"I don't want to be an auto mechanic"

[Brian Koontz]

Big Rod is speaking with Other than Mike:

OtM: I paid some guy $200 to come out to set up my new computer. That seems like a lot of money, but where better to put it? Who's got the time to mess with that?, and I don't want to screw something up. I pay a guy to work on my car's engine, same thing.

Now my printer goes bad. I don't want to haul my printer somewhere... can someone just bring me a new printer?

[BobJustBob]

He's either trying to say that specialization in a society is bad and that technology shouldn't have progressed past the point where it was possible for everyone to know how to do everything, or that it's wrong to trade money for time, even though the opposite is a fundamental element of our job system.

At least it's short.

[Ed Solomon]

No way. I think he's trying to say he wishes he'd sprung for the at home service contract.

[Bill Dungsroman]

Big Rod never spoke, and that scares me, because I'm pretty sure he was a bloated corpse by the time Br^H^H^H Other than Mike addressed him.

[Marcus]

Lets be real here working on cars is not hard. I mean look at some of the monkies they have doing it.

[Robert Sharp]

Lets be real here working on cars is not hard. I mean look at some of the monkies they have doing it.

It's harder every day. A lot of newer cars have computers you have to work with. But mostly, you need the right equipment and you have to be willing to get dirty. The basics of a car are not overly complicated, for the most part. But it's still hard work.

[Lunch of Kong]

Working on a car is easy and any monkey with the proper tools can follow instructions from a shop manual. Figuring out what is wrong with a car, the diagnostics, is what can be difficult, and that's where you need a smart, technical person.

[Brian Koontz]

Big Rod never spoke, and that scares me, because I'm pretty sure he was a bloated corpse by the time Br^H^H^H Other than Mike addressed him.

He didn't speak last time either, but don't worry, he'll have his day in the sun eventually. The cock, after all, IS mightier.

Other than Mike was put into a difficult position. He's the first character I ever created that did not derive from some idea. Thus the character didn't preexist in a context... as it turns out he just ran into the next context that I created after him... turning again to the topic of the anti-hands-on American. Perhaps Other than Mike will get some better treatment next time.

I'm somewhat amused by the blase attitudes here since Privacy requires self-sufficiency (don't bother making a strawman argument attacking 100% self-sufficiency). If you don't understand the link between the two, then perhaps you will learn following the loss of some of your Privacy.

[Bill Dungsroman]

He didn't speak last time either, but don't worry, he'll have his day in the sun eventually. The cock, after all, IS mightier.

Other than Mike was put into a difficult position. He's the first character I ever created that did not derive from some idea. Thus the character didn't preexist in a context... as it turns out he just ran into the next context that I created after him... turning again to the topic of the anti-hands-on American. Perhaps Other than Mike will get some better treatment next time.
Uh, what? Are you talking to me? I'll have to echo what Hawkeye said in that other Krazy Koontz Thread, cuz those look like words in English. Yes, the sentence structure appears proper, but to Hell if I know what you're on about. Seriously Boss, I've interviewed dozens of crazy people, read interview trancsripts from them. You sound bonano.


I'm somewhat amused by the blase attitudes here since Privacy requires self-sufficiency (don't bother making a strawman argument attacking 100% self-sufficiency).
Yeah bu...shit, you got me, Quick Draw McGraw. You do all the thinning around here.


If you don't understand the link between the two, then perhaps you will learn following the loss of some of your Privacy.
Hey , guess what Brian? I understand everything you say, any of the things that aren't utterly mangled by your tortured, half-assed verbiage, leastways. Cuz WOW, just how are privacy and self-sufficiency linked? Man, it's like them puzzles where you have to turn COCK into TITS by only changing one letter at a time. Actuallly, in this case it's more like turning COCK into CORK.

[dannimal]

I know this one! COCK and CORK are both things you stuff into holes!

[Jack]

Lets be real here working on cars is not hard. I mean look at some of the monkies they have doing it.

Spelling, however, is a BITCH.

[Marsh Davies]

Privacy requires self-sufficiency
And society requires interdependency. So... what?

I wonder if you are surprised by the hostile response you get here. I'm sure you realise that making opaque statements which lack explanatory context does not make your ideas more complex; it simply makes them difficult to parse.

