I read about this in college. It's a form of magical thinking, which must
rely on non-falsifiable statements to survive. "My worldview cannot be
contradicted. The statements by proponents of worldviews which contradict
my own are not to be tested because the proponents are not credible. They
are not credible because they hold worldviews which contradict my own.
Thus, my worldview is uncontradicted by anybody credible. Anybody credible
is someone who does not contradict my worldview."
"I don't like ISOC, INTA and CORE (or flouridation or the CIA or black
helicopters)." People who are members of ISOC, INTA and CORE who
contradict me, are not credible because they are members of ISOC, INTA and
CORE. Thus, we do not have to reality check anything said by anyone from
INTA, ISOC and INTA, because everything they say is a lie. I don't like
ISOC, INTA and CORE because everything they say is a lie"
At 09:12 PM 6/2/99 -0400, you wrote:
>Martin B. Schwimmer a �crit:
>
>> I am not employed by or paid by or represent David Maher and don't care
>> whether he controls the non-commercial constituency, assuming, according to
>> you, that that is one of his ambitions. To the best of my knowledge, he is
>> not a member of INTA. I am a trademark lawyer like him, Senator McCarthy.
>
>Your organization and his have been in collaboration for three years
>or more to control the DNS, according to the archives and what I
>have personally seen with my own eyes. You are an operative of INTA,
>that is, of the international trademark lawyers interested in the
>Internet, just as David Crocker and Kent Crispin are operatives of
>ISOC and CORE. You three have been given more or less the same task:
>to intervene on the public lists in order to stop dissent, by
>whatever means available to you, from what your organizations are
>together doing to control the DNS for your common goals. You three
>are not here by chance. You have been assigned, or have assigned
>yourselves, to that mission. You are operatives of a plan, and you
>are here at work.
>
>