MegaList, February 1999 (Part One)
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 14:31:37 -0600 (CST)
From: "James P. Ferry" <jferry@cse.uiuc.edu>
Subject: [MegaList] The Langan Tar Baby
To: megalist@brokersys.com
I noticed a link to "that other Mega society" on the Boffin Board
and sent the following:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James P. Ferry <jferry@cse.uiuc.edu>
> To: boffinboard@dewell.com <boffinboard@dewell.com>
> Date: Thursday 14 January 1999 12:46
> Subject: Mega Society Link
>
> >I notice you have links to high IQ societies on the Boffin Board
> >page. A link to the Mega society seems appropriate: the closest
> >thing to an official page (we're talking about making it official)
> >is http://www.brokersys.com/~bahai/.
> >
> >I also notice you have a link to "the Mega society." I'm surprised
> >you link to *this* group. It is the creation of one Chris Langan,
> >who broke away from the Mega society proper. This would be fine if
> >he'd created a society with another name: such a society could be
> >judged on its own merits. By using the same name, Langan attempts
> >to divide Mega into factions, and then to emerge as the legitimate
> >faction.
> >
> >I, as a U.S. citizen, hereby form my own United States. I am the
> >President. Is this a legitimate faction? It is hard to see why
> >Langan has any more claim to legitimacy than this. Could it be
> >
> > - Size? There are 4 members of Langan's group that I know
> > of: Langan, Christopher Michael, Eric Hart, and Paul Maxim.
> > The first three are the same person (Eric Hart being created
> > for the purpose of resubmitting the Mega Test after second
> > attempts were disallowed). The last is someone who was
> > denied entrance to Mega proper (and who therefore contacted
> > the Medical Board of California, etc).
> >
> > - Democratic Process? Nope.
> >
> > - The endorsement of Ron Hoeflin, Mega's founder? Hardly.
> >
> >The only legitimacy he has comes from those who link to him.
The reply:
> An interesting situation. I guess people just have a natural tendency to
> separate and pledge allegiance to their own little team.
>
> As you see, I've changed the link as you asked, but I wonder if I can post
> your argument on the Boffin Board for discussion? Or, maybe you'd like to
> yourself. It would be interesting to give it some publicity and see what
> others think.
>
> -joe
Do I have my facts straight? I didn't make a compelling enough
argument: joe seems amused by the pettiness of it. People seem
to view it as factionalism and get a chuckle over the quarreling
geniuses.
What are the pre-conditions for legitimately usurping the name
of some entity? All that Langan has going for him is that he
actually was (is?) a member of Mega proper, and that the group
is small enough that a single member constitutes a fair portion
of it.
Anyone want to write to this guy with a better argument than mine
to post? I don't know why you would. Sticky tar baby. Arguing
makes it look like there's an argument. One cold argue that the
admission criteria Mega uses don't actually select at the 1-in-a-
million level (I'm a good example of this) and then form a
*different* society. Feh.
In fact, never mind. This crap is too annoying. I wouldn't
bother you with it, but I've already sent this e-mail.
| Jim Ferry | http://www.uiuc.edu/ph/www/jferry/ |
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 09:55:13 -0800
To: megalist@brokersys.com
From: Kevin Langdon <kevin.langdon@polymath-systems.com>
Subject: [MegaList] Re: The Langan Tar Baby
The message to which I am replying here raised some interesting
and pertinent questions about the "two Mega Societies."
At 02:31 PM 2/11/99 -0600, Jim Ferry wrote:
> I noticed a link to "that other Mega society" on the Boffin Board
> and sent the following:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: James P. Ferry <jferry@cse.uiuc.edu>
>> To: boffinboard@dewell.com <boffinboard@dewell.com>
>> Date: Thursday 14 January 1999 12:46
>> Subject: Mega Society Link
>>
>> I notice you have links to high IQ societies on the Boffin Board
>> page. A link to the Mega society seems appropriate: the closest
>> thing to an official page (we're talking about making it official)
>> is http://www.brokersys.com/~bahai/.
This point will be raised in the issues of *Noesis* which I'm now
working on; comments on the proposal to make Steve Schuessler's
site the official Mega Web site and a ballot will be included in Ron
Hoeflin's next issue.
