FDR Liberated Forum

General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Oliver Cromwell on September 04, 2018, 06:47:54 PM

Title: Tricking Molyneux Into A Debate.
Post by: Oliver Cromwell on September 04, 2018, 06:47:54 PM
Since we all know that Molyneux doesn't actually let informed critics debate him most of the time, could it be possible to trick Molyneux into letting you on the show by pretending to be a fan, then proceeding to make him look like a jackass?
Title: Re: Tricking Molyneux Into A Debate.
Post by: Weston Dupree on September 04, 2018, 08:10:09 PM
I've thought of that too. Though I personally wouldn't bother. It would definitely be cool though if someone is willing to go through the trouble.

I know this is slightly off topic, but I was all set to go to Manhattan and stand with the lefties with a "Molyneux is a cult leader" sign, but I had a birthday party to go to back in January. There was another time where I was at a Trump rally and I met two Infowars guys, but it slipped my mind to bring up Molyneux. Been kicking myself ever since. If anyone's interested, I've posted about the political internet celebrities that I talked to about Molyneux. I could find them if anyone's curious. 
Title: Re: Tricking Molyneux Into A Debate.
Post by: Lupus on September 04, 2018, 08:20:36 PM
Yes, same here, I have the same thought too.

But . . . . seeing as the show is recorded (and not live) I can't imagine a call to his call-in show that didn't result in some kind of 'victory' for Molyneux would ever be uploaded.

Title: Re: Tricking Molyneux Into A Debate.
Post by: summa logicae on September 04, 2018, 11:08:34 PM
Yes, same here, I have the same thought too.

But . . . . seeing as the show is recorded (and not live) I can't imagine a call to his call-in show that didn't result in some kind of 'victory' for Molyneux would ever be uploaded.

I had the same thought. There's simply no way he would ever allow any debate to be made public, in which he's plainly made to look wrong. His debate performance was considered bad before by his  fans to be sure, but only because they thought he was being a bully, not because they thought he was wrong.
Title: Re: Tricking Molyneux Into A Debate.
Post by: Weston Dupree on September 05, 2018, 08:02:50 AM
Yes, same here, I have the same thought too.

But . . . . seeing as the show is recorded (and not live) I can't imagine a call to his call-in show that didn't result in some kind of 'victory' for Molyneux would ever be uploaded.

I had the same thought. There's simply no way he would ever allow any debate to be made public, in which he's plainly made to look wrong. His debate performance was considered bad before by his  fans to be sure, but only because they thought he was being a bully, not because they thought he was wrong.

True. Though the person who debates him could record it.
Title: Re: Tricking Molyneux Into A Debate.
Post by: The Observer on September 05, 2018, 04:24:35 PM
Some months ago, someone posted a comment on my channel stating they had a conversation where he felt Molyneux was very embarrassed and the show ended up not being published.  I don't remember if he mention that he recorded it.  There's no way Molyneux would upload a podcast where he shows his ignorance or weakness.  Sooner or later, someone will likely record a debate with him on their own end and upload it. 
Title: Re: Tricking Molyneux Into A Debate.
Post by: Lupus on September 06, 2018, 03:06:42 AM
True. Though the person who debates him could record it.

Good point, I think that's what Anarcopac did . . .

( link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqghKRF9564&pbjreload=10 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqghKRF9564&pbjreload=10) )

. . . the only issue here is that Molyneux's reach is so much bigger than any of his critics, even if you were to roundly trounce him on whatever issue you were debating - and upload it your own channel - it would quickly fall off the radar.
Title: Re: Tricking Molyneux Into A Debate.
Post by: QuestEon on September 06, 2018, 09:41:25 PM
In 2010, a guy named mgeduld showed up on FDR. He usually posted on the MetaFilter forum under the name "Grumblebee."

He was very bright and completely unfamiliar with the territory. He takes FDR at face value. Then he starts to notice that not everyone thinks FDR is on the up-and-up.

So he innocently starts a conversation about that, which creates a huge firestorm. So, again, he innocently decides to have a Skype chat with Molyneux, who will explain everything and make it all make sense.

The chat room goes wild during the call, as the FDR faithful grew apoplectic over mgeduld's insistence on discussing FDR's critics.

In the end, Molyneux's strategy of explaining everything was to delete the Skype audio, pretend the conversation and mgeduld never existed, and forge forward with his "community" of True Believers.

Pretty funny stuff. Someone actually recorded the audio and preserved it as MP3s. The audio isn't great but it's the only surviving proof the conversation took place. I still have them.

