Slashdot Mirror

What I offer here is an involved yet detached look at slashdot's casus belli. Perhaps time, further study, and more reflection will either modify or enrich the analysis offered here, but I shall return to this point in particular. Although not without overlap and simplification, I plan to identify three primary positions on slashdot's harangues. I acknowledge that I have not accounted for all possible viewpoints within the parameters of these three positions. Nevertheless, slashdot has been using all sorts of jiggery-pokery to convince people that mammonism is a sine qua non for mankind's happiness. That worldview may be appealing, at least to the worst types of unctuous schmucks I've ever seen, but it severely limits our national conversation on critical policy issues. Perhaps more painfully, slashdot will probably throw another hissy fit if we don't let it bamboozle people into believing that the future of the entire world rests in its hands. At least putting up with another slashdot hissy fit is easier than convincing slashdot's fans that I want to unify our community. Slashdot, in contrast, wants to drive divisive ideological wedges through it.

Slashdot's slaveys remain largely silent when asked about the correlative connecting slashdot to extremism. The rare times they do deign to comment they invariably skew the issue to prevent people from realizing that I have always been an independent thinker. I'm not influenced by popular trends, the media, or even so-called undisputed facts when parroted by others. Maybe that streak of independence is what first enabled me to see that slashdot has a talent for inventing fantasy worlds in which it never engages in primitive, petty, or effrontive politics. Then again, just because slashdot is a prolific fantasist doesn't mean that the health effects of secondhand smoke are negligible.

The worst kinds of tetchy rapscallions there are commonly succumb to slashdot's distortions, deceptions, and delusions. I do not. Rather, I take pride in dispensing justice. When slashdot was first found keeping us hypnotized so we don't review the basic issues at the root of the debate, I was scared. I was scared not only for my personal safety; I was scared for the people I love. And now that slashdot is planning to make life less pleasant for us, I'm undoubtedly downright terrified. I would like to end on a heartfelt note. I am aggrieved by slashdot's use of cameralism to play on people's irrational fears.
http://www.pakin.org/complaint...

What I have to say will probably provoke a response from Kirby Delauter. He may label me “philopolemical” or even “lawless”. I realize and accept that as a consequence of what I am about to say. However, I do indubitably hope that Kirby will read everything I have to say before labeling me. First and foremost, the hour is late indeed. Fortunately, it's not yet too late to banish intolerance.

It would be nice to say that pudibund fainéantism doesn't exist anymore but we all know that it does. Prudence is no vice. Cowardice—especially Kirby's counterproductive form of it—is.

Why doesn't Kirby realize that his head is so far in rectal defilade it would require major surgery to extricate it? Perhaps his failure of recognition lies rather in the degeneracy of the faculty of seeing than in the misrepresentation of the vision to be seen. It may be also confessed that Kirby's attempts to destroy the sovereignty of all nations and every feeling or expression of patriotism are much worse than mere exclusionism. They are hurtful, malicious, criminal behavior and deserve nothing less than our collective condemnation. He counts lamebrained philosophasters as his friends. Unfortunately for Kirby, these are hired friends, false friends, friends incapable of realizing for a moment that he is always prating about how conscienceless, cullionly boneheads aren't ever whiney. (He used to say that his canards are all sweetness and light, but the evidence is too contrary so he's given up on that score.)

Let's get reasonable; Kirby has become a patsy to his own malevolence. I'll stand by that controversial statement and even assume that most readers who bring their own real-life experience will agree with it. At a bare minimum, Kirby's pronouncements are a load of bunk. I use this delightfully pejorative term, “bunk”—an alternative from the same page of my criminal-slang lexicon would serve just as well—because this is just simple math. That is, if A is more pugnacious than B, and B is more pugnacious than C, then A is more pugnacious than C, right? In case you don't have the secret decoder ring, A is an uppity nihilarian; B is a loopy, daffy schnorrer; and C is Kirby Delauter.

At first blush, it appears that my rogues' gallery includes not only Kirby but also all of the self-serving patrioteers who help Kirby brainwash the masses into submission. However, we cannot afford to waste our time, resources, and energy by dwelling upon inequities of the past. Instead, we must denounce those who claim that Kirby's writings are a veritable encyclopedia of everything that is directly pertinent to mankind's spiritual and intellectual development. Doing so would be significantly easier if more people were to understand that there are two challenges we must face if we wish to repair the alabandical world we have inherited from Kirby. The first challenge is to make his clumsy scare tactics understood, resisted, and made the object of deserved contempt by young and old alike. This is only slightly less difficult than the second challenge, which is to convey to people the knowledge that ophidian, moonstruck lummoxes are somehow fascinated by Kirby's rummy diablerie, just as a dove is sometimes charmed by a glittering serpent. Unfortunately for such people, Kirby relies heavily on “useful idiots”, that is, people who unwittingly do Kirby's dirty work for him. Without his swarms of useful idiots, Kirby would not have been able to conceal the fact that it's amazing to me that his legates actually proclaim that he can override nature. Not only must such people be mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration, but I, speaking as someone who is not an obtuse rumormonger, am growing weary of Kirby's repeated claims that all minorities are poor, stupid ghetto trash. Here, I invoke the Royal Society's famous motto, Nullius in verba: take no one's word for it. That is, we should rely not on opinions but on objective scien

You think that's insightful? You might be interested in this site, you will find an endless stream of similarly "insightful" commentary....

> You got a URL for that?

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

That looks to be output from the Complaint Generator, so it involved less effort to create than your post did.

It's probably a reference to the fact that DNS-and-BIND has used that exact post before.

Here is the missing link: http://www.pakin.org/complaint

FYI, it is a rant generator. Getting too many clichés in one post makes me suspicious.

It's just a troll from the Complaint Generator.

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

It's drivel from the automatic complaint letter generator. http://www.pakin.org/complaint/

For those who aren't aware of it, this was composed using Scott Pakin's Automatic Complaint Letter Generator.

To learn how to do this yourself, please visit Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator

Thank you for your time and have a nice day.

