This is all beautiful, and I love you for it. The reality is that most people that have tried to launch investigations in the last 5-10 years have been all about the vendetta, and we don’t want that kind of BS.
1 Like
Is that what happened with this Vinny character? I guess I have missed a lot.
I forget all that went down, there. Osiris was personally involved, I’ll leave it to him to explain.
1 Like
Here’s a thread for your face:
The idea going on there was BJJ (specifically Gracies) were basically human trafficking, and evading US income tax, among other offenses. It’s the Vinny Souza thread.
1 Like
Jesus. Well that’s a whole dumpster fire of a thread. And those are outright allegations of specific crimes. That’s a whole different thing…I’m just talking about dudes claiming they’re acolytes of Pei Mei and fleecing ignorant students who don’t know any better. I’m not going accuse anyone of tax evasion or trafficking without the police being involved. That’s just asking for a libel suit.
Not to mention I don’t really give a shit about the inner workings of martial arts organizations unless they’re abusing people. You want to engage in unethical or shady business practices or affiliation fees? Sell black belts? As long as nobody is being forced to participate I don’t really give a shit. I’ll find a better organization or start my own. That’s getting into areas that I don’t really consider bullshido per se. But that’s just me.
I mean, that’s kinda the rub… if you want to be recognized as legit, you have to pay into these fuckers’ schemes. Otherwise, you’re just a pretender. If BJJ could get off its ass and get a real NGB…
I guess. I mean, that’s how it’s been forever in other martial arts though. You can be a TKD blackbelt under a shitty instructor and you haven’t made any invalid claims. Claiming ITF affiliation is slightly more “valid” from an organizational perspective, but doesn’t really matter to the average student. The Gracies don’t seem to have the same stranglehold they used to over the BJJ world…I’m a fan of that sort of decentralization in a certain sense. Helps prevent a single org from getting so powerful that corruption becomes the SOP. But then you lose some of the “purity” of lineages and all that. I don’t know much about the BJJ world though.
In Capoeira circles, orgs never really took off. You claim a Mestre and a group/school that’s about as far as it goes. The community knows you and will vouch for you if you’re good. Hell, I was teaching before I was ever ranked by any masters, but I got offered membership in a group when the community started recognizing my students, despite never having learned from a mestre. I don’t think most martial arts work that way anymore.
It’s not ceding ground to the Q mentality, it’s reminding everyone that grounded theories work and conspiracy theories don’t. A grounded theory is one that is subject to constant scrutiny based on empirical data, a constant comparative meat grinder. By definition a conspiracy theorist will not accept this predicate, which makes them easy to spot.
That’s exactly what’s missing from the entire Q ethos. It’s all positive feedback. No negative feedback.
At the same time, some people here have strategic identifies more than 15 years old. Most Q identities are less than 3 years old. Guess what? The average Joe doesn’t care, which is a problem for strategic cyber identities, the whole point of which is establishing trust.
Welcome to the Zero Trust present, my friend.
I understand. And I’m not talking about anything greater than bullshido investigations. The identity of an investigator is irrelevant specifically because of the nature of the things being investigated. Trusting an argument based on whether or not you trust a persona is fundamentally a fallacy. The only thing that matters is the evidence. X claims Y. Test Y. Report results. What am I missing?
If you do an investigation and report what you find, why should I trust you? The fact that you’ve been here a long time? I don’t know you, and despite me being a lurker since 2004 I’m virtually indistinguishable from a total newbie. Or if Phrost does the same investigation as a brand new, anonymous account, why should I care? All that matters is the veracity of the claims. Whether I choose to trust them or not is irrelevant to whether or not they’re true. If I doubt it, I should be able investigate those claims with the evidence given myself and come to the same conclusion. Scientific method 101.
This seems to be falling into validating an argument from authority. Just because an identity is established as trustworthy doesn’t mean any of their positions are true. They must reliably present falsifiable evidence for every claim they make in order to prove or disprove a claim. That they happen to be trustworthy and become established over time is incidental. Useful, no doubt, but doesn’t rise to the evidence-based and logically sound approach that’s always been advocated for here.
Like submessenger up there. He posts about the importance of evidence and demonstrating said evidence before making claims. Avoiding rumors and spreading falsehoods. I agree. He then goes on in other threads to make claims with no evidence and spreading rumors about things he is wholly unqualified to speak authoritatively on. Now I fundamentally don’t trust him in the slightest. But does that mean all of his claims will be untrue? Of course not. It’s my responsibility to treat each claim with the same skepticism and consideration as any other, otherwise I would be falling victim to motivated reasoning myself. Or are you more concerned with how the average, non-skeptic would respond to grifters?
Your name, address, phone number, job, and SSN being posted online.
Identities matter.
Did you watch the Fact vs. Truth video I posted earlier?
Go back.
Are you arguing that you need those things posted online to test claims, or are you saying that people shouldn’t test claims for fear of being doxxed. I thought that was the whole point of keeping fully anonymous personas. Are we talking about the same thing still?
Saying “Identities matter” isn’t an argument. I didn’t say they don’t matter under any circumstances. I said they don’t matter when testing a bullshido claim (well, most at least), which doesn’t need to be more complicated than a few phone calls and a few hours on Google. Why do they matter to the average joe interested in finding out about whether some instructor he wants to train with is a potential fraud? How is this different than any anonymous review on Amazon or eBay? Hell, if you look up my former instructor’s name, the first thing that pops up is a Bullshido thread about him. He doesn’t teach anymore in large part to that fact.
What Fact vs Truth video? I don’t see anything. Was it on another thread? Still learning to navigate this layout.
“IDENTITIES MATTER” is, in fact, an argument. It’s formal logic.
Pedantic. Let me rephrase. “Identities matter” is an argument indistinguishable from an aphorism in that it doesn’t address anything I pointed out. Seems like a copout.
Indy? Really? “Truth - that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality.” Pithy Hollywood screenwriters notwithstanding, I guess I’m done with this discussion.
Your cyber identity isn’t worth shit.
Yes. That’s my point. Your cyber identity isn’t worth shit is a statement I fully agree with.