways:

1. You could consider my views to be fringe. The reality is that I don't identify with the Alt-Right and never have. I rarely visit Breitbart and I am not really a fan of Infowars. So, this seems to be a stretch.

2. You could consider the upside that the CEO has propagated a culture of "do the right thing even when nobody is looking", built on traditional Judeo-Christian values.

I invite folks to consider #2 as being the lens through which to see my personal views.

Regardless of my personal views, Epik welcomes all who are lawfully engaged and has a consistent track record of equally protecting the interests.

There is an active Board-authorized plan to round out the ownership and governance of the company to create greater diversity. The company is open for investment and the terms are compelling.

 

[Rob Monster]

Regardless of whether Rob Monster is right or wrong in his opinions he is entitled to have them but the real question is....

Can the man, Rob Monster be separated from the company Epik?

Can the company, Epik be separated from the man Rob Monster?

If I was Rob the first thing I would do is post all Epik things under an Epik banner and keep my personal opinions to myself.

If he felt it absolutely necessary he could make an alter ego (does not have to be secret) and use it to post his personal opinions. It is unfortunate that Robs name has the word monster in it because some people will use that against him, but it could be used in a positive if one got creative enough.

As the Epik brand name grows Rob will be forced to become homogenized or he will be forced out by a board of directors somewhere. The absolute best case scenario would be to completely sever the two alter egos and never have them meet again.

All that said, if a company has a single spokesman then eventually that spokesman becomes the company and the two are forever inseparable. We see that with Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Warren Buffet etc. With a few wrong words these people could have done irreparable harm to their companies.

So Rob needs to decide if he is a crusader or a company leader. Publicly I don't think he can do both especially if the crusades evoke discussions about religion or conspiracies, those discussions can never be won. In fact if I had 10 customers and started this topic I would probably alienate half of them and they would never use my company.

When representing a company each word has to be carefully chosen, reviewed and taken into consideration as to how it could be interpreted by the public. How many times do we see companies hastily releasing a statement and then having to retract it.

The lessons are already there if we just learn to listen.

It is fitting that you would ask this question since you started this thread.

I would start by saying that you probably did not have any idea what kind of frenzy you would start. I actually lay that outcome at the feet of Shane Cultra who I think was irresponsible in his damning and ill-informed commentary on a blog that apparent gave others the apparent license to pile on with condemnation. I am not sure what motivates a guy to do that, but I am sure it will eventually be revealed.

The topics discussed in this thread weigh on my heart. I care a lot about truth. I have also contemplated it a lot more than most people ever have or ever will. The search for truth has been a primary hobby of mine for the last decade.

Those who know me personally know, and some will even attest, that I am consistent. I do try to help others where I can. I also try not to underestimate what is possible. If I feel moved to tackle some challenge, I might do so even if, to the casual observer, the odds look long.

As for the right/left topic, as stated elsewhere in this thread,I believe it is a false construct. The persona called "Tarrant" was a nihilist. He was not a conservative and definitely not a Christian. I would not protect such a person. To the contrary, I would, and have, attempted to de-fuse such persons.

I have made some statements about faith and also about the search for truth in this thread, largely in response to questions but also because I feel I was given a stage on which to do it. I specialize in turning lemons into lemonade, i.e. seeing the upside of any circumstance, believing things happen for a reason.

My views are by no means radical. They are conservative and traditional. Yes, they are oppressed, which is why we see churches being burned around the world, and why Christians are openly mocked for their confidence in what cannot be directly seen, and only inferred. That is the leap of faith.

As for the prospect of being "homogenized", that is an interesting choice of words. Christians are to be salt and light. The notion of salt losing its saltiness, or being homogenized, is the natural temptation to which most of the Christian world has succumbed. They are Laodicean, or luke-warm. I am not that.

Going forward, if folks want to engage me on the topics of faith and truth, this is a fine thread with which to do it, or otherwise privately. I will be happy to answer questions.

 

[Rob Monster]

Show attachment 116257

Wernher von Braun and Roy Disney were both 33rd degree freemasons and worked closely. Kennedy Space Center is less than hour from Disney World. ICYMI, "Club 33" is a hat-tip to Masonry.