Incidentally, I actually do accuse you of phallocentrism, unilateralism, child molestation, and halitosis, although not in that order.

Every few years a new wave of kids discover the Pakin Complaint Generator. Apparently it's that time again.

Twitter is typical of argumentative gasbags in his wild invocations to the irrational, the magic, and the fantastic to dramatize his views.

well, I know where you generated this, but it's just damn scary that most of it is factually correct...

The following letter is inspired by a quote from Thomas Paine: "He who dares not offend cannot be honest." Instead of focusing on why biased reporting and blatant disregard for the truth are hardly limited to highly visible media outlets, I would like to remind people that HiggsBison likes to compare his protests to those that shaped this nation. The comparison, however, doesn't hold up beyond some uselessly broad, superficial similarities that are so vague and pointless, it's not even worth summarizing them. He twists every argument into some sort of "struggle" between two parties. HiggsBison unvaryingly constitutes the underdog party, which is what he claims gives him the right to scrap the notion of national sovereignty. His double standards are based on two fundamental errors. They assume that cannibalism, wife-swapping, and the murder of infants and the elderly are acceptable behavior. And they promote the mistaken idea that hooliganism brings one closer to nirvana.

I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people. I can therefore assure you that if HiggsBison were to inculcate the hermeneutics of suspicion in otherwise open-minded people, social upheaval and violence would follow. It is therefore clear that HiggsBison will accelerate the natural tendency of civilization to devolve from order to chaos, liberty to tyranny, and virtue to vice because he possesses a hatred that defies all logic and understanding, that cannot be quantified or reasoned away, and that savagely possesses the most batty ex-cons I've ever seen with neo-biggety and uncontrollable rage. HiggsBison periodically puts up a facade of reform. However, underneath the pretty surface, it's always business as usual. If he thinks that he can make me cower before the emotions and accusations of others, then he's barking up the wrong tree. HiggsBison's understrappers work behind the scenes to shame my name. Now, that last statement is a bit of an oversimplification, an overgeneralization. But it is nevertheless substantially true.

You may not understand this now, and I don't fault you for that, but HiggsBison's grievances will have consequences -- very serious consequences. And we ought to begin doing something about that. You might think that anyone who doesn't know that HiggsBison is unforgiving must be inhabiting a different world. Well, if that's the case, then I'm afraid HiggsBison's vassals must have spent the past month on Mars. Are you beginning to get the picture here? If he feels ridiculed by all the attention my letters are bringing him, then that's just too darn bad. HiggsBison's arrogance has brought this upon himself. Anyway, I hope I've made my point, which is that the only morally sound solution is to deal summarily with polyloquent card sharks.

In any case, perhaps you were looking for this.

... was obviously from Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator

Spent a good 30 minutes looking for the source :)

Although I have no criticism of Mr. Anonymous Coward's blanket statements, I have a few observations and comments to share. For most of the facts I'm about to present, I have provided documentation and urge you to confirm these facts for yourself if you're skeptical. As our society continues to unravel, more and more people will be grasping for straws, grasping for something to hold onto, grasping for something that promises to give them the sense of security and certainty that they so desperately need. These are the sorts of people Mr. Coward preys upon. He must sense his own irremediable inferiority. That's why Mr. Coward is so desperate to disguise the complexity of color, the brutality of class, and the importance of religion and sexual identity in the construction and practice of philistinism; it's the only way for him to distinguish himself from the herd. It would be a lot nicer, however, if Mr. Coward also realized that he is always prating about how a plausible excuse is a satisfactory substitute for performance. (He used to say that stoicism is a viable and vital objective for our nation's educational institutions, but the evidence is too contrary, so he's given up on that score.) The bottom line is that Mr. Anonymous Coward got into a snit the last time I pointed out that questionable statistics, pseudoscientific studies, and biased reports tell us how to live, what to say, what to think, what to know, and -- most importantly -- what not to know.

automatic complaint-letter generator

Where did I find this? On an ANSWER forum? The Democratic National Committee's speeches? A letter from Marx?

None of them. The above letter is actually an *auto-generated* complaint from this website: http://www.pakin.org/complaint/

Granted, I typed in Bush under the "company" box rather than the box to complain about a person (which is why it writes "Bush sticking its proboscis" instead of "his"), but still, it's eerily similar to the daily frothing at the mouth rants that Leftists spew out about the President. Is this how war protesters write their speeches? By using auto-generators?

I wouldn't put it past them, considering that they've been repeating the same things over and over again, that they are flailing for originality.

Yes yes, very clever of you.

It's from http://www.pakin.org/complaint/ Don't feed the troll.

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

Just select "Pres." and use George W. Bush for the name. Now you have the same source as the NY Times!

This was made with an automatic complaint generator.

My complaint about Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator
I have something important I need to tell you. I anticipate it will result in my receiving a barrage of angry e-mail from Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator accusing me of being lackluster, but Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator is an institutional leech dedicated to sucking the life out of our doomed corpses. To organize my discussion, I suggest that we take one step back in the causal chain and unmask Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's true face and intentions in regard to hooliganism. The central paradox of Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sophistries, the twist that makes Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sound bites so irresistible to reckless, contemptible pamphleteers, is that these people truly believe that we should avoid personal responsibility.
For one thing, if Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator opened up its callous mind just a teeny-weeny little bit, maybe it could understand that. But more important, some people think that before bothering us with its next batch of garrulous flimflams, Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator should review the rules of writing a persuasive essay, most notably the one about sticking to the topic the writer establishes. Others maintain that even the most aberrant turncoats you'll ever see would think twice before sitting next to someone whose sole dream is to bask in the insecure shine of statism. In the interest of clearing up the confusion, I'll make the following observation: If we're to effectively carry out our responsibilities and make a future for ourselves, we will first have to direct our efforts toward clearly defined goals and measure progress toward those goals as frequently and as objectively as possible. So that there may be no misunderstanding, let me make it clear that I, speaking as someone who is not a featherbrained, illaudable vagabond, do not propose a supernatural solution to the problems we're having with Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. Instead, I propose a practical, realistic, down-to-earth approach that requires only that I overcome the obstacles that people like it establish.
Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's homilies promote a redistribution of wealth. This is always an appealing proposition for Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's supporters because much of the redistributed wealth will undoubtedly end up in the hands of the redistributors as a condign reward for their loyalty to Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. We were put on this planet to be active, to struggle, and to analyze Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's treatises in the manner of sociological studies of mass communication and persuasion. We were not put here to shame my name, as Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator might aver. When one examines the ramifications of letting Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator open the floodgates of prætorianism, one finds a preponderance of evidence leading to the conclusion that its apple-polishers have been staggering around like punch-drunk fighters hit too many times -- stunned, confused, betrayed, and trying desperately to rationalize its lubricious off-the-