That's what happens if you manage to trick Molyneux into a debate. You simply get disappeared.
Title: Re: Tricking Molyneux Into A Debate.
Post by: Lupus on September 07, 2018, 04:58:19 AM
Pretty funny stuff. Someone actually recorded the audio and preserved it as MP3s. The audio isn't great but it's the only surviving proof the conversation took place. I still have them.

Is there anywhere we could take a listen, for example are they on a blog or a YouTube channel somewhere ?

By the way I can repair the audio for you if you like (depending on the condition of the original signal).
Title: Re: Tricking Molyneux Into A Debate.
Post by: jety on September 08, 2018, 10:56:51 AM
Questeon

I'd like to hear that debate as well. If you don't want to upload it, perhaps you could email it to us.
Title: Re: Tricking Molyneux Into A Debate.
Post by: JimJesus on September 09, 2018, 07:46:46 PM
Don't tease us, QuestEon.
Title: Re: Tricking Molyneux Into A Debate.
Post by: Brainpolice2 on September 20, 2018, 11:09:57 AM
I would reframe this a little bit. It is not necessarily that Molyneux favors "uninformed critics". Rather, it's the fact that most of his critics are people like me, who are informed, but don't have "public speaking" skills and sheer verbal speed like he does. So in a call-in show format, with the aggressive way he tries to bully dialogue, it's very easy to appear weak or for him to "show you up" by exploiting your lack of ability to quickly counter him verbally.

It was much easier for me to get my point across in writing than when I "debated" Molyneux on his call-in show those years ago. That's why I did a follow-up blogpost at the time, to clarify what my argument was and point out where he was manipulating the dialogue after listening back to it, because the call-in show "debate" was mostly an hour and half of him dodging my points, trying to trip me up, and going on tangents. Also, Molyneux's original request to debate him was in reaction to a prior blogpost of mine that criticized his position on a number of topics.

In a way, the way that Molyneux operates is such that *he* is/was the one who tricks other people into debating him. He would mine the internet and libertarian movement for people criticizing him, like me and other people who were "20 something intellectually oriented types" at the time and in similar circles, and invite them to a "debate" in a faux-nice sort of way, then try to "destroy" them on his turf, on his terms.

By the way, after I posted that follow-up blog post, Molyneux was basically clearly mad, as he then did an entire follow up "public shaming ritual" podcast essentially condemning me from the FDR club in grandois terms, which was much more emotionally toned on his part than my call-in "debate" with him. The whole thing was revealing and bizarre.
Title: Re: Tricking Molyneux Into A Debate.
Post by: Faith on September 20, 2018, 03:21:51 PM
Hi Brainpolice

Do you think Stefan is really more interested in "destroying" his opponents than in the actual debate?
 I haven't watched any of his debates, and I admit that I haven't watched many of his YouTube videos, either.  The reason being that I literally can't stand the man; his annoying smugness, illogical assumptions and endless red herring distractions, irritate me to the point of screaming 😁

I should add, I'm obviously a good deal older than most of the posters here- and I've had experiences with narcissistic people over the years - and I quickly recognized there is something very WRONG with Stefan.

But, I'm curious about your thoughts on this - does Stefan just want to "win" , and does he get an ego boost from believing that he "destroyed " his opponent?

What's also interesting is that Jordan Peterson (another man I thoroughly dislike ) has bragged about his own ability to verbally dominate others - this is something he prides himself with - being a VERBAL BULLY.

 
Title: Re: Tricking Molyneux Into A Debate.
Post by: QuestEon on September 23, 2018, 09:50:04 AM
Don't tease us, QuestEon.


Okey dokey. So sorry for the delay. But first, a preamble:

1. Several years ago,  I made a "super-secret" blog :-) where I could house Molyneux-deleted podcasts (mostly the ones featuring Christina). Below is one of the posts on that blog--"The Mgeduld affair." In short, Mgeduld was trying to have an honest conversation about criticisms of FDR. It didn't seem to go well!

2. This MP3 was made by a listener during the chat between Mgeduld and Molyneux on August 20, 2010. The quality is not good. On-line technology has improved a lot in the past few years but at the time Molyneux had just begun to use Skype. There were a lot of drops and dead air in the original audio but I have cut most of them out.

