What Am I Doing Wrong?

[Dr. Caligari]

From the "Trolls" thread on LostHorizons:

Also, juju and Dr. Caligari were added to the list a year ago, and LogicTax was formally warned by Pete directly, but they have survived all cutbacks and have continued to promote and display teachability, so I have not included them in this list as of 06/11/07. At this point Dr. Caligari is the only known Quatloos regular who does not routinely lapse into frivolous argument on this forum.

[Imalawman]

From the "Trolls" thread on LostHorizons:

Also, juju and Dr. Caligari were added to the list a year ago, and LogicTax was formally warned by Pete directly, but they have survived all cutbacks and have continued to promote and display teachability, so I have not included them in this list as of 06/11/07. At this point Dr. Caligari is the only known Quatloos regular who does not routinely lapse into frivolous argument on this forum.

I, for one, am ashamed of you. Perhaps its time for you to prove your true quatloosian nature and get yourself banned by pointing out that CTC has lost everytime in court.

[The Observer]

Obviously, you forgot to ask questions for which the LHers have no answer - the minute you post /crickets, you will get banned.

[Demosthenes]

Dr. C. Your sad behavior on LH almost prompts me to ban you here. Traitor.

[webhick]

At this point Dr. Caligari is the only known Quatloos regular who does not routinely lapse into frivolous argument on this forum.

Key word here is "routinely".

[Dr. Caligari]

I was originally listed as an "avowed troll":

Avowed Trolls:
Dr. Caligari <(same)> (regular Quatloos poster)

To which I responded as follows:

John, I don't deny that I am a regular poster on Quatloos. But I certainly don't think I am a "troll" on this site in any usual sense of that word.

I don't come on this site to post "CtC is wrong" or "you're all going to jail" or anything like that. (I save that for Quatloos.)

On this site, I have supplied information which I believe is accurate and would be useful both to people who believe in CtC and those who don't. For example, when you started a thread about filing a declaratory judgment action, I posted a reply that cited some provisions of the Declaratory Judgment Act that limit its use in tax cases. I don't think anyone ever disputed that what I cited was an accurate statement of the law. Similarly, when someone started a thread to ask for court decisions about the IRS's ability to levy without a court order, I posted a Supreme Court decision on that issue. Some people didn't like what that case said, but I don't think anyone ever accused me of misquoting the court, citing an overruled case, or otherwise posting false information.

If you don't value the information I post, fine. It's your site, you can ban anyone you want. But I plead not guilty to the charge of "trolling."

Which resulted in Bulten posting this:

OK, I'll give you credit for that, I don't think that either. See amendments above. But everyone should remember, when you believe something accurate, support your belief reasonably. (And don't get the idea that I reverse myself for just any doctoral dissertation. As always, the procedure for appealing moderator decisions is email to phendrickson, at losthorizons, dotcom.)

[Joey Smith]

All the dialogue at LostHeads can be simply reduced to the following: "We have our heads in the sand and we don't want to hear! DON'T WANT TO HEAR!"

[.]

formally warned

Sounds very serious.

Daffy Duck said..... Elmer Fudd said..... Bugs Bunny said..... John J. Bullshite said.....

[LPC]

In answer to the question, "What am I doing wrong?", I can offer the following suggestions:

1. You're too tangential. Yes, you point out something that is wrong, but it's a side issue and not about CtC or anything really important. If you do not "routinely lapse into frivolous arguments," then you're not talking about CtC.

2. You're too subtle. You might cite a Supreme Court decision that is contrary to a claim, but you don't explain how just how contrary. Don't expect them to figure it out for themselves. Rub their noses in it.

3. You've got no follow-through. You can't just say something coherent and correct and expect to be banned right away. Be persistent. Remember: float like a butterfly; buzz like a mosquito.

[notorial dissent]

"Formally warned" - does this mean John J. Bulten was wearing a tuxedo when he made the warning?

No, he was wearing his bippy and a funny hat.

[Doktor Avalanche]

Oh man, I gotta get myself banned from Lost Horizons.

[Demosthenes]

Oh man, I gotta get myself banned from Lost Horizons.

Yep. It's this year's black.

[Disilloosianed]

Doktor,

I've just been lurking at LH, so I haven't been banned either.....we could have a race

[John J. Bulten]

formally warned

Sounds very serious.

Daffy Duck said..... Elmer Fudd said..... Bugs Bunny said..... John J. said.....

Donald Duck said in 1943 that you should patriotically permit a third party to give some of your money to the government, and apparently without either of you researching the law to find out whether you have to.

"Formal" means I send a form that says "I saw you riding one of Bob's Bicycles". http://www.losthorizons.com/GettingFree.pdf

[webhick]

The Illuminati says: A sense of humor is good.

[Doktor Avalanche]

Giving money to the government in 1943.........what was going on in 1943 that might have required great government expenditures and a certain level of enforced sacrifice by the population as a whole. What little event triggered the whole thing......

Oh yeah.....World War II. You might have read about it in school. US, Great Britain and the Soviet Union fighting the Axis Powers (Nazi Germany, fasist Italy and Japan).

And Daffy Duck was not the only one to push public funding of the war effort........

Today, John J. Bulten can make his snide comment. In 1943 it would have garnered him an intense visit from the FBI, who would have vigorously questioned him as to how long he had been disloyal to the United States of America

I'm almost in favor of voting that regime back into power. Almost...

[Doktor Avalanche]

Doktor,

I've just been lurking at LH, so I haven't been banned either.....we could have a race

I'm sure Mr. Bulten has already announced my arrival and that I've been preemptively banned for life from Lost Horizons.

Anyone who doesn't buy Bulten's "Pete's not a mail bomber" argument tends to end up that way.

[Quixote]

I'm not sure what got me banned from LH, but it was probably either referring to CtC as tax evasion, or pointing out why every CtC return is internally inconsistent. The first one ought to do it, but the second one is more fun.