My complaint about Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator
I have something important I need to tell you. I anticipate it will result in my receiving a barrage of angry e-mail from Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator accusing me of being lackluster, but Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator is an institutional leech dedicated to sucking the life out of our doomed corpses. To organize my discussion, I suggest that we take one step back in the causal chain and unmask Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's true face and intentions in regard to hooliganism. The central paradox of Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sophistries, the twist that makes Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sound bites so irresistible to reckless, contemptible pamphleteers, is that these people truly believe that we should avoid personal responsibility.
For one thing, if Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator opened up its callous mind just a teeny-weeny little bit, maybe it could understand that. But more important, some people think that before bothering us with its next batch of garrulous flimflams, Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator should review the rules of writing a persuasive essay, most notably the one about sticking to the topic the writer establishes. Others maintain that even the most aberrant turncoats you'll ever see would think twice before sitting next to someone whose sole dream is to bask in the insecure shine of statism. In the interest of clearing up the confusion, I'll make the following observation: If we're to effectively carry out our responsibilities and make a future for ourselves, we will first have to direct our efforts toward clearly defined goals and measure progress toward those goals as frequently and as objectively as possible. So that there may be no misunderstanding, let me make it clear that I, speaking as someone who is not a featherbrained, illaudable vagabond, do not propose a supernatural solution to the problems we're having with Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. Instead, I propose a practical, realistic, down-to-earth approach that requires only that I overcome the obstacles that people like it establish.
Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's homilies promote a redistribution of wealth. This is always an appealing proposition for Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's supporters because much of the redistributed wealth will undoubtedly end up in the hands of the redistributors as a condign reward for their loyalty to Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. We were put on this planet to be active, to struggle, and to analyze Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's treatises in the manner of sociological studies of mass communication and persuasion. We were not put here to shame my name, as Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator might aver. When one examines the ramifications of letting Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator open the floodgates of prætorianism, one finds a preponderance of evidence leading to the conclusion that its apple-polishers have been staggering around like punch-drunk fighters hit too many times -- stunned, confused, betrayed, and trying desperately to rationalize its lubricious off-the-

My complaint about Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator
I have something important I need to tell you. I anticipate it will result in my receiving a barrage of angry e-mail from Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator accusing me of being lackluster, but Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator is an institutional leech dedicated to sucking the life out of our doomed corpses. To organize my discussion, I suggest that we take one step back in the causal chain and unmask Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's true face and intentions in regard to hooliganism. The central paradox of Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sophistries, the twist that makes Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sound bites so irresistible to reckless, contemptible pamphleteers, is that these people truly believe that we should avoid personal responsibility.
For one thing, if Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator opened up its callous mind just a teeny-weeny little bit, maybe it could understand that. But more important, some people think that before bothering us with its next batch of garrulous flimflams, Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator should review the rules of writing a persuasive essay, most notably the one about sticking to the topic the writer establishes. Others maintain that even the most aberrant turncoats you'll ever see would think twice before sitting next to someone whose sole dream is to bask in the insecure shine of statism. In the interest of clearing up the confusion, I'll make the following observation: If we're to effectively carry out our responsibilities and make a future for ourselves, we will first have to direct our efforts toward clearly defined goals and measure progress toward those goals as frequently and as objectively as possible. So that there may be no misunderstanding, let me make it clear that I, speaking as someone who is not a featherbrained, illaudable vagabond, do not propose a supernatural solution to the problems we're having with Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. Instead, I propose a practical, realistic, down-to-earth approach that requires only that I overcome the obstacles that people like it establish.
Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's homilies promote a redistribution of wealth. This is always an appealing proposition for Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's supporters because much of the redistributed wealth will undoubtedly end up in the hands of the redistributors as a condign reward for their loyalty to Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. We were put on this planet to be active, to struggle, and to analyze Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's treatises in the manner of sociological studies of mass communication and persuasion. We were not put here to shame my name, as Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator might aver. When one examines the ramifications of letting Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator open the floodgates of prætorianism, one finds a preponderance of evidence leading to the conclusion that its apple-polishers have been staggering around like punch-drunk fighters hit too many times -- stunned, confused, betrayed, and trying desperately to rationalize its lubricious off-the-

My complaint about Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator
I have something important I need to tell you. I anticipate it will result in my receiving a barrage of angry e-mail from Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator accusing me of being lackluster, but Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator is an institutional leech dedicated to sucking the life out of our doomed corpses. To organize my discussion, I suggest that we take one step back in the causal chain and unmask Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's true face and intentions in regard to hooliganism. The central paradox of Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sophistries, the twist that makes Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sound bites so irresistible to reckless, contemptible pamphleteers, is that these people truly believe that we should avoid personal responsibility.
For one thing, if Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator opened up its callous mind just a teeny-weeny little bit, maybe it could understand that. But more important, some people think that before bothering us with its next batch of garrulous flimflams, Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator should review the rules of writing a persuasive essay, most notably the one about sticking to the topic the writer establishes. Others maintain that even the most aberrant turncoats you'll ever see would think twice before sitting next to someone whose sole dream is to bask in the insecure shine of statism. In the interest of clearing up the confusion, I'll make the following observation: If we're to effectively carry out our responsibilities and make a future for ourselves, we will first have to direct our efforts toward clearly defined goals and measure progress toward those goals as frequently and as objectively as possible. So that there may be no misunderstanding, let me make it clear that I, speaking as someone who is not a featherbrained, illaudable vagabond, do not propose a supernatural solution to the problems we're having with Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. Instead, I propose a practical, realistic, down-to-earth approach that requires only that I overcome the obstacles that people like it establish.
Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's homilies promote a redistribution of wealth. This is always an appealing proposition for Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's supporters because much of the redistributed wealth will undoubtedly end up in the hands of the redistributors as a condign reward for their loyalty to Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. We were put on this planet to be active, to struggle, and to analyze Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's treatises in the manner of sociological studies of mass communication and persuasion. We were not put here to shame my name, as Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator might aver. When one examines the ramifications of letting Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator open the floodgates of prætorianism, one finds a preponderance of evidence leading to the conclusion that its apple-polishers have been staggering around like punch-drunk fighters hit too many times -- stunned, confused, betrayed, and trying desperately to rationalize its lubricious off-the-