So, I wish you'd just ditch the enigmatic pose. I don't know if you'd care to actually have a philosophical debate here, but you aren't likely to find one when your statements are purposefully, aggressively nubilous. No wonder people find it offensive: it hints at an assumption on your part that they are simply purblind if they fail to understand you, when, in fact, it is your failure to express yourself in an intelligible way.

[dannimal]

You must be new here.

[extarbags]

This one is bad, even for Brian though. Usually he's saying something completely crazy, but you at least know what it's about. This one is just like a tiny capsule of pure crazy. I think he might just be toying with us now.

[Bill Dungsroman]

Yeah. This one came with a few twists. It was brief, extra crazy, and Brian immediately got defensive with all the "Don't talk to me about X" shit. But it did have one of his awesome fictitious dialogues. Remember the one he did using the female game developer? That one was awesome. Proving your point by concocting fake conversations, it's hard to top that.

[Troy S Goodfellow]

Yeah. This one came with a few twists. It was brief, extra crazy, and Brian immediately got defensive with all the "Don't talk to me about X" shit. But it did have one of his awesome fictitious dialogues. Remember the one he did using the female game developer? That one was awesome. Proving your point by concocting fake conversations, it's hard to top that.

Yeah, but at least his fake conversations have both sides. I mean, why even give Big Rod a name if he doesn't have any lines? Then again, why go as far as to call Other than Mike (which, literally, could also be Big Rod since he's not Mike) a "character" since we know nothing about him besides the fact that he's not exceptionally bright.

Troy

[Brian Koontz]

Yeah, but at least his fake conversations have both sides. I mean, why even give Big Rod a name if he doesn't have any lines?

Why do you have a name while standing on a bus if you aren't talking? Because its still YOU standing on the bus, and talking is kind of irrelevant, at least to whether or not you are standing there. Its not "I talk, therefore I am".

Then again, why go as far as to call Other than Mike (which, literally, could also be Big Rod since he's not Mike) a "character" since we know nothing about him besides the fact that he's not exceptionally bright.

The issue there is laziness and asceticism, not lack of intelligence, but really it could have been any context at all, because Other than Mike was created very soon before that and not in any context (at least that I understand). He'll get more contextualized if he reappears. But then again, with a name like Other than Mike a loose contextual fit seems just about right.

I wonder if you are surprised by the hostile response you get here. I'm sure you realise that making opaque statements which lack explanatory context does not make your ideas more complex; it simply makes them difficult to parse.

Honestly, people will complain no matter what. I used to provide more explanation (long posts with about 80% explanation) and they complained that the posts were too long. However, I build off the prior explanations, so definitely if you're a newcomer to this forum you'll be lost fairly frequently in my posts.

One of the requirements of brevity is that no explanation is given more than once. While I'm kind enough to not quite stick to that, I don't repeat explanations in every post.

So, I wish you'd just ditch the enigmatic pose. I don't know if you'd care to actually have a philosophical debate here, but you aren't likely to find one when your statements are purposefully, aggressively nubilous. No wonder people find it offensive: it hints at an assumption on your part that they are simply purblind if they fail to understand you, when, in fact, it is your failure to express yourself in an intelligible way.

Fail to understand me? Hah... they wish. They can take no such comfort.

The post is not rocket science. There's no great mystery here. It was simple commentary on a continual American strain of laziness/asceticism. Big Rod was used because he's an American social critic and I want to introduce him slowly so as to prevent objection, and Other than Mike was used because I just created him and he merged for no reason other than coincidence with the post.

Sheesh... can't I make a *simple* post every once in a while?

Uh, what? Are you talking to me? I'll have to echo what Hawkeye said in that other Krazy Koontz Thread, cuz those look like words in English. Yes, the sentence structure appears proper, but to Hell if I know what you're on about. Seriously Boss, I've interviewed dozens of crazy people, read interview trancsripts from them. You sound bonano.

Whoa... I'm not the one interviewing crazy people. I like my interviewees sane, at least until after the interview.

I'm still upset that we lost Rywill. Goddamn it, those Sanity Awards obviously sent him over the edge. Now apparently I've got to take the responsibility to keep all you nutjobs in order. And no, you can forget about getting me to interview you. I have standards to keep, you understand.

What happens when one of the Serious Angry sees you and says "I'm not interviewing that guy." Are you going to pucker up, salute up, wear your best serious and call him mistaken? Sanity is a harsh mistress... only your self-respect is at stake.

Who will win the next Sanity Award? Step right up! Bill... are you a contender, or just a pretender?