The land for Disney World was acquired in 1963. Kennedy space center opened in July 1962. If you visit Kennedy Space Center, or watch a video tour of it, you will feel like you are at a Disney attraction.

Wernher von Braun, sworn to secrecy under a blood oath, even left his heirs a memo on his tombstone.

"The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. "

The word firmament is the Hebrew word רָקַע or raqiya. You can read the details here.

As for the image you reference of Buzz Aldrin trying to punch out Bart Sibrel, it is because Bart tried to get Buzz to swear on the Bible that he went to the moon. See the clip:

James Irwin, was on Apollo 15. He went on to be an evangelist writing many books.

I don't judge these guys -- not one of them. They had a job to do. They did it.

 

[MapleDots]

Going forward, if folks want to engage me on the topics of faith and truth, this is a fine thread with which to do it, or otherwise privately. I will be happy to answer questions.

That's actually a really good idea, keep it in a single place.

Only thing I would say is keep it off twitter and such because it often gets quoted in the media.

Understand Rob, I don't pick sides and personally think free speech is a great thing, but I also feel there are boundaries. Everything in life has boundaries and to say all speech is protected would be a wrong assumption. I'm not addressing that statement to you directly but in general.

Personally I am rooting for Epik, I think there is a good possibility for it to morph into a monster of a registrar . However the monster in the registrar must show restraint because he is a public figure. Without restraint competitors will play the trump card and feed the monster. Placing little ones in certain places to egg you on and the media blowback could severely harm the company.

I used to run a multi million dollar company and restraint was always at the forefront of ANY official response. In the end the company has flourished and grown exponentially. I think this is what we all hope for Epik and personally as a domainer I sincerely hope the brand flourishes in the years ahead because godaddy definitely needs some competition.

Edit: Also note this topic does not display in the popular topics section so it is safer than most.

 

[TCK]

To get to truth, I think one has to get to the first cause, i.e. what existed before nothing existed. For some the first cause was a "big bang". However, what caused the big bang? As one follows the chain of first cause, you eventually get to a root first cause.

Whether your leap of faith is a "big bang", or "God", either way one's truth about matter ame into existence is a leap of faith. The main difference is whether you believe the event was intentional.

For me, God is the foundational truth. The Big Bang is an attempt to explain away God. How matter and life came into existence is a foundational truth. I find it categorically implausible that matter, life and consciousness in all their complexity can exist as a product of randomness.

On a more practical level, there are people who research conspiracies. In some cases, they found compelling proof of a deception. This deception is sometimes highly organized. JFK famously talked about the monolithic and ruthless conspiracy shortly before being assassinated.

If one searches further, one finds that while there is a Satan. He is the father of lies and the author of confusion and deception. Indeed, the greatest conspiracy of all is that Satan actually exists and that he is the God of this world, iconically symbolized on the US dollar bill as the Eye of Horus, or all seeing eye.

Since the fall of man in the Garden of Eden, Satan has been God of this world. He is operating behind the scenes at the top of the monolithic, ruthless and worldwide conspiracy. He has earthly rewards to offer, and has convinced much of humanity that earthly rewards is all there is when it is not.

The atheists and skeptics may brush the idea of a Satan aside as nonsense. And yet pedophilia, infanticide, licentiousness, and the general "do as thou wilt" mindset that pervades much of humanity, has a first mover as well, and that first mover is Satan, who desires for every human to die in their sins.

The Creator God, YHWH, who is sovereign over all, knows the end from the beginning and is outside of space and time, did provision a savior to atone for the sins of man. Jesus Christ, lamb of God, celebrated on Passover, was the final sacrifice. He rose again on the 3rd day and his reward is eternal life.

The Bible is my authority. I am confident that it is the inspired word of God. The prophets of the OT and apostles of the NT were able to document it. Mankind preserved it, word for word, to the present day. The Bible happens to give us a very clear duality of the works of the spirit and the works of the flesh:

The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, gentleness, and self-control. (Galatians 5:22-23)

On the other hand, we have the carnal state of man:

Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, envy, drunkenness, carousing. (Galatians 5:19-21)

I get that there are those who believe that they can through sheer force of will be more like the former and less like the latter. The point is that much human behavior can be explained by this duality. When someone finds the truth, I believe they finally begin to understand why the world works the way it does.