My complaint about Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator
I have something important I need to tell you. I anticipate it will result in my receiving a barrage of angry e-mail from Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator accusing me of being lackluster, but Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator is an institutional leech dedicated to sucking the life out of our doomed corpses. To organize my discussion, I suggest that we take one step back in the causal chain and unmask Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's true face and intentions in regard to hooliganism. The central paradox of Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sophistries, the twist that makes Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sound bites so irresistible to reckless, contemptible pamphleteers, is that these people truly believe that we should avoid personal responsibility.
For one thing, if Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator opened up its callous mind just a teeny-weeny little bit, maybe it could understand that. But more important, some people think that before bothering us with its next batch of garrulous flimflams, Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator should review the rules of writing a persuasive essay, most notably the one about sticking to the topic the writer establishes. Others maintain that even the most aberrant turncoats you'll ever see would think twice before sitting next to someone whose sole dream is to bask in the insecure shine of statism. In the interest of clearing up the confusion, I'll make the following observation: If we're to effectively carry out our responsibilities and make a future for ourselves, we will first have to direct our efforts toward clearly defined goals and measure progress toward those goals as frequently and as objectively as possible. So that there may be no misunderstanding, let me make it clear that I, speaking as someone who is not a featherbrained, illaudable vagabond, do not propose a supernatural solution to the problems we're having with Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. Instead, I propose a practical, realistic, down-to-earth approach that requires only that I overcome the obstacles that people like it establish.
Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's homilies promote a redistribution of wealth. This is always an appealing proposition for Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's supporters because much of the redistributed wealth will undoubtedly end up in the hands of the redistributors as a condign reward for their loyalty to Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. We were put on this planet to be active, to struggle, and to analyze Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's treatises in the manner of sociological studies of mass communication and persuasion. We were not put here to shame my name, as Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator might aver. When one examines the ramifications of letting Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator open the floodgates of prætorianism, one finds a preponderance of evidence leading to the conclusion that its apple-polishers have been staggering around like punch-drunk fighters hit too many times -- stunned, confused, betrayed, and trying desperately to rationalize its lubricious off-the-

My complaint about Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator
I have something important I need to tell you. I anticipate it will result in my receiving a barrage of angry e-mail from Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator accusing me of being lackluster, but Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator is an institutional leech dedicated to sucking the life out of our doomed corpses. To organize my discussion, I suggest that we take one step back in the causal chain and unmask Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's true face and intentions in regard to hooliganism. The central paradox of Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sophistries, the twist that makes Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sound bites so irresistible to reckless, contemptible pamphleteers, is that these people truly believe that we should avoid personal responsibility.
For one thing, if Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator opened up its callous mind just a teeny-weeny little bit, maybe it could understand that. But more important, some people think that before bothering us with its next batch of garrulous flimflams, Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator should review the rules of writing a persuasive essay, most notably the one about sticking to the topic the writer establishes. Others maintain that even the most aberrant turncoats you'll ever see would think twice before sitting next to someone whose sole dream is to bask in the insecure shine of statism. In the interest of clearing up the confusion, I'll make the following observation: If we're to effectively carry out our responsibilities and make a future for ourselves, we will first have to direct our efforts toward clearly defined goals and measure progress toward those goals as frequently and as objectively as possible. So that there may be no misunderstanding, let me make it clear that I, speaking as someone who is not a featherbrained, illaudable vagabond, do not propose a supernatural solution to the problems we're having with Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. Instead, I propose a practical, realistic, down-to-earth approach that requires only that I overcome the obstacles that people like it establish.
Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's homilies promote a redistribution of wealth. This is always an appealing proposition for Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's supporters because much of the redistributed wealth will undoubtedly end up in the hands of the redistributors as a condign reward for their loyalty to Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. We were put on this planet to be active, to struggle, and to analyze Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's treatises in the manner of sociological studies of mass communication and persuasion. We were not put here to shame my name, as Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator might aver. When one examines the ramifications of letting Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator open the floodgates of prætorianism, one finds a preponderance of evidence leading to the conclusion that its apple-polishers have been staggering around like punch-drunk fighters hit too many times -- stunned, confused, betrayed, and trying desperately to rationalize its lubricious off-the-

My complaint about Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator
I have something important I need to tell you. I anticipate it will result in my receiving a barrage of angry e-mail from Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator accusing me of being lackluster, but Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator is an institutional leech dedicated to sucking the life out of our doomed corpses. To organize my discussion, I suggest that we take one step back in the causal chain and unmask Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's true face and intentions in regard to hooliganism. The central paradox of Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sophistries, the twist that makes Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sound bites so irresistible to reckless, contemptible pamphleteers, is that these people truly believe that we should avoid personal responsibility.
For one thing, if Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator opened up its callous mind just a teeny-weeny little bit, maybe it could understand that. But more important, some people think that before bothering us with its next batch of garrulous flimflams, Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator should review the rules of writing a persuasive essay, most notably the one about sticking to the topic the writer establishes. Others maintain that even the most aberrant turncoats you'll ever see would think twice before sitting next to someone whose sole dream is to bask in the insecure shine of statism. In the interest of clearing up the confusion, I'll make the following observation: If we're to effectively carry out our responsibilities and make a future for ourselves, we will first have to direct our efforts toward clearly defined goals and measure progress toward those goals as frequently and as objectively as possible. So that there may be no misunderstanding, let me make it clear that I, speaking as someone who is not a featherbrained, illaudable vagabond, do not propose a supernatural solution to the problems we're having with Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. Instead, I propose a practical, realistic, down-to-earth approach that requires only that I overcome the obstacles that people like it establish.
Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's homilies promote a redistribution of wealth. This is always an appealing proposition for Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's supporters because much of the redistributed wealth will undoubtedly end up in the hands of the redistributors as a condign reward for their loyalty to Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. We were put on this planet to be active, to struggle, and to analyze Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's treatises in the manner of sociological studies of mass communication and persuasion. We were not put here to shame my name, as Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator might aver. When one examines the ramifications of letting Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator open the floodgates of prætorianism, one finds a preponderance of evidence leading to the conclusion that its apple-polishers have been staggering around like punch-drunk fighters hit too many times -- stunned, confused, betrayed, and trying desperately to rationalize its lubricious off-the-