>> I also notice you have a link to "the Mega society." I'm surprised
>> you link to *this* group. It is the creation of one Chris Langan,
>> who broke away from the Mega society proper. This would be
>> fine if he'd created a society with another name: such a society
>> could be judged on its own merits. By using the same name,
>> Langan attempts to divide Mega into factions, and then to emerge
>> as the legitimate faction.
>>
>> I, as a U.S. citizen, hereby form my own United States. I am the
>> President. Is this a legitimate faction? It is hard to see why
>> Langan has any more claim to legitimacy than this. Could it be
>> - Size? There are 4 members of Langan's group that I know
>> of: Langan, Christopher Michael, Eric Hart, and Paul Maxim.
>> The first three are the same person (Eric Hart being created
>> for the purpose of resubmitting the Mega Test after second
>> attempts were disallowed). The last is someone who was
>> denied entrance to Mega proper (and who therefore contacted
>> the Medical Board of California, etc).
This person expected the Prometheus and Mega societies to junk
the admission criteria established by their respective memberships
and admit him on the basis of some questionable childhood scores.
>> - Democratic Process? Nope.
Chris is quite indifferent to the will of the membership as expressed
through actual membership votes.
>> - The endorsement of Ron Hoeflin, Mega's founder? Hardly.
>>
>> The only legitimacy he has comes from those who link to him.
> The reply:
>> An interesting situation. I guess people just have a natural
>> tendency to separate and pledge allegiance to their own little
>> team.
This guy may not yet be clear on the fact that Langan doesn't have
a team. The reason is very clear: Langan claims that he has invented
the ultimate philsophy, the ultimate mathematics, the ultimate
religion, and the ultimate ultimate and that therefore all of us should
bow down and worship him, while at the same time nobody can
understand what the hell he's talking about.
>> As you see, I've changed the link as you asked, but I wonder if
>> I can post your argument on the Boffin Board for discussion?
>> Or, maybe you'd like to yourself. It would be interesting to give
>> it some publicity and see what others think.
>>
>> -joe
> Do I have my facts straight? I didn't make a compelling enough
> argument: joe seems amused by the pettiness of it. People seem
> to view it as factionalism and get a chuckle over the quarreling
> geniuses.
I think you did fine. You're welcome to use the information
contained in my interlineated comments above to supplement
your remarks.
> What are the pre-conditions for legitimately usurping the name
> of some entity? All that Langan has going for him is that he
> actually was (is?) a member of Mega proper, and that the group
> is small enough that a single member constitutes a fair portion
> of it.
It is illegal to use someone else's name with the intent of
misleading the public, which is what Chris Langan is doing;
the Mega Society's name belongs to the members of Mega
collectively. Chris has no right to pretend that his versions of
the Mega Society and *Noesis* are the real thing.
> Anyone want to write to this guy with a better argument than
> mine to post? I don't know why you would. Sticky tar baby.
> Arguing makes it look like there's an argument. One cold
> argue that the admission criteria Mega uses don't actually
> select at the 1-in-a-million level (I'm a good example of this)
> and then form a *different* society. Feh.
I've mentioned before that at the present state of the art in high-
range testing it's highly questionable whether it's possible to
discriminate at the one-in-a-million level, but this society has
made a good-faith attempt to do so and we have no doubt
succeeded in gathering together a number of very intelligent
people.
> In fact, never mind. This crap is too annoying. I wouldn't
> bother you with it, but I've already sent this e-mail.
> Jim Ferry
Jim, it is annoying, but something needs to be said when the
question is raised. You've done us a favor and I appreciate it.
Kevin Langdon
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 00:50:55 +0200
To: megalist@brokersys.com
From: Steve <bahai@brokersys.com>
Subject: [MegaList] Should I invite Chris Langan here?
Should I invite Chris Langan here?
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 00:47:18 +0200
To: megalist@brokersys.com
From: Steve <bahai@brokersys.com>
Subject: [MegaList] Fishing for tar babies on Boffin
-----------[After Jim, Steve posted: ]-------------
Hello Jim and Kevin,
And greetings to you Boffin (may you live up to
your name!). I am delighted that the
Boffin-Board-to-Mega link has been repaired. As
you know, I abhor contentiousness, but I won't
shirk this. What irks me is that the Bizarro page
claims entrance to the Mega Society may be granted
solely on the basis of eminence. The elected
officers never told me we were ditching the
"intelligence" thing without a vote! Ha! Pass the
cold fusion, my feathered friends...