The search for TRUTH is ultimately a search for MEANING, i.e. why are we here. This search is ultimately a search for GOD. As stated prior, I believe there is absolutely nothing in this life, or on this earth, that is more noble or worthwhile than the search for that universal and all-encompassing truth.

Hope that helps someone.

@Rob Monster

Thanks for the detailed post on what you consider the truth. You'd be surprised how much of what you posted I would agree on and wouldn't mind discussing it further with you in private. Or anyone else that would like to as well.

However, what you posted is big-picture stuff.

When I say I believe there is only one truth, I am referring there can only be one truth for any given situation. Let me give you few examples:

- You ask your kid: "Did you finish your homework?"

- A cop pulls you over and asks: "Did you have anything to drink today?"

There can only be one truth in each situation. The facts are binary and can be easily verified. The truth will be established very quickly.

As we pull out into conspiracy theory situations, the truths are more complicated but I still believe there can only be one truth for each situation. Many facts, but only one truth.

Let me give you this example:

Back in 2017 a shooter in Las Vegas shot at a crowd attending an outdoor concert. He killed 58 people and wounded 422.

I come out on Gab.com or whatever, and post: The shooter was an experienced army sniper because of the high ground he chose and type of weapon. That he was hired by the deep state (or maybe Hillary Clinton and John Podesta) so that bump stocks would be banned.

Now, is that the truth? It may sound provocative, but I haven't provided any facts, any evidence.

If I was really a truth-seeker, I would take the time to really investigate and come up with some facts that back up my supposition before posting something that someone else can take as "truth" and possibly act on it. And if I don't find any facts, then I let it go. There's no there there.

Remember Pizzagate and the unnecessary mess that that conspiracy theory created?

People have been seriously hurt or killed as a result of unsupported conspiracy theories.

The problem is where do you draw the line.

How do you know that something goes under the fact/truth column or under the opinion/supposition column? How do you distinguish the two?

 

[Rob Monster]

@Rob Monster

Thanks for the detailed post on what you consider the truth. You'd be surprised how much of what you posted I would agree on and wouldn't mind discussing it further with you in private. Or anyone else that would like to as well.

However, what you posted is big-picture stuff.

When I say I believe there is only one truth, I am referring there can only be one truth for any given situation. Let me give you few examples:

- You ask your kid: "Did you finish your homework?"

- A cop pulls you over and asks: "Did you have anything to drink today?"

There can only be one truth in each situation. The facts are binary and can be easily verified. The truth will be established very quickly.

As we pull out into conspiracy theory situations, the truths are more complicated by I still believe there can only be one truth for each situation. Many facts, but only one truth.

Let me give you this example:

Back in 2017 a shooter in Las Vegas shot at a crowd attending an outdoor concert. He killed 58 people and wounded 422.

I come out on Gab.com or whatever, and post: The shooter was an experienced army sniper because of the high ground he chose and type of weapon. That he was hired by the deep state (or maybe Hillary Clinton) so that bump stocks would be banned.

Now, is that the truth? It may sound provocative, but I haven't provided any facts, any evidence.

If I was really a truth-seeker, I would take the time to really investigate and come up with some facts that back up my supposition before posting something that someone else can take as "truth" and possibly act on it.

Remember Pizzagate and the unnecessary mess that that conspiracy theory created?

People have been seriously hurt or killed as a result of unsupported conspiracy theories.

The problem is where do you draw the line.

How do you know that something goes under the fact/truth column or under the opinion/supposition column? How do you distinguish the two?

As for the Vegas incident, and Pizzagate, there are peculiarities with both. I have not deeply investigated either, but specifically to pedophilia, it is fairly rampant.

For example:

https://www.disclose.tv/stanley-kubrick-said-pedophiles-run-the-world-claims-nicole-kidman-314706

I don't need to study every allegation to believe that infanticide and pedophilia are demonic. However, this is one way that Satan knows for sure whose side you are actually on.

If an adult wants to explore alternative holes, that's their sovereign choice. However if an innocent child is forced into a sex act, the line has been crossed both legally and morally.

Satanic Ritual Abuse is absolutely a thing. It is a rabbit hole but it is absolutely another way that people come into the certainty that Satan is real.

Another example is the expression "eat shit". It is a common ritual in Hollywood -- a relatively benign but gross act of fealty before greater acts of fealty are required.