3. In those days--before Molyneux began using his fawning mini-me Michael DeMarco--listeners who wanted to chat with Molyneux would gather in the now defunct FDR chatroom and ask the fawning James Pyrich to be entered into the queue and await their turn to speak to the Great Man. During those "confabs," FDR members (who were listening to the conversation as it occurred) would also make running comments in the chatroom. During the Mgeduld conversation, the population in the chatroom swelled significantly. This was probably due to "outsiders" who were interested in how the conversation would go. I have included the chat logs (also a gift from a listener) that start with Mgeduld asking to be put into the cue, the FDR members flipping out during the conversation, and them Mgeduld joining the chatroom again post-conversation with Molyneux.

4. Mgeduld was probably attracted to the FDR conversation and the criticisms of Molyneux due to the (at the time) large degree of attention being paid to a woman named bake, who was absolutely crushing the "logic" behind Molyneux's book "Real-Time Relationships: The Logic of Love." Since Molyneux could not beat her logic, he eventually pronounced her mentally unstable and banned her. You may notice her being referred to by Mgeduld and others in the chat logs. I wrote about the bake event in this too-long article here: (Allison’s last card (http://www.fdrliberated.com/stefan-molyneux-philosophy/freedomain-radio-allisons-last-card/)).

For those who don't remember, this was a fairly significant event, as bake was joined in this effort by long-time FDR supporter Allison. Together, they basically humiliated Molyneux while he stood helplessly by. I've always been fascinated when Molyneux's world, which consists mainly of him and sycophantic young men, is invaded by smarter women who deftly turn everything upside down, as Noesis did with UPB, bake and Allison did with Real-Time Relationships, and Tru Shibes did with, well, everything else. And yet you wonder where his misogyny comes from. 

So, there's the preamble. Here's my entire secret blog post (which I already partly quoted above), with links. (I probably won't refresh them, so if you're reading this months from now and they're dead, sorry.)

-------------------------------

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 3, 2010

The "mgeduld" Affair

So, this guy named mgeduld shows up on FDR one day. Turns out he usually posts on a site named MetaFilter under the name "Grumblebee," but his real name is Marcus.

(Reminds me of that Beatles song--"her name was McGill, and she called herself Lil, but everyone knew her as Nancy") :-)

He's heard about FDR on MetaFilter and has decided to learn more.

He's very bright and completely unfamiliar with the territory. He takes FDR at face value. Then he starts to notice that not everyone thinks FDR is on the up-and-up.

So he innocently starts a conversation on the forum about that, which creates a huge firestorm. So, again, he innocently decides to have a Skype chat with Molyneux, who will explain everything and make it all make sense.

The chat room goes wild during the call, as the FDR faithful grow apoplectic over mgeduld's insistence on discussing FDR's critics.

In the end, Molyneux's strategy of explaining everything is to delete the Skype audio, pretend the conversation and mgeduld never existed, and forge forward with his "community" of True Believers.

Pretty funny stuff.

Attached is the audio in MP3 form, but it is not of typical FDR quality (that version is gone forever). This is a rogue recording from someone near and dear to this blog's heart. There was something wrong with the Skype connection that night, resulting in many spots of "dead air" and garbled audio. I have removed most of those.

Also enclosed is the entire chatroom transcript from before and slightly after the Molyneux/mgeduld Skype chat.


Download: Sunday Show 08/29/2010 Mgeduld and Molyneux.mp3 (http://www.mediafire.com/file/r3rjkznocwa17qy/SundayShow290810_live_mgeduld.mp3/file)

Chat Log Part 1--Call-in with mgeduld regarding MetaFilter (http://www.mediafire.com/file/wndwahkml6o7iz0/2010-08-29_21-17_call_in_mgeduld_on_metafilter_thread.txt/file)

Chat Log Part 2--Molyneux doesn't understand mgeduld's questions about FDR as self-promotional propoganda (http://www.mediafire.com/file/8ozkzeza7ecrmy1/2010-08-29_22-07_call_in_Stef_not_understand_question_about_propaganda_Call_dropped_again.txt/file)

Chat Log Part 3--mgeduld persists, but Molyneux claims on only 30 bans from 8,500 members in five years (http://www.mediafire.com/file/vee8a5cp36w5o88/2010-08-29_22-38_chatroom_mgeduld_persists_Stef_on_30_bans_from_8500_in_5_years.txt/file)

Chat Log Part 4--mgeduld feels community is responding to him as an attacker (http://www.mediafire.com/file/6ka31ldl1n0wgnt/2010-08-29_23-23_mgeduld_feels_community_is_responding_to_him_as_an_attacker.txt/file)
Title: Re: Tricking Molyneux Into A Debate.
Post by: Patience on September 24, 2018, 07:40:08 AM
Molyneux's "fawning mini-me" is Michael DeMarco, not DeFranco!
Title: Re: Tricking Molyneux Into A Debate.
Post by: QuestEon on September 24, 2018, 08:33:13 AM
Molyneux's "fawning mini-me" is Michael DeMarco, not DeFranco!
Ha ha! Thanks for the correction! Fixed.
Title: Re: Tricking Molyneux Into A Debate.
Post by: Oliver Cromwell on September 24, 2018, 12:24:02 PM
Quote
Molyneux's "fawning mini-me" is Michael DeMarco, not DeFranco!