---------------[Langan's Reply:]-----------------
Funny you should mention cold fusion, Steve - its proponents now have a reputation for
claiming to be much smarter than they really are, and claiming to speak authoritatively
when they really can't. Much, perhaps, like you, who have never actually qualified to be
in the Mega Society. You claim to have shown a Mega Test score report to Jeff Ward, but I
can't confirm that. See, Jeff is afraid to address me directly, as well he should be after
his many years of collusion with the worst element the Mega Society contains...the element
you're involved with.
I don't want to be over-critical, but I've spoken to several people who find your web site a little embarrassing. Parts of it look and read as though they were authored by a 10 year old child, and most of the links you provide are to people who have never been in the group (on anybody's roster). Now, that's annoying. It's especially annoying in light of the fact that you're a latecomer who doesn't have the slightest understanding of what's been going on here for the last decade...a gullible child allowing himself to be misled by the kind of people who offer candy to children on street corners.
And please stop claiming to be allergic to contention. It's evidently your middle name. You've managed, in a very short period of time, to insert yourself directly in the middle of something way over your head, and that's the very definition of "contentious". It's a form of hypocrisy that I'm astonished to see in one who claims a high level of spiritual consciousness, as do most bahai-type people. Take a long, hard look in the mirror, son - you may not like what you see.
Chris Langan
---------------[Steve replies:]---------------
Steve's reply on the Boffin Board:
Chris Langan:
Your page still makes false
claims about membership
criteria and specifies inaccurate
admissions procedures.
If you had stated flat out your
intention to start up a new high-
IQ (or IEQ) society, I would
have sent my Mega score report
to you, even submitted articles
to your publication, and we
would have been old friends by
now.
You chose a different path.
(sigh)
My score report has been
verified by the only source that
matters--Ron Hoeflin. Ask him.
You disgusted me by
questioning my membership, so
I decided you weren't worth the
trouble.
Our two websites reflect our
personalities. I'm childlike, a
desultory dreamer, neotenous--
while you can be haughty,
overbearing and condescending.
Neither of us had a ghost of a
chance at a normal childhood,
Chris. We diverged-we are the
two 'Captain Kirks'. I know my
mirror, as well as my Jungian
Shadow. He looks astonishingly
like you.
The ideal Official Mega Site
may be a Hegelian synthesis.
I'll clarify the links on my site;
are you willing to stop claiming
the authority to grant
memberships unilaterally?
Then we can link between our sites without disclaimers. I'll go first.
I worry that you will fall prey to
the manipulations of non-
member Paul Maxim, author of
the mean-spirited misogynistic
tripe "What to do with a worn-
out shoe".
Nobody is afraid of you, by the
way. We just don't trust you! At
one point members were asked
to each take a turn editing the
journal, and you took two turns
using different names. (See
issues 41 and 44). Have you
ever voted twice using an alias?
You accuse me of hypocrisy,
while I can't explain what
appears to be an outright
deception.
All your poliorcetics merely
repulsed us, and orphaned you.
" Thoughts are shadows of our
feelings, always darker, emptier,
and simpler than these,"
-Nietzsche
Steve - http://www.brokersys.com/~bahai icq 24607437
The Mega Society Page
From: "Paul" <paul@jitterbug.prestel.co.uk>
To: "MEGA LIST" <MegaList@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: [MegaList] Fishing for tar babies on Boffin
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 10:06:38 -0000
Steve asked if he should invite Langan to the list....
Hmm.... Well, he does seem to be quite an amusing sort of arsehole. Maybe it
would liven up the list if he were to take part?
The problem is he'd most likely only want to bang on about the "real" Mega
Society. This would get pretty boring - if not pretty ugly.
[And please, no oxymoronic comments... I can't take it.]
Paul Johns
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 10:09:20 -0500 (EST)
From: "James C. Harbeck" <df249@freenet.toronto.on.ca>
Subject: [MegaList] oh, man...
To: MegaList@brokersys.com
I don't know whether my opinion counts for anything on this, but,
having encountered Chris Langan's diatribes, while I find them funny in
their sheer arrogance, I can't think of too many people I'd less rather
have on a list.
On top of that, my mailbox space is limited. He'd max it out
every day with his postings.
James Harbeck.