My complaint about Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator
I have something important I need to tell you. I anticipate it will result in my receiving a barrage of angry e-mail from Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator accusing me of being lackluster, but Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator is an institutional leech dedicated to sucking the life out of our doomed corpses. To organize my discussion, I suggest that we take one step back in the causal chain and unmask Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's true face and intentions in regard to hooliganism. The central paradox of Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sophistries, the twist that makes Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sound bites so irresistible to reckless, contemptible pamphleteers, is that these people truly believe that we should avoid personal responsibility.
For one thing, if Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator opened up its callous mind just a teeny-weeny little bit, maybe it could understand that. But more important, some people think that before bothering us with its next batch of garrulous flimflams, Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator should review the rules of writing a persuasive essay, most notably the one about sticking to the topic the writer establishes. Others maintain that even the most aberrant turncoats you'll ever see would think twice before sitting next to someone whose sole dream is to bask in the insecure shine of statism. In the interest of clearing up the confusion, I'll make the following observation: If we're to effectively carry out our responsibilities and make a future for ourselves, we will first have to direct our efforts toward clearly defined goals and measure progress toward those goals as frequently and as objectively as possible. So that there may be no misunderstanding, let me make it clear that I, speaking as someone who is not a featherbrained, illaudable vagabond, do not propose a supernatural solution to the problems we're having with Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. Instead, I propose a practical, realistic, down-to-earth approach that requires only that I overcome the obstacles that people like it establish.
Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's homilies promote a redistribution of wealth. This is always an appealing proposition for Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's supporters because much of the redistributed wealth will undoubtedly end up in the hands of the redistributors as a condign reward for their loyalty to Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. We were put on this planet to be active, to struggle, and to analyze Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's treatises in the manner of sociological studies of mass communication and persuasion. We were not put here to shame my name, as Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator might aver. When one examines the ramifications of letting Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator open the floodgates of prætorianism, one finds a preponderance of evidence leading to the conclusion that its apple-polishers have been staggering around like punch-drunk fighters hit too many times -- stunned, confused, betrayed, and trying desperately to rationalize its lubricious off-the-

My complaint about Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator
I have something important I need to tell you. I anticipate it will result in my receiving a barrage of angry e-mail from Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator accusing me of being lackluster, but Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator is an institutional leech dedicated to sucking the life out of our doomed corpses. To organize my discussion, I suggest that we take one step back in the causal chain and unmask Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's true face and intentions in regard to hooliganism. The central paradox of Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sophistries, the twist that makes Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sound bites so irresistible to reckless, contemptible pamphleteers, is that these people truly believe that we should avoid personal responsibility.
For one thing, if Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator opened up its callous mind just a teeny-weeny little bit, maybe it could understand that. But more important, some people think that before bothering us with its next batch of garrulous flimflams, Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator should review the rules of writing a persuasive essay, most notably the one about sticking to the topic the writer establishes. Others maintain that even the most aberrant turncoats you'll ever see would think twice before sitting next to someone whose sole dream is to bask in the insecure shine of statism. In the interest of clearing up the confusion, I'll make the following observation: If we're to effectively carry out our responsibilities and make a future for ourselves, we will first have to direct our efforts toward clearly defined goals and measure progress toward those goals as frequently and as objectively as possible. So that there may be no misunderstanding, let me make it clear that I, speaking as someone who is not a featherbrained, illaudable vagabond, do not propose a supernatural solution to the problems we're having with Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. Instead, I propose a practical, realistic, down-to-earth approach that requires only that I overcome the obstacles that people like it establish.
Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's homilies promote a redistribution of wealth. This is always an appealing proposition for Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's supporters because much of the redistributed wealth will undoubtedly end up in the hands of the redistributors as a condign reward for their loyalty to Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. We were put on this planet to be active, to struggle, and to analyze Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's treatises in the manner of sociological studies of mass communication and persuasion. We were not put here to shame my name, as Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator might aver. When one examines the ramifications of letting Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator open the floodgates of prætorianism, one finds a preponderance of evidence leading to the conclusion that its apple-polishers have been staggering around like punch-drunk fighters hit too many times -- stunned, confused, betrayed, and trying desperately to rationalize its lubricious off-the-