[Raife]

Why do you have a name while standing on a bus if you aren't talking? Because its still YOU standing on the bus, and talking is kind of irrelevant, at least to whether or not you are standing there. Its not "I talk, therefore I am".

Yeah, sit down or get off of the bus, Troy.

What happens when one of the Serious Angry sees you and says "I'm not interviewing that guy." Are you going to pucker up, salute up, wear your best serious and call him mistaken? Sanity is a harsh mistress... only your self-respect is at stake.

It's kind of like a bad Japanese translation.

[Troy S Goodfellow]

Why do you have a name while standing on a bus if you aren't talking? Because its still YOU standing on the bus, and talking is kind of irrelevant, at least to whether or not you are standing there. Its not "I talk, therefore I am".

True, but this is a story of some kind, I'm guessing, not something that has really happened.

I mean, it makes sense to tell a story about something that I saw or overheard and mention myself being there since I'm an observer and undoubtedly real in some context.

I just think that, for an author/storyteller, calling someone Big Rod (a name full of possible sports metaphors or Freudian analysis) and then never letting him say anything is an interesting choice. Not wrong, or even stupid, but certainly interesting. And, as I noted, very different from most of the fake conversations you write.

Troy

[Marsh Davies]

Brian KoontzSheesh... can't I make a *simple* post every once in a while?

Apparently not, because using unnecessary protracted analogies delivered via inexplicable fictitious personae does not a simple post make.

You have a simple point, I'll agree, but your argument is a mess of redundant elaboration.

Perhaps I spend too much of my time unraveling byzantine critical theory to want to engage with emptier convolutions outside my field of study. Perhaps the structuring of your post seems to me to be a transparent attempt at obfuscation, if you will pardon the oxymoron. Either way, it kind of got my goat, because it seems asinine to sabotage the possibility of establishing clear dialogue in the way that you do on a board which is largely for casual discussion. For whose benefit do you post?

[dannimal]

However, I build off the prior explanations, so definitely if you're a newcomer to this forum you'll be lost fairly frequently in my posts.

It's not just the newcomers, bozo. Understanding your tripe is like trying to find the marble in the oatmeal: Messy, difficult, pointless, unrewarding, and lacking almost all entertainment.

On the plus side, for the exernal viewer, the similarities extend to "Hilarious to watch".

[Jazar]

Koontz : Worthwhile discussion :: Masturbation : Actual Sex

[Flowers]

To Wit:

The sum in toto of a social contract is the negation of alternative discretion. Throughout history, every rose that has died has shown that man's nature invariably requires leadership. Although oftentimes personalities subjugate needs and desires, it is always true that such needs and desires are the framework of a fascist society.

The following conversation is the counterexample that proves contraindicative;

Briaus Koontziaus: The flower of my womanhood? What price a waffle iron?
Reason: The same, my daughter, the same.
Briaus: The price is set, it is bought and sold!
Reason: No, my sister, it is taken.
Briaus: I assume the new form, I am the new name.
Reason: Society will become you!
Terry Bradshaw: Forever the acorn gives death to the old oak.
Reason: Thor's Goats come with the thunder, I can see the next beginning.
Terry Bradshaw: I am raping myself. (Sets fire to a wicker penis, paints self silver.)
Reason: I die.

Furthermore;

Bindusara: Crystals flicker across my vision!
Natalie Holloway: Who is left that can hold my liquor?
Both: And so we become history! (Join hands, Bow.)

[MikeSofaer]

It's not just the newcomers, bozo. Understanding your tripe is like trying to find the marble in the oatmeal: Messy, difficult, pointless, unrewarding, and lacking almost all entertainment.

On the plus side, for the exernal viewer, the similarities extend to "Hilarious to watch".
Unrewarding? The FIRE HOSE is unrewarding?

[Rimbo]

I dislike the way some folks dogpile on Koontz's posts far more than I dislike his posts.

[Raife]

I dislike the way some folks dogpile on Koontz's posts far more than I dislike his posts.

Because someone who puts words and ideas together like a kid with a new chemistry set mixes chemicals is someone who should be sheltered and protected. Got it.

[Hunkpapa]

Ahhh. Brian is back. And Marsh doesn't just feed the trolls, but puts the I.V. in and pumps. All is well again.

[Marsh Davies]

But he looked so skinny and hungry and he was giving me these big puppy-dog eyes...