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 21:28:52 -0500 (EST)
From: Benoit Desjardins <benoit@mars1.mars.upmc.edu>
Subject: [MegaList] request for info
To: megalist megalist@brokersys.com
>---------------[Langan's Reply:]-----------------
>I don't want to be over-critical, but I've spoken to several people
>who find your web site a little embarrassing. Parts of it look and
>read as though they were authored by a 10 year old child,
I agree on this point, and have made several recommendations to
Steve on how to make the Web site look more serious (like the site
for the Prometheus Society). He is currently redesigning the site.
If the membership decides to make his site official, then I'm sure
there will be a major overhaul of the content and structure of the
site. I would be happy to help him design the new site. While
we're at it, how about designing an official logo for the society?
We could use it on the site, on the newsletter and maybe on eventual
membership cards.
>and most of the links you provide are to people who have never been
>in the group (on anybody's roster)....
>you're a latecomer who doesn't have the slightest understanding
>of what's been going on here for the last decade...
I am also a latecomer to the Mega society, and one of the elements I
find the most frustrating is the lack of information on the Society
provided to its new members. I have no idea how many members are
currently in the society and who they are, and Chris Cole has not
answered my request for this information. That's certainly very
frustrating. I would love to find out more about the current status
of the Mega Society and about its complex recent history. I've been
able to gather some pieces of information from different mail
messages and web pages (including Miyaguchi's history page), but I
do not yet have all the pieces of the puzzle. If someone wouldn't
mind filling in new members about the past and current status of
the Society, I would be very grateful. This information could
eventually be made available on the web site.
Does anyone have a current membership list for the Mega society?
Benoit
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 10:43:30 -0600 (CST)
From: "James P. Ferry" <jferry@cse.uiuc.edu>
Subject: [MegaList] Clangin'
To: megalist@brokersys.com
A letter Chris Langan sent me:
> Dear Jim:
>
> I happened to be browsing the web today and noticed that you've got some
> kind of problem with me. I don't know you, so I know that you don't know
> me either. You're a newcomer to the Mega Society with very limited and
> obviously one-sided knowledge of what's been going on there for the last
> 10 or 15 years. Yet, your analyses of my character are rapidly
> converging on what some people might consider personal - the amusing
> comparison to Lucifer, for instance. Incredible though it may seem, some
> people would actually take offense at that kind of thing.
>
> However, after seeing your photo, I know better. Now I know you're just a
> poor guy who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time...a place
> where Kevin Langdon could pump your head full of all kinds of nonsense,
> and then put corks in your ears to make sure you couldn't get the other
> side of the story. We have to try to remove those corks and get rid of
> some of that nonsense before it gets you into even more trouble.
>
> Being a graduate of MIT, you're of course what one might call an
> "intellectual heavyweight" in every sense of the term. Being into rocket
> simulations, you can probably do a little math - that is to say, you can
> probably use kinds of math that are already out there while not
> necessarily being able to apply them in philosophically dicey situations,
> or invent any new math of your own. That's the thing about engineering...
> you don't have to be intellectually creative to program dynamical
> equations and plug numbers into them. But now I'm going to give you a
> chance to prove your creativity.
>
> Over the last decade, during every single year of which I've technically
> been the editor of Noesis - by the way, did you know that I'm the one
> who named it Noesis? - the Mega Society has debated some very important
> problems. I solved every single one of them, in the process causing some
> bad blood between Chris Cole and I (he had to eat whole piles of crow;
> if you want to take things all the way back, that's probably why there
> are two factions in the Mega Society now). Almost a year ago, a challenge
> was issued to Kevin, Chris, and any other Mega Society member to prove
> just one of those solutions wrong.
>
> So far, that challenge has gone unmet. No one thinks he's even remotely
> good enough to take me on. But maybe you're destined to be the "hero".
> Maybe you're the guy who's going to make Chris Langan wish he'd never
> opened his mouth about an "ultimate theory". Maybe you'll be the one who
> saves Kevin and all his little buddies - the Chris Coles, the Steve
> Schuesslers, the Jeff Wards - from looking like a bunch of morons whose
> alligator mouths ran off with their canary bottoms. Maybe you, Jim Ferry,
> are that guy! You don't get the real Noesis any more, because you asked
> to be omitted. But since you're such good buddies with Kevin, why don't
> you have him run off a copy of each of the last three or four issues?