Would make sense though. After all, Spanish dictator Francisco Franco was also an advocate of defooing - seizing children from leftist parents and giving them to good, right-wing Christians instead. The sort of thing Molyneux should support.
Title: Re: Tricking Molyneux Into A Debate.
Post by: Lupus on September 24, 2018, 01:50:32 PM
Quote
Molyneux's "fawning mini-me" is Michael DeMarco, not DeFranco!

Would make sense though. After all, Spanish dictator Francisco Franco was also an advocate of defooing - seizing children from leftist parents and giving them to good, right-wing Christians instead. The sort of thing Molyneux should support.

Well . . . in podcast FDR-3718 Molyneux says that it's better that a child is brought up in a Christian family that physically abuses their children - rather than being brought up without abuse in an non-religious family.



Title: Re: Tricking Molyneux Into A Debate.
Post by: QuestEon on September 24, 2018, 06:08:10 PM
Do you think Stefan is really more interested in "destroying" his opponents than in the actual debate?...

...But, I'm curious about your thoughts on this - does Stefan just want to "win" , and does he get an ego boost from believing that he "destroyed " his opponent?
 

Well, I'll take a shot. I mentioned earlier that every interaction Molyneux has, even when he's having a little "therapy" call-in with one of his followers, is conducted as a debate (that he must win).

Why is that? Over the years, I've talked to a few practicing psychologists who consistently remind me that they wouldn't diagnose someone unless they were sitting in front of them. Therefore, I've always been reluctant to pronounce Molyneux as a narcissist (although I have done that every once in a while)!

Nevertheless, the more I've learned about narcissism, the more I think I understand him and the more his actions make sense to me.

The base need of every narcissist is "narcissistic supply"--praise and acknowledgement of their superiority. It is such a powerful craving. They need it like we need air.

That's the distinction I'd offer to your question:  A run-of-the-mill bully won't have a problem assaulting someone when no one is looking. A narcissist must have an audience. The audience is the most important part.

Molyneux's alleged verbal vanquishing of Brainpolice (who, by the way, had a better command of the topic at hand and is a better writer than Molyneux) certainly gave Molyneux a little buzz and helped to prop up his false self for a moment.

The REAL benefit came next, as Molyneux's adoring fans came back with a chorus of "You're the greatest, SM!" "You're still the champ, SM!" "No one will ever beat you, SM!" or whatever version of praise they were using that day.

That means everything to him. I would imagine Molyneux's real self (which we'll never see), knows all too well his failures and failings. I wouldn't be surprised if he dwells on them. The false self is so fragile--it has to have its constant supply to exist.

By extension, I've often mentioned that the people Molyneux employs to keep the accounts and comments of "trolls" (i.e., people who expose Molyneux's errors or shady behaviors) erased from all of his social media do so because it makes good business sense. (If you're going to market yourself as an infallible uber genius, then it just won't do to have people make you look ridiculous.)  But I think the other reason is narcissistic supply. On all of his media accounts, Molyneux can look back on continuous praise every time he needs to give his false self a little boost. And I'll bet you he does just that. It's all an illusion, but it seems to be working for him for now.
Title: Re: Tricking Molyneux Into A Debate.
Post by: Lupus on September 25, 2018, 02:09:25 PM
Download: Sunday Show 08/29/2010 Mgeduld and Molyneux.mp3 ([url]http://www.mediafire.com/file/r3rjkznocwa17qy/SundayShow290810_live_mgeduld.mp3/file[/url])



Cleaned up audio - not perfect (as the original is pretty ropey) but a fair bit more listenable / intelligible than the original.

