Aliens Eat Lana Turner

[From Rick Marken (2004.04.16.1430)]

Bill Williams (15 March 2004 2:00 PM CST)--

Does this gives Bill Powers the right to disrupt Michelle's
demonstration that Rick is almost totally clueless?

I think you would be even more effective if you would overcome your
inclination to temper your rants with terms like "almost". I think you made
a similar mistake in an earlier post where you said something like "even
Rick gets it right sometimes". Your audience will make these qualifications
on their own; you don't have to do it for them. Your job is to do what
_National Enquirer_ headlines do: make people think there must be
_something_ to what you are saying. All you have to do to accomplish this is
say awful things about me.

The great philosopher Joan Rivers once observed that people may know that
headlines like _Aliens Eat Lana Turner_ are false but these people will
still believe that "they must have eaten some _part_ of her" or the
_Enquirer_ wouldn't have printed it. This is the principle that should drive
your posts. Say as many outrageous things as possible about my purported bad
behavior. People may not believe that I do those specific things but they
will believe that I must have done _something_ bad, otherwise you wouldn't
have said such things.

You are carrying on a great tradition on CSGNet, a tradition started in 1998
with Tom Bourbon's post that contained the "headline": Bill Powers and Rick
Marken say RTP teachers are terrorists and Nazis (well, they must have said
_something_ bad about RTP teachers). The tradition was carried on by Dag
Forssell who introduced the headline: "Rick Marken attacks Ed Ford by
attacking Ed's religion" (well, he must have done something bad to Ed Ford).
Dag had a couple of other smears that I can't recall (Dag seems to have
realized that it was best to focus the smear campaign on me, Bill Powers,
after all, being the fellow who developed PCT). And in just the last few
weeks you have added at least three new headlines: "Rick calls Michelle an
ignorant slut", "Rick wants pedophiles in police departments" and, of
course, "Rick makes giant leaps backward in economics".

This is very imaginative material. And believe me, it's working. Even Bill
Powers thinks that I must be kind of bad or I wouldn't get all the bad
press? The important thing is to have no scruples. Imitate those greatest
destroyers of careers and reputations -- the _National Enquirer_ and, of
course, Joe McCarthy. Use the BIG lie, not the little one. And, of course,
continue to insist that its all completely true; Rick is unimaginably bad
(and stupid and incompetent, to boot). Even if this doesn't drive me off the
net (which it might, so don't give up hope) it still gets people to think
that I must be a _somewhat_ bad guy, even if I'm not as bad as you and your
friends make out. After all, even if it's not true that aliens ate Lana
Turner, they must have eaten some part of her.

Best regards

Rick

···

--
Richard S. Marken
MindReadings.com
Home: 310 474 0313
Cell: 310 729 1400

From[Bill Williams 16 April 2004 7:50 AM CST]

[From Rick Marken (2004.04.16.1430)]

Bill Williams (15 March 2004 2:00 PM CST)--

Does this gives Bill Powers the right to disrupt Michelle's
demonstration that Rick is almost totally clueless?

I think you would be even more effective if you would overcome your
inclination to temper your rants with terms like "almost".

Come to think of it there are several things that I could probably do, but have
made that much use of that would make my "rants" more effective. But, the
best thing for me to do is keep the "rants" as funny as possible. And, I find
that the most effective thing to do to make my "rants" funny is to imitate you.

I think you made
a similar mistake in an earlier post where you said something like "even
Rick gets it right sometimes".

I think you are the one is that is making the mistake. You see my audience
thinks that it is hilarious when I say something like this. They know that
despite the fact that I said it I really don't mean it. This is the reverse
method of communication from the one you employ. When, as you say, that you that
you never said that Michelle was an "ignorant slut." people know that this is what you
actually meant. Actually you did say it. But, your saying you didn't adds to the fun
everyone, including me, but perhaps not Michelle, had as a result of Rick being Rick.

Your audience will make these qualifications
on their own;

No, I really do think that they enjoy the faux subtleties that such qualifiers introduce--
like the ostentatious introduction of a bit of Frog talk from time to time.

you don't have to do it for them. Your job is to do what
_National Enquirer_ headlines do: make people think there must be
_something_ to what you are saying. All you have to do to accomplish this is
say awful things about me.

Actually I think that it is more effective when I quote Bill Powers saying
awful things about you. Bill Powers doesn't really like to say awful things
about you -- see his recent post -- but, when he becomes sufficiently
exasperated he gets himself worked up and comes up with these great lines
like that my favourite one when Bill Powers described you attempt to do
economic modelling as, "in some ways" a "giant leap in the wrong direction."
I really do think that it is important to qualify these awful things and put
them in context. Bill Powers thinks by leaving out these qualifiers that I
have come close to misrepresenting what he said. If I get any more complaints
the the only solution will be to reproduce the whole god dam critique.