> There should be enough there for you to sink those fangs into.
>
> I joined the Mega Society to make a difference...to really solve some of
> the intractable problems that "sub-mega" people can't seem to solve on
> their own. Since I did, the few members with whom you've unwisely aligned
> yourself have routinely treated me like Gulliver in Lilliputia. Today, I
> got jabbed in the pinky by another outraged Lilliputian. If you want to
> prove you're more than just that, get busy. The Mega Society has important
> problems to solve.
>
> And Jim - good luck, pal!
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Chris Langan
My response:
Dear Chris,
I don't have a problem with you, just with the confusion
you've sown with your Bizarro Mega Society. If you feel I've
attacked you, consider it merely overzealous synecdoche :@).
I'm not interested in your ultimate theories. I've wasted too
much time on sci.math Fermat-cranks. I've learned that when
someone gives his thoughts hyperbolic billing and rants about
the masses being too dull to "get it," that someone is usually
a crank. I don't heed those who claim to be Christ either,
and while you, like one of these, may be special, you don't
control my hitherto-unsuspected afterlife, so why bother? If
I'm wrong, and you're . . . what, the new Aristotle? then I'm
wrong. Big deal. I'm not that interested in the original
Aristotle.
Naturally, Aristotle is a poor comparison. He wasn't, er,
magnificent. No wait, "ultimate." Right.
--------------------
My vote is not to invite him to the MegaList. The level of
bickering here suffices as is (and let me just say how happy
I am to contribute to this atmosphere by bringing all this
up). I mean, look at the rancor that the presence of Robert
Dick and his treatises generate. And Robert seems to be
genuinely kind.
Chris probably has his own MegaList anyway in which he debates
with Eric Hart and Christopher Michael about how the Ultimate
Theory of Reality bears on the clinical treatment of Multiple
Personality Disorder.
| Jim Ferry | http://www.uiuc.edu/ph/www/jferry/ |
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 12:30:58 -0600 (CST)
From: "James P. Ferry" <jferry@cse.uiuc.edu>
Subject: Re: [MegaList] Clangin'
To: megalist@brokersys.com
> I don't intend here to express any opinion one way or the other on Chris
> Langan -- a hot topic, to be sure -- but I have to question whether it was
> in good taste for you to run off and share your correspondence with us.
You're right. In examining my precepts I notice "Don't post
private e-mail." It doesn't blare like "Thou shalt not kill,"
but it's there, and I didn't even think about it. You didn't
mention that one whose mores allow e-mail posting might well
forge e-mail (I'm innocent of that, BTW), so such posts are
suspect.
Trying to explain my lapse -- I guess I have categories of
correspondence received and of forums posted to. The pre-
and post-"thinking about it" versions of these categories
don't coincide (evidently). In the "post-thinking" version,
Langan's e-mail is in the same category as all personal
e-mail; in the "pre-" version various other factors pertain.
> Apparently, anything written you should be considered written all the
> world.
I think you are exaggerating here, rather than making an
implicit statement about your "categories," particularly
in equating this forum with, say, a newsgroup.
> Eric Erlandson
| Jim Ferry | http://www.uiuc.edu/ph/www/jferry/ |
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 15:34:10 -0800
To: megalist@brokersys.com
From: Kevin Langdon <kevin.langdon@polymath-systems.com>
Subject: [MegaList] Re: Clangin'
At 12:30 PM 2/17/99 -0600, Jim Ferry wrote:
[Quoting Eric Erlandson:]
>> I don't intend here to express any opinion one way or the other
>> on Chris Langan -- a hot topic, to be sure -- but I have to question
>> whether it was in good taste for you to run off and share your
>> correspondence with us.
> You're right. In examining my precepts I notice "Don't post
> private e-mail." It doesn't blare like "Thou shalt not kill,"
> but it's there, and I didn't even think about it. You didn't
> mention that one whose mores allow e-mail posting might well
> forge e-mail (I'm innocent of that, BTW), so such posts are
> suspect.
A little more examination might be in order. Chris Langan is making
a lot of trouble for Mega by claiming to be the legimate Mega
Society. Members of Mega have a right to see anything he says that
bears on his false claims.
> Trying to explain my lapse -- I guess I have categories of
> correspondence received and of forums posted to. The pre-
> and post-"thinking about it" versions of these categories
> don't coincide (evidently). In the "post-thinking" version,
> Langan's e-mail is in the same category as all personal
> e-mail; in the "pre-" version various other factors pertain.