[Rimbo]

Because someone who puts words and ideas together like a kid with a new chemistry set mixes chemicals is someone who should be sheltered and protected. Got it.

^-- And people are claiming that Koontz is making bizarre logical leaps?

[TrodKnee]

I'm pretty sure Other than Mike is looking for input from Big Rod in regards to the moral dilemma of either hiring a prostitute, or simply masturbating. But Big Rod couldn't fucking care less, because he's just a giant penis who wants to bust a nut...

[Bill Dungsroman]

I hadn't realized Big Rod had appeared in that earlier Koontz thread about emo boys until it got resurrected. I guess I'm going to start having to take notes.

[Brian Koontz]

True, but this is a story of some kind, I'm guessing, not something that has really happened.

I mean, it makes sense to tell a story about something that I saw or overheard and mention myself being there since I'm an observer and undoubtedly real in some context.

I just think that, for an author/storyteller, calling someone Big Rod (a name full of possible sports metaphors or Freudian analysis) and then never letting him say anything is an interesting choice. Not wrong, or even stupid, but certainly interesting. And, as I noted, very different from most of the fake conversations you write.

Troy

Never say never. Big Rod will get to talk eventually... you can't keep a social critic silent forever.

If you want the *analysis* of why Big Rod has appeared in the posts in which he did, rather than other posts, each post with him has been... well... social or cultural criticism. By introducing him in those posts, it tips the reader off to his identity, without him speaking... thus lubricating the following entry into their lives.

This is not to say Big Rod is particularly important, but then again you never know. As that song goes, "the future is wide open".

[Brian Koontz]

Brian Koontz
Apparently not, because using unnecessary protracted analogies delivered via inexplicable fictitious personae does not a simple post make.

You have a simple point, I'll agree, but your argument is a mess of redundant elaboration.

Perhaps I spend too much of my time unraveling byzantine critical theory to want to engage with emptier convolutions outside my field of study. Perhaps the structuring of your post seems to me to be a transparent attempt at obfuscation, if you will pardon the oxymoron. Either way, it kind of got my goat, because it seems asinine to sabotage the possibility of establishing clear dialogue in the way that you do on a board which is largely for casual discussion. For whose benefit do you post?

Qt3s, mine, anyone for whom I repost the material...

One of the keys to understanding me is knowing that nothing is stand-alone. All of my posts are related to other posts, all of my truth is related to other truths. The concept of a post where everything is SELF-CONTAINED (self-explanatory without external reference other than objective word meaning) is one you need to immediately discard. That's the single biggest misconception and results in the most unhappiness... it doesn't seem to "make sense" but that's only because you don't appreciate the context... it doesn't mean the context doesn't exist (insanity) or that I don't reference the context (obscurity).

And again, brevity requires that I not multi-reference the context or provide excessive explanation, repetitive explanation.

Something I've been considering doing is having the post, then having a clarification/analysis of the post after it. If that wasn't so fundamentally silly and more than a little condescending I would probably already be doing it.

[Aszurom]

You should have your own website for that project sir.

Also,

http://www.blackscienceinstitute.org/stuff/suckit.gif

[Lunch of Kong]

Who is Big Rod?

[Backov]

The patsy who took the blame for Lilly Kanes murder was named Abel Koontz.. Coincidence? I think not.

[Talisker]

Something I've been considering doing is having the post, then having a clarification/analysis of the post after it. If that wasn't so fundamentally silly and more than a little condescending I would probably already be doing it.
Please start doing so, sir.

[madkevin]

Yeah, I'll call that bluff too. I'd very much like to see a clarification, written in plain English, after one of your Koontzified ravings, Oh Great One.

[Rob Beschizza]

Yes. Just do it for five posts and see what happens. If you like, you can even roll the metatextual analysis into the whole dealie as a constutiuent element of the Kthoontzhu mythos

[Bill Dungsroman]

Brian, you already come off as condescending and silly so don't fret over those potentialities.

[Brian Koontz]

Brian, you already come off as condescending and silly so don't fret over those potentialities.

While incorrect people might think something I don't want to become what they think.

[madkevin]

Except it isn't incorrect. You do come off as silly and condescending. Well, mostly - sometimes, you manage to claw your way up to "messianic crackpot" territory.

[Bill Dungsroman]

While incorrect people might think something I don't want to become what they think.
Brian, the way you come off to other people is not decided by you, it's decided by them.