My complaint about Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator
I have something important I need to tell you. I anticipate it will result in my receiving a barrage of angry e-mail from Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator accusing me of being lackluster, but Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator is an institutional leech dedicated to sucking the life out of our doomed corpses. To organize my discussion, I suggest that we take one step back in the causal chain and unmask Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's true face and intentions in regard to hooliganism. The central paradox of Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sophistries, the twist that makes Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sound bites so irresistible to reckless, contemptible pamphleteers, is that these people truly believe that we should avoid personal responsibility.
For one thing, if Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator opened up its callous mind just a teeny-weeny little bit, maybe it could understand that. But more important, some people think that before bothering us with its next batch of garrulous flimflams, Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator should review the rules of writing a persuasive essay, most notably the one about sticking to the topic the writer establishes. Others maintain that even the most aberrant turncoats you'll ever see would think twice before sitting next to someone whose sole dream is to bask in the insecure shine of statism. In the interest of clearing up the confusion, I'll make the following observation: If we're to effectively carry out our responsibilities and make a future for ourselves, we will first have to direct our efforts toward clearly defined goals and measure progress toward those goals as frequently and as objectively as possible. So that there may be no misunderstanding, let me make it clear that I, speaking as someone who is not a featherbrained, illaudable vagabond, do not propose a supernatural solution to the problems we're having with Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. Instead, I propose a practical, realistic, down-to-earth approach that requires only that I overcome the obstacles that people like it establish.
Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's homilies promote a redistribution of wealth. This is always an appealing proposition for Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's supporters because much of the redistributed wealth will undoubtedly end up in the hands of the redistributors as a condign reward for their loyalty to Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. We were put on this planet to be active, to struggle, and to analyze Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's treatises in the manner of sociological studies of mass communication and persuasion. We were not put here to shame my name, as Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator might aver. When one examines the ramifications of letting Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator open the floodgates of prætorianism, one finds a preponderance of evidence leading to the conclusion that its apple-polishers have been staggering around like punch-drunk fighters hit too many times -- stunned, confused, betrayed, and trying desperately to rationalize its lubricious off-the-

My complaint about Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator
I have something important I need to tell you. I anticipate it will result in my receiving a barrage of angry e-mail from Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator accusing me of being lackluster, but Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator is an institutional leech dedicated to sucking the life out of our doomed corpses. To organize my discussion, I suggest that we take one step back in the causal chain and unmask Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's true face and intentions in regard to hooliganism. The central paradox of Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sophistries, the twist that makes Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sound bites so irresistible to reckless, contemptible pamphleteers, is that these people truly believe that we should avoid personal responsibility.
For one thing, if Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator opened up its callous mind just a teeny-weeny little bit, maybe it could understand that. But more important, some people think that before bothering us with its next batch of garrulous flimflams, Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator should review the rules of writing a persuasive essay, most notably the one about sticking to the topic the writer establishes. Others maintain that even the most aberrant turncoats you'll ever see would think twice before sitting next to someone whose sole dream is to bask in the insecure shine of statism. In the interest of clearing up the confusion, I'll make the following observation: If we're to effectively carry out our responsibilities and make a future for ourselves, we will first have to direct our efforts toward clearly defined goals and measure progress toward those goals as frequently and as objectively as possible. So that there may be no misunderstanding, let me make it clear that I, speaking as someone who is not a featherbrained, illaudable vagabond, do not propose a supernatural solution to the problems we're having with Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. Instead, I propose a practical, realistic, down-to-earth approach that requires only that I overcome the obstacles that people like it establish.
Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's homilies promote a redistribution of wealth. This is always an appealing proposition for Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's supporters because much of the redistributed wealth will undoubtedly end up in the hands of the redistributors as a condign reward for their loyalty to Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. We were put on this planet to be active, to struggle, and to analyze Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's treatises in the manner of sociological studies of mass communication and persuasion. We were not put here to shame my name, as Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator might aver. When one examines the ramifications of letting Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator open the floodgates of prætorianism, one finds a preponderance of evidence leading to the conclusion that its apple-polishers have been staggering around like punch-drunk fighters hit too many times -- stunned, confused, betrayed, and trying desperately to rationalize its lubricious off-the-

My complaint about Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator
I have something important I need to tell you. I anticipate it will result in my receiving a barrage of angry e-mail from Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator accusing me of being lackluster, but Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator is an institutional leech dedicated to sucking the life out of our doomed corpses. To organize my discussion, I suggest that we take one step back in the causal chain and unmask Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's true face and intentions in regard to hooliganism. The central paradox of Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sophistries, the twist that makes Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sound bites so irresistible to reckless, contemptible pamphleteers, is that these people truly believe that we should avoid personal responsibility.
For one thing, if Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator opened up its callous mind just a teeny-weeny little bit, maybe it could understand that. But more important, some people think that before bothering us with its next batch of garrulous flimflams, Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator should review the rules of writing a persuasive essay, most notably the one about sticking to the topic the writer establishes. Others maintain that even the most aberrant turncoats you'll ever see would think twice before sitting next to someone whose sole dream is to bask in the insecure shine of statism. In the interest of clearing up the confusion, I'll make the following observation: If we're to effectively carry out our responsibilities and make a future for ourselves, we will first have to direct our efforts toward clearly defined goals and measure progress toward those goals as frequently and as objectively as possible. So that there may be no misunderstanding, let me make it clear that I, speaking as someone who is not a featherbrained, illaudable vagabond, do not propose a supernatural solution to the problems we're having with Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. Instead, I propose a practical, realistic, down-to-earth approach that requires only that I overcome the obstacles that people like it establish.
Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's homilies promote a redistribution of wealth. This is always an appealing proposition for Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's supporters because much of the redistributed wealth will undoubtedly end up in the hands of the redistributors as a condign reward for their loyalty to Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. We were put on this planet to be active, to struggle, and to analyze Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's treatises in the manner of sociological studies of mass communication and persuasion. We were not put here to shame my name, as Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator might aver. When one examines the ramifications of letting Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator open the floodgates of prætorianism, one finds a preponderance of evidence leading to the conclusion that its apple-polishers have been staggering around like punch-drunk fighters hit too many times -- stunned, confused, betrayed, and trying desperately to rationalize its lubricious off-the-