And hopefully in the post-post-thinking version as well.
>> Apparently, anything written you should be considered written
>> all the world.
Anything that other people have a right to know is fair game.
Don't expect me to be silent if you tell me that you got into Mega
by cheating on the Mega Test.
> I think you are exaggerating here, rather than making an implicit
> statement about your "categories," particularly in equating this
> forum with, say, a newsgroup.
It's hyperbole, but it was justified under the assumptions you
said you accepted above. When you're sincere about admitting
you're wrong about something, you just have to take what comes
back for a cycle or two without quibbling. However, as I
mentioned above, I don't think you were wrong in the first place.
Kevin Langdon
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 18:01:52 -0600 (CST)
From: Eric Erlandson <ere@inetnebr.com>
To: Kevin Langdon <kevin.langdon@polymath-systems.com>
cc: megalist@brokersys.com
Subject: Re: [MegaList] Re: Clangin'
On Wed, 17 Feb 1999, Kevin Langdon wrote:
> A little more examination might be in order. Chris Langan is making
> a lot of trouble for Mega by claiming to be the legimate Mega
> Society. Members of Mega have a right to see anything he says that
> bears on his false claims.
Members of Mega have a desire to see anything he says that bears on what
they regard as his false claims, yes.
-Eric
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 21:22:53 -0600 (CST)
From: Eric Erlandson <ere@inetnebr.com>
To: Kevin Langdon <kevin.langdon@polymath-systems.com>
cc: megalist@brokersys.com
Subject: Re: [MegaList] Re: Clangin'
On Wed, 17 Feb 1999, Kevin Langdon wrote:
> At 06:01 PM 2/17/99 -0600, Eric Erlandson wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 17 Feb 1999, Kevin Langdon wrote:
>
> >> A little more examination might be in order. Chris Langan is making
> >> a lot of trouble for Mega by claiming to be the legimate Mega
> >> Society. Members of Mega have a right to see anything he says that
> >> bears on his false claims.
>
> > Members of Mega have a desire to see anything he says that bears on
> > what they regard as his false claims, yes.
>
> See, we have these things called "elections" and "appointment of
> officers after there's been a request for volunteers and everyone who
> might be interested has had a chance to speak up." That's how
> people get to make true claims that they represent the Mega Society.
> But there's only one person who thinks he knows what's good for
> the membership better than we do ourselves (or two if you count
> the nonmember nonentity who's all the support that Langan can
> muster).
That you have lost sight of my original point concerning whether it's
right to post publicly copies of personal mail, and have managed to bring
this back to who will run which collections of signers-up -- that's all
they are, really -- is exactly the kind of tiresome crap that ultimately
deprives us of thoughtful contribution by our membership. It's stupid
and petty and why most everything that comes out of these societies is
legalism, Revelations interpretation and lame verbal analogies.
-Eric
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 22:26:45 -0800
To: megalist@brokersys.com
From: Kevin Langdon <kevin.langdon@polymath-systems.com>
Subject: [MegaList] Re: Clangin'
At 09:22 PM 2/17/99 -0600, Eric Erlandson wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Feb 1999, Kevin Langdon wrote:
>> At 06:01 PM 2/17/99 -0600, Eric Erlandson wrote:
>>> On Wed, 17 Feb 1999, Kevin Langdon wrote:
>>>> A little more examination might be in order. Chris Langan is making
>>>> a lot of trouble for Mega by claiming to be the legimate Mega
>>>> Society. Members of Mega have a right to see anything he says that
>>>> bears on his false claims.
>> > Members of Mega have a desire to see anything he says that bears on
>> > what they regard as his false claims, yes.
>> See, we have these things called "elections" and "appointment
of
>> officers after there's been a request for volunteers and everyone who
>> might be interested has had a chance to speak up." That's how
>> people get to make true claims that they represent the Mega Society.
>> But there's only one person who thinks he knows what's good for
>> the membership better than we do ourselves (or two if you count
>> the nonmember nonentity who's all the support that Langan can
>> muster).
> That you have lost sight of my original point concerning whether it's
> right to post publicly copies of personal mail, and have managed to bring
> this back to who will run which collections of signers-up -- that's all
> they are, really -- is exactly the kind of tiresome crap that ultimately
> deprives us of thoughtful contribution by our membership.