MP3 link > http://www.mediafire.com/file/06if0q7xjxg2zv9/repair.mp3/file (http://www.mediafire.com/file/06if0q7xjxg2zv9/repair.mp3/file)
Title: Re: Tricking Molyneux Into A Debate.
Post by: Faith on September 25, 2018, 04:47:38 PM
I think you're right, Questeon. Stef definitely depends on the ego boost (narcissistic supply) he gets from adoring fans and his hapless puppets. And while we can't diagnose him online, I think it's fair to say that Molyneux often exhibits behaviour consistant with narcissism.

I have a strong suspicion that some of those Molyneux puppets are responsible for a few of the recent odd threads that have been posted here - such as the CIA conspiracy BS from a few days ago, which is why I replied to them the way I did. I am currently being trolled and attacked on another forum (and i have reason to suspect the same culprits as the 'Honeypot' guys) However the other forum has an extremely misogynistic "moderator" who is allowing, and I believe encouraging, the abuse.

Title: Re: Tricking Molyneux Into A Debate.
Post by: QuestEon on September 25, 2018, 04:58:34 PM
Download: Sunday Show 08/29/2010 Mgeduld and Molyneux.mp3 ([url]http://www.mediafire.com/file/r3rjkznocwa17qy/SundayShow290810_live_mgeduld.mp3/file[/url])



Cleaned up audio - not perfect (as the original is pretty ropey) but a fair bit more listenable / intelligible than the original.

MP3 link > [url]http://www.mediafire.com/file/06if0q7xjxg2zv9/repair.mp3/file[/url] ([url]http://www.mediafire.com/file/06if0q7xjxg2zv9/repair.mp3/file[/url])


Great! Thank you!!
Title: Re: Tricking Molyneux Into A Debate.
Post by: mgeduld on October 01, 2018, 02:13:07 PM
Wow. What a blast from the past. I'm mgeduld/grumblebee. I've maintained an interest in Molyneux and FDR, and I learned a huge amount about myself from that incident--about the ways I'm gullible. Prior to that, I never thought I was the sort of person who could be sucked into a cult. Now I know which buttons of mine are most easily pushed.

I'm always thirsty for intellectual discussion, and I never feel like I have enough of it in my life. When it comes to talking about ideas, I'm like a frustrated teenager who longs for sex.

I simply bought the idea that this is what FDR was about--and I was briefly seduced. I *wanted* it to be true. If Molyneux and his community had a been a bit more sophisticated (if the irrationality and corruption hasn't been so glaringly obvious), or if I had been a bit younger, I can imagine having written a check or made some terrible life decisions. And just because the FDR crowd *wasn't* sophisticated in that way, it doesn't mean some other group won't be in the future. The experience made me shed some hubris, and I'm glad of that.

Immediately after the skype call in which I tried and failed to get M to discuss his critics, he called me privately. I remember his tone was much humbler than it had been when talking in public. He seemed--*semmed*--to genuinely want to talk and to be my friends. But it was too late by then. My credulity was used up.

I probably check this forum a couple of times a year. I think it's terrific, but I have too much going on to check it continually. So it was just random chance that made me check today and see this thread!
Title: Re: Tricking Molyneux Into A Debate.
Post by: Patience on October 02, 2018, 04:55:13 AM
I simply bought the idea that this is what FDR was about--and I was briefly seduced. I *wanted* it to be true. If Molyneux and his community had a been a bit more sophisticated (if the irrationality and corruption hasn't been so glaringly obvious), or if I had been a bit younger, I can imagine having written a check or made some terrible life decisions. And just because the FDR crowd *wasn't* sophisticated in that way, it doesn't mean some other group won't be in the future. The experience made me shed some hubris, and I'm glad of that.

Immediately after the skype call in which I tried and failed to get M to discuss his critics, he called me privately. I remember his tone was much humbler than it had been when talking in public. He seemed--*semmed*--to genuinely want to talk and to be my friends. But it was too late by then. My credulity was used up.

I am sure he would have recorded that private call. He would have used it against you, if you had stayed around any longer.
Title: Re: Tricking Molyneux Into A Debate.
Post by: QuestEon on October 07, 2018, 05:54:45 PM
Wow. What a blast from the past. I'm mgeduld/grumblebee. I've maintained an interest in Molyneux and FDR, and I learned a huge amount about myself from that incident--about the ways I'm gullible. Prior to that, I never thought I was the sort of person who could be sucked into a cult. Now I know which buttons of mine are most easily pushed.
So thrilled that you checked in! I know that a lot of past contributors still visit from time to time and I'm always glad when they say hi.

I agree with Patience. In those days (and perhaps still today) Molyneux recorded everything. His sole purpose for contacting you was to "win," in some way, probably using your words against you.