My complaint about Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator
I have something important I need to tell you. I anticipate it will result in my receiving a barrage of angry e-mail from Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator accusing me of being lackluster, but Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator is an institutional leech dedicated to sucking the life out of our doomed corpses. To organize my discussion, I suggest that we take one step back in the causal chain and unmask Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's true face and intentions in regard to hooliganism. The central paradox of Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sophistries, the twist that makes Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sound bites so irresistible to reckless, contemptible pamphleteers, is that these people truly believe that we should avoid personal responsibility.
For one thing, if Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator opened up its callous mind just a teeny-weeny little bit, maybe it could understand that. But more important, some people think that before bothering us with its next batch of garrulous flimflams, Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator should review the rules of writing a persuasive essay, most notably the one about sticking to the topic the writer establishes. Others maintain that even the most aberrant turncoats you'll ever see would think twice before sitting next to someone whose sole dream is to bask in the insecure shine of statism. In the interest of clearing up the confusion, I'll make the following observation: If we're to effectively carry out our responsibilities and make a future for ourselves, we will first have to direct our efforts toward clearly defined goals and measure progress toward those goals as frequently and as objectively as possible. So that there may be no misunderstanding, let me make it clear that I, speaking as someone who is not a featherbrained, illaudable vagabond, do not propose a supernatural solution to the problems we're having with Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. Instead, I propose a practical, realistic, down-to-earth approach that requires only that I overcome the obstacles that people like it establish.
Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's homilies promote a redistribution of wealth. This is always an appealing proposition for Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's supporters because much of the redistributed wealth will undoubtedly end up in the hands of the redistributors as a condign reward for their loyalty to Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. We were put on this planet to be active, to struggle, and to analyze Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's treatises in the manner of sociological studies of mass communication and persuasion. We were not put here to shame my name, as Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator might aver. When one examines the ramifications of letting Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator open the floodgates of prætorianism, one finds a preponderance of evidence leading to the conclusion that its apple-polishers have been staggering around like punch-drunk fighters hit too many times -- stunned, confused, betrayed, and trying desperately to rationalize its lubricious off-the-

My complaint about Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator
I have something important I need to tell you. I anticipate it will result in my receiving a barrage of angry e-mail from Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator accusing me of being lackluster, but Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator is an institutional leech dedicated to sucking the life out of our doomed corpses. To organize my discussion, I suggest that we take one step back in the causal chain and unmask Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's true face and intentions in regard to hooliganism. The central paradox of Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sophistries, the twist that makes Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sound bites so irresistible to reckless, contemptible pamphleteers, is that these people truly believe that we should avoid personal responsibility.
For one thing, if Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator opened up its callous mind just a teeny-weeny little bit, maybe it could understand that. But more important, some people think that before bothering us with its next batch of garrulous flimflams, Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator should review the rules of writing a persuasive essay, most notably the one about sticking to the topic the writer establishes. Others maintain that even the most aberrant turncoats you'll ever see would think twice before sitting next to someone whose sole dream is to bask in the insecure shine of statism. In the interest of clearing up the confusion, I'll make the following observation: If we're to effectively carry out our responsibilities and make a future for ourselves, we will first have to direct our efforts toward clearly defined goals and measure progress toward those goals as frequently and as objectively as possible. So that there may be no misunderstanding, let me make it clear that I, speaking as someone who is not a featherbrained, illaudable vagabond, do not propose a supernatural solution to the problems we're having with Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. Instead, I propose a practical, realistic, down-to-earth approach that requires only that I overcome the obstacles that people like it establish.
Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's homilies promote a redistribution of wealth. This is always an appealing proposition for Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's supporters because much of the redistributed wealth will undoubtedly end up in the hands of the redistributors as a condign reward for their loyalty to Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. We were put on this planet to be active, to struggle, and to analyze Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's treatises in the manner of sociological studies of mass communication and persuasion. We were not put here to shame my name, as Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator might aver. When one examines the ramifications of letting Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator open the floodgates of prætorianism, one finds a preponderance of evidence leading to the conclusion that its apple-polishers have been staggering around like punch-drunk fighters hit too many times -- stunned, confused, betrayed, and trying desperately to rationalize its lubricious off-the-

My complaint about Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator
I have something important I need to tell you. I anticipate it will result in my receiving a barrage of angry e-mail from Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator accusing me of being lackluster, but Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator is an institutional leech dedicated to sucking the life out of our doomed corpses. To organize my discussion, I suggest that we take one step back in the causal chain and unmask Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's true face and intentions in regard to hooliganism. The central paradox of Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sophistries, the twist that makes Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's sound bites so irresistible to reckless, contemptible pamphleteers, is that these people truly believe that we should avoid personal responsibility.
For one thing, if Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator opened up its callous mind just a teeny-weeny little bit, maybe it could understand that. But more important, some people think that before bothering us with its next batch of garrulous flimflams, Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator should review the rules of writing a persuasive essay, most notably the one about sticking to the topic the writer establishes. Others maintain that even the most aberrant turncoats you'll ever see would think twice before sitting next to someone whose sole dream is to bask in the insecure shine of statism. In the interest of clearing up the confusion, I'll make the following observation: If we're to effectively carry out our responsibilities and make a future for ourselves, we will first have to direct our efforts toward clearly defined goals and measure progress toward those goals as frequently and as objectively as possible. So that there may be no misunderstanding, let me make it clear that I, speaking as someone who is not a featherbrained, illaudable vagabond, do not propose a supernatural solution to the problems we're having with Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. Instead, I propose a practical, realistic, down-to-earth approach that requires only that I overcome the obstacles that people like it establish.
Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's homilies promote a redistribution of wealth. This is always an appealing proposition for Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's supporters because much of the redistributed wealth will undoubtedly end up in the hands of the redistributors as a condign reward for their loyalty to Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. We were put on this planet to be active, to struggle, and to analyze Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator's treatises in the manner of sociological studies of mass communication and persuasion. We were not put here to shame my name, as Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator might aver. When one examines the ramifications of letting Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator open the floodgates of prætorianism, one finds a preponderance of evidence leading to the conclusion that its apple-polishers have been staggering around like punch-drunk fighters hit too many times -- stunned, confused, betrayed, and trying desperately to rationalize its lubricious off-the-

That post was made with an automatic complaint generator .

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

That post was made using a complaint generator.

I could write a very angry letter right now about Microsoft, but I decided instead merely to express some constructive criticism. One of my objectives is to put to rest the animosities that have kept various groups of people from enjoying anything other than superficial unity. Microsoft knows how to lie. It's too bad it doesn't yet understand the ramifications of lying.