I replied to your original point in the passage marked ">>>>"
above. Did
you happen to notice the title of this thread?
> It's stupid and petty and why most everything that comes out of these
> societies is legalism, Revelations interpretation and lame verbal analogies.
> -Eric
I'm willing to take the trouble to deal with the needs of the society, even if
some find it tedious.
What have you contributed, Eric?
Kevin Langdon
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 00:47:18 +0200
To: megalist@brokersys.com
From: Steve <bahai@brokersys.com>
Subject: [MegaList] Fishing for tar babies on Boffin
-----------[After Jim, Steve posted: ]-------------
Hello Jim and Kevin,
And greetings to you Boffin (may you live up to
your name!). I am delighted that the
Boffin-Board-to-Mega link has been repaired. As
you know, I abhor contentiousness, but I won't
shirk this. What irks me is that the Bizarro page
claims entrance to the Mega Society may be granted
solely on the basis of eminence. The elected
officers never told me we were ditching the
"intelligence" thing without a vote! Ha! Pass the
cold fusion, my feathered friends...
---------------[Langan's Reply:]-----------------
Funny you should mention cold fusion, Steve - its proponents now have a reputation for
claiming to be much smarter than they really are, and claiming to speak authoritatively
when they really can't. Much, perhaps, like you, who have never actually qualified to be
in the Mega Society. You claim to have shown a Mega Test score report to Jeff Ward, but I
can't confirm that. See, Jeff is afraid to address me directly, as well he should be after
his many years of collusion with the worst element the Mega Society contains...the element
you're involved with.
I don't want to be over-critical, but I've spoken to several people who find your web site a little embarrassing. Parts of it look and read as though they were authored by a 10 year old child, and most of the links you provide are to people who have never been in the group (on anybody's roster). Now, that's annoying. It's especially annoying in light of the fact that you're a latecomer who doesn't have the slightest understanding of what's been going on here for the last decade...a gullible child allowing himself to be misled by the kind of people who offer candy to children on street corners.
And please stop claiming to be allergic to contention. It's evidently your middle name. You've managed, in a very short period of time, to insert yourself directly in the middle of something way over your head, and that's the very definition of "contentious". It's a form of hypocrisy that I'm astonished to see in one who claims a high level of spiritual consciousness, as do most bahai-type people. Take a long, hard look in the mirror, son - you may not like what you see.
Chris Langan
---------------[Steve replies:]---------------
Steve's reply on the Boffin Board:
Chris Langan:
Your page still makes false
claims about membership
criteria and specifies inaccurate
admissions procedures.
If you had stated flat out your
intention to start up a new high-
IQ (or IEQ) society, I would
have sent my Mega score report
to you, even submitted articles
to your publication, and we
would have been old friends by
now.
You chose a different path.
(sigh)
My score report has been
verified by the only source that
matters--Ron Hoeflin. Ask him.
You disgusted me by
questioning my membership, so
I decided you weren't worth the
trouble.
Our two websites reflect our
personalities. I'm childlike, a
desultory dreamer, neotenous--
while you can be haughty,
overbearing and condescending.
Neither of us had a ghost of a
chance at a normal childhood,
Chris. We diverged-we are the
two 'Captain Kirks'. I know my
mirror, as well as my Jungian
Shadow. He looks astonishingly
like you.
The ideal Official Mega Site
may be a Hegelian synthesis.
I'll clarify the links on my site;
are you willing to stop claiming
the authority to grant
memberships unilaterally?
Then we can link between our sites without disclaimers. I'll go first.
I worry that you will fall prey to
the manipulations of non-
member Paul Maxim, author of
the mean-spirited misogynistic
tripe "What to do with a worn-
out shoe".
Nobody is afraid of you, by the
way. We just don't trust you! At
one point members were asked
to each take a turn editing the
journal, and you took two turns
using different names. (See
issues 41 and 44). Have you
ever voted twice using an alias?
You accuse me of hypocrisy,
while I can't explain what
appears to be an outright
deception.
All your poliorcetics merely
repulsed us, and orphaned you.
" Thoughts are shadows of our
feelings, always darker, emptier,
and simpler than these,"
-Nietzsche
Steve - http://www.brokersys.com/~bahai icq 24607437
The Mega Society Page