Dave Chappelle was one who apparently opted out of that program. He happens to be a Muslim, naming his own kids Abraham and Solomon, in the Arabic form, Ibrahim and Sulayman.

 

[Slanted]

Not fair to make a blanket statement. Very lazy.

Seriously? I tore your remarks to shreds in exquisite detail, quoting phrase after phrase, in 2 long posts:

https://www.namepros.com/threads/wh...-and-rob-monster.1128748/page-52#post-7199487

https://www.namepros.com/threads/wh...-and-rob-monster.1128748/page-53#post-7199656

Hardly a "blanket statement" and certainly not "very lazy". To learn why I think your remarks were ridiculous, re-read the posts above.

It just seems that in one breath you are in disagreement with Rob but then seem to be working as a team. Nothing wrong with that.

Wow. You really ARE obsessed with this conspiracy theory of yours – which paints me as Rob's alter ego or as secretly coordinating with Rob in some devious tag-team strategy to defeat you in this thread. You've brought it up day after day. Just the other day, you called me a liar because of this weird obsession of yours. And even though you apologized, here you go again.

If 2 people respond to you in a public thread with 50+ pages, it doesn't mean they are working as a team or that they are secretly the same person. How many more times must I spell this out for you? That I'm writing as an individual. That nobody has asked me to respond in NamePros, and that it's not an Epik task. That Rob and I don't coordinate NamePros posts whatsoever. That I am not Rob wearing a mask.

I don't know which conspiracy theory is more laughably absurd – that the earth is flat or that you believe I am secretly plotting with Epik's CEO to say that it's flat! Or is it that I'm Rob's sock puppet, which he uses to say critical things about himself in between talking about the Bible? @TCK your obsessive insinuations are borderline nuts.

Let me add that I am under no obligation to be 100% pro-Rob or 100% anti-Rob. So if you are confused that I sometimes say critical things and sometimes say supportive things, you may need to work on your critical thinking skills in general. For all your mumbling about "truth" and "facts", you seem to be bewildered by someone who takes a balanced or complex view of the world – as if I were a duplicitous shape shifter.

 

[TCK]

As for the Vegas incident, and Pizzagate, there are peculiarities with both. I have not deeply investigated either, but specifically to pedophilia, it is fairly rampant.

I don't need to study every allegation to believe that infanticide and pedophilia are demonic. However, this is one way that Satan knows for sure whose side you are actually on.

So you believe Pizzagate was real?

 

[TCK]

@Slanted

You can cherry pick which part of my posts you want to respond to, but you completely avoided the question on which posts about truth you find ridiculous.

@Rob Monster

You also completely missed the point of my post and went on a rant about child sex abuse and Satanic rituals.

 

[Slanted]

you completely avoided the question on which posts about truth you find ridiculous.

Nonsense. I included 2 links to 2 long posts in which I quote several of your posts in detail and rip them apart like cotton candy.

Since you keep babbling, pretending that I refuse to show why you're ridiculous, here is proof that I ridiculed you:

https://www.namepros.com/threads/wh...-and-rob-monster.1128748/page-52#post-7199487

https://www.namepros.com/threads/wh...-and-rob-monster.1128748/page-53#post-7199656

Even if you don't understand why you're being ridiculed, you should at least be aware that you have been ridiculed – and thoroughly. Satire and reductio ad absurdum are their own self-contained explanations. Re-read the posts where I ridiculed your posts if you're unclear about why I found them ridiculous. And stop saying I've avoided the question, or else I'll keep posting the answer.

 

[Rob Monster]

So you believe Pizzagate was real?

Ritual abuse of youth is real and has been for thousands of years, including sacrifices to the Canaanite deity called Moloch.

That being said, I have no opinion on what happened, or didn't happen in Washington DC, or Epstein Island, underneath the Getty or at Bohemian Grove. You will find references to this stuff if you go looking for it. The topics don't have much to do with domains but there are privately owned websites that are cataloging their findings. I don't believe any of them are Epik clients, with the exception of Infowars, whose founder famously leaked the Cremation of Care ritual:

I know enough to know that the duality of good and evil is real, and to believe that there are eternal stakes. Having established sufficient certainty that the duality exists, I have very little interest in exploring the morbid evidence of evil.