Looking at it on the bright side, Microsoft's allegations are sheer idiocy. That's pretty transparent. What's not so transparent is the answer to the following question: What exactly is Microsoft trying to hide? A clue might be that the term "idiot savant" comes to mind when thinking of Microsoft. Admittedly, that term applies only halfway to it, which is why I maintain that Microsoft never stops boasting about its generous contributions to charitable causes. As far as I can tell, however, its claimed magnanimousness is thoroughly chimerical and, furthermore, you should never forget the three most important facets of Microsoft's self-fulfilling prophecies, namely their wild origins, their internal contradictions, and their tendentious nature. I can assure you that the first lies that Microsoft told us were relatively benign. Still, they have been progressing. And they will continue to progress until there is no more truth; its lies will grow until they blot out the sun. ... Microsoft would toss quaint concepts like decency, fairness, and rational debate out the window if it got the chance.

even that generator is below the truth
My complaint about slashdot

I just want a little editorial balance here. It is worth noting at the outset that it seems clear that inhumane, polyloquent suborners of perjury have no business here. But we ought to look at the matter in a broader framework before we draw final conclusions on the subject: We see that slashdot is careless with data, makes all sorts of causal interpretations of things without any real justification, has a way of combining disparate ideas that don't seem to hang together, seems to show a sort of pride in its own biases, gets into all sorts of hateful speculation, and then makes no effort to test out its speculations -- and that's just the short list! Slashdot's revenge fantasies are designed to corrupt our youth. And they're working; they're having the desired effect. What's interesting is that we must oppose our human vices wherever they may be found -- arrogance, hatred, jealousy, unfaithfulness, avarice, and so on -- if we are ever to stick to the facts and offer only those arguments that can be supported by those facts. Yes, this is a bold, audacious, even unprecedented undertaking. Yes, it lacks any realistic guarantee of success. However, it is an undertaking that we must unmistakably pursue because slashdot ignores a breathtaking number of facts, most notably:

Fact: Slashdot has neither honor nor integrity, nor even knows what those words mean.

Fact: I hate slashdot's constant misuse of historical analogies.

Fact: Slashdot's scribblings are a cesspool of academicism.

In addition, the conflation of ophidian snobs and obdurate control freaks in slashdot's intimations is either dramatic hyperbole or a fatal methodological flaw. But what, you may ask, does any of that have to do with the theme of this letter, viz., that the law of parsimony suggests that there is not much demand for independent thinkers in its gestapo? You know the answer, don't you? You probably also know that it insists that truth is merely a social construct. This is a rather strong notion from someone who knows so little about the subject.

Slashdot has vowed that eventually it'll leave a large part of this country's workforce dislocated and disillusioned. This is hardly news; slashdot has been vowing that for months with the regularity of a metronome. What is news is that overbearing, capricious derelicts all over the country are now having an absolute field day with their new-found freedoms supposedly granted by slashdot's hastily mounted campaigns. Or, to express that sentiment without all of the emotionally charged lingo, slashdot and its chums are conniving menaces. This is not set down in complaint against them, but merely as analysis. The two things I just mentioned -- the way that for its own sake, slashdot should not deny both our individual and collective responsibility to live in harmony with each other and the world and the fact that it tends to forget what matters most -- may sound like they're completely unrelated, but they're not. The common link is that it periodically puts up a facade of reform. However, underneath the pretty surface, it's always business as usual. Slashdot has been offering the worst kinds of misguided prevaricators there are a lot of money to cause pain and injury to those who don't deserve it. This is blood money, plain and simple. Anyone thinking of accepting it should realize that my purpose here is not to enable adversaries to meet each other and establish direct personal bonds which contradict the stereotypes they rely upon to power their prolix half-measures. Well, okay, it is. But I should point out that when a mistake is made, the smart thing to do is to admit it and reverse course. That takes real courage. The way that slashdot stubbornly refuses to own up to its mistakes serves only to convince me that I have a message for it. My message is that, for the good of us all, it should never apotheosize humorless masters of deceit. It should never

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

I skimmed this and thought, "Hmm, this looks like the kind of text that would be generated by a script." A couple of minutes of searching (via Google, ironically enough) turned up the Automatic Complaint Generator.

Sigh. Remember when trolling was an art form, when people would put time, effort, and (dare I say it?) heart into inciting flame wars, even when posting as Anonymous Cowards. The kids these days are just phoning it in, and that saddens this oldtimer's heart.

http://www.pakin.org/complaint/ COMPLAINT GENERATOR. SIMPLE.

Mod me down -5 Offtopic Idiot, but it took me 3 or 4 readings of that sentence to figure out what the hell he's is talking about, an I'm still not sure.

He isn't talking about anything. The whole rant is apparently generated by some sort of computer program (like the complaint letter generator), and only appears to make sense because of the inherent tendency of human brains to find patterns anywhere, even in white noise.

That, or he's just trolling. And let's not forget that he does have a financial interest in web comics, being associated with a dead-tree comics publisher, so he could be simply spreading FUD.

very close

http://www.pakin.org/complaint

^^
Its a wonderful tool :)

Software piracy

SIR - Your article on software piracy was extreme, misleading and irresponsible ("BSA or just BS?", May 21st). The headline was particularly offensive. The implication that an industry would purposely inflate the rate of piracy and its impact to suit its political aims is ridiculous. The problem is real and needs no exaggeration.



What an amusing little letter from an organization such as BSA.

extreme, misleading and irresponsible

Fine, enlighten us then- what is so "BS" about it, any proof/evidence?

The headline was particularly offensive.

W00t, let's go after the title, not the actual story itself! Attack the title to create an impression! Yes that's the way to win an arguement.

The implication that an industry would purposely inflate the rate of piracy and its impact to suit its political aims is ridiculous.

I don't see why not. Wow, I am really speechless. Fine, if you want to accuse the E of slendering, provide evidence that would uphold in a court battle.

The problem is real and needs no exaggeration.

So is your logic apparently.

Jesus, I can't believe the government is delegating the enforcement power to these idiots. This stuff looks as if it had been pass thru the random complain letter generator.

They should just hire me- even I can do better than that.

Scott Pakin's Automatic Complaint Letter Generator :)

I've always been a fan of Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. When I was in college, we used this all the time, including for submitting letters to the editor of our school paper. Letters that were actually printed. (Guess which one).

This post was brought to you by a shameless plug.