The great philosopher Joan Rivers

Rick, if you read my fable "Running Naked in the Forest" and the supplementary
texts you may recall I mentioned these places that are sort of like temples
where the store these things called books. The places that people hide secrets
so that they will never ever be found again. Real philosophers put their deepest
secrets in books. I recommend book.

once observed that people may know that
headlines like _Aliens Eat Lana Turner_ are false but these people will
still believe that "they must have eaten some _part_ of her" or the
_Enquirer_ wouldn't have printed it. This is the principle that should drive
your posts. Say as many outrageous things as possible about my purported bad
behavior. People may not believe that I do those specific things but they
will believe that I must have done _something_ bad, otherwise you wouldn't
have said such things.

You are so right! It is the same sort of shocking stupidity that leads people
to think that simplely because Bill Powers described your effort to model the
economy as a "giant leap in the wrong direction." that he must have meant that
there was something badly wrong with how you were, and are, going about it.
As they say, no one every when broke under estimating the inteligence or the
taste of the public.

You are carrying on a great tradition on CSGNet, a tradition started in 1998
with Tom Bourbon's post that contained the "headline": Bill Powers and Rick
Marken say RTP teachers are terrorists and Nazis (well, they must have said
_something_ bad about RTP teachers).

You see how effective this is. I seem to remember you saying how much you
hated being lied to. Bill Powers, seems to have gotten this somewhat confused
when he described your position in terms of how much you love to hate.

The tradition was carried on by Dag
Forssell who introduced the headline: "Rick Marken attacks Ed Ford by
attacking Ed's religion" (well, he must have done something bad to Ed Ford).
Dag had a couple of other smears that I can't recall (Dag seems to have
realized that it was best to focus the smear campaign on me,

You are quite right. And, as you know, there is almost nothing that Dag would
rather see, other than his grandchildren, than a bucket of shit hitting you
square in the face.

Bill Powers, after all, being the fellow who developed PCT).

If you keep poking about in the archives you will see where I said the same
thing maybe a year ago or more. And, you might have noticed that despite
my tendency to cut Bill Powers some slack, when Bill Powers endulges himself
by making gratuitous howlers, I make fun of him too. It isn't going to cost
a dam thing to go to Mars, Yeah Right! The economists are a club that conspires
to keep secrets from everyone else. Sure Bill.

And in just the last few weeks you have added at least three new headlines:

"Rick calls Michelle an ignorant slut",

If I knew how to make the email work I'd put this in big type.

"Rick wants pedophiles in police departments"

I don't think I said that you "wanted" paedophiles in police departments, what I said
was that you thought that they along with everyone else would make good police
officers.

and, of course, "Rick makes giant leaps backward in economics".

But, of coure, But this last one is what Bill Powers said.

This is is very imaginative material.

Well, of course it is. I'm an imaginative guy. But, it gets a little extra zip as
a result of people remembering that you did say that Michelle is an "ignorant slut."

And, you did say that "anyone" could be a good police officier.

And, Bill did say that your econmics stuff ( I refuse to call it a model ) was a

Giant leap in the wrong direction.

And believe me, it's working.

It isn't that I don't believe you, but I would love to have an in depth and detail
damage report.

Even Bill Powers thinks that I must be kind of bad or I wouldn't get all the bad

press?

There isn't much traffic on CSGnet these days, but I understand that there is quite
a bit of back channel traffic. It isn't so much the "bad press" but the personal
mail that creates a feeling-- this isn't going well.

The important thing is to have no scruples.

I guess you are talking about me. I can't tell you how much this hurts-- because it
doesn't hurt at all. You are making a basic mistake here. The important thing is to
understand control theory. Then you can behave in a way to bring your perception
into equation with your reference level. And you, I suppose, have got a pretty good
idea what one of my reference levels is.

Imitate those greatest
destroyers of careers and reputations -- the _National Enquirer_ and, of
course, Joe McCarthy. Use the BIG lie, not the little one. And, of course,
continue to insist that its all completely true; Rick is unimaginably bad
(and stupid and incompetent, to boot). Even if this doesn't drive me off the
net (which it might, so don't give up hope) it still gets people to think
that I must be a _somewhat_ bad guy, even if I'm not as bad as you and your
friends make out.

Short of a war, I don't know of anyone who's done more damage to my life.

After all, even if it's not true that aliens ate Lana
Turner, they must have eaten some part of her.

Rick, as far as I'm concerned you geniunely are a monster. I know that Bill Powers
has found that you are handy to have around because you'll run errands for him.

But, I wonder, do you have any friends?

Bill Williams

···

Subject: Aliens Eat Lana Turner