Punch the guy who viciously insults your partner.

[blackie]

I don't get the song though. If the only point is that fighting sucks you're missing the point entirely and ignoring the issue. If it's just a good song you could have at least provided a link.

A link? So the "kids" today don't know Johnny Cash? It's so crazy that I am old.

But yeah, fighting sucks. It is a low class problem. Usually with intoxicants involved. I am not sure the last time someone I know has even gotten into a physical fight. Probably about 15 years ago.

What is the issue that is being ignored?

[Free libertarian]

I don't get the song though. If the only point is that fighting sucks you're missing the point entirely and ignoring the issue. If it's just a good song you could have at least provided a link.

Pay me no heed.   I was practicing being mysterious. 

[Tom Sawyer]

I don't get the song though. If the only point is that fighting sucks you're missing the point entirely and ignoring the issue. If it's just a good song you could have at least provided a link.

Pay me no heed.   I was practicing being mysterious.

One day eglove (grasshopper) will be able to take the pebble from your hand. Of course then he has to pick up that hot cauldron with his forearms...

[Jim Johnson]

I don't get the song though. If the only point is that fighting sucks you're missing the point entirely and ignoring the issue. If it's just a good song you could have at least provided a link.

Pay me no heed.   I was practicing being mysterious.

One day eglove (grasshopper) will be able to take the pebble from your hand. Of course then he has to pick up that hot cauldron with his forearms...

That's the worst part.... having "Wait..." burned into one arm and "What?" burned into the other.

[eglove]

Jim says the audio sucks. Now everyone wants to build a studio. I'm skeptical of doing such a show in a studio or having a limited amount of mics, still thinking on that one.

What is the current set up?

Why not a decent onmidirectional mic in the center of everyone?

Done. I got one of these. We gave it a short test, it sounds really great. I'm surprised such a thing exists. It would allow people to sit back on a couch and chat as we did in the video, and still have quality audio. At least, the test seems to suggest so.

[eglove]

I don't get the song though. If the only point is that fighting sucks you're missing the point entirely and ignoring the issue. If it's just a good song you could have at least provided a link.

Pay me no heed.   I was practicing being mysterious.

One day eglove (grasshopper) will be able to take the pebble from your hand. Of course then he has to pick up that hot cauldron with his forearms...

That's the worst part.... having "Wait..." burned into one arm and "What?" burned into the other.

It's already burned into my skull after enough strawmen from that maine guy. What I'm stuck on is how people react to the question at hand. You've also mentioned, Jim, that there is no universal ethic, and you can't pretend to be able to judge every situation yourself based on a single principle. Context always matters. It's why we've developed juries. So what then, is the issue? It looks like either one of two things, 1) You think somebody is suggesting fighting is a good idea, or 2) It's a question of whether the NAP covers 'threats.' But when you consider the example of the difference between threats online and in real life (to include when the person online lives near you and when they don't) it still comes back to the fact that it can not universally tie into every situation.

So what do you think you're arguing with?

[eglove]

I don't get the song though. If the only point is that fighting sucks you're missing the point entirely and ignoring the issue. If it's just a good song you could have at least provided a link.

A link? So the "kids" today don't know Johnny Cash? It's so crazy that I am old.

But yeah, fighting sucks. It is a low class problem. Usually with intoxicants involved. I am not sure the last time someone I know has even gotten into a physical fight. Probably about 15 years ago.

What is the issue that is being ignored?

The question is, primarily, is there such a thing as an implicit dual? That is, can there be such a situation that the guy who "aggressed" ie. made the first physical attack, was in the right (or atleast was a part of an implicit, mutual agreement to fight)? Rich's example is when he put a guy against the wall for insulting someone else continuously. That doesn't constitute "reparations," he shouldn't be "apprehended" for it, it doesn't mean he has no self-control, nor would you call him a violent person. To call what he did "wrong" based on the NAP ignores the reality of the situation. In his case, it probably needed to happen. If you say, "Well, he SHOULD have talked the guy down." You're ignoring the tension, emotion, history, and context of the situation. To say that YOU would do different, because YOU'RE "principled" is naive, because it DIDN'T happen to you. What's important is that it happened to HIM, why he did it, and what the FULL story is. It'd be wrong of you to judge what happened based on a single principle, especially seeing how it solved the issue at hand without further problem.

[Free libertarian]

I don't get the song though. If the only point is that fighting sucks you're missing the point entirely and ignoring the issue. If it's just a good song you could have at least provided a link.

Pay me no heed.   I was practicing being mysterious.

One day eglove (grasshopper) will be able to take the pebble from your hand. Of course then he has to pick up that hot cauldron with his forearms...

[blackie]

I think there are some situations where the initiation of force is OK.

I don't think a threat is the initiation of force, but it may warrant a response if it is a perceived credible threat.

If someone points a gun at me and tries to rob me, I am going to perceive the gun is real, and loaded. Doesn't matter if it is a toy gun, and there is no real threat of being shot.

As far as Rich getting physical because of insults, that is weird to me. I would need to hear the other guy's side of the story, and witnesses, before I could attempt to make a judgement.

Verbal contracts are "just mouth noises". Insults don't require a response but a perceived credible threat may, even if it is "just mouth noises".

[MaineShark]

It's already burned into my skull after enough strawmen from that maine guy.

Hey, look, you also don't know that a "strawman" is.

How surprising.  An illogical Statist.  There's a shocker.

[eglove]

I think there are some situations where the initiation of force is OK.

I don't think a threat is the initiation of force, but it may warrant a response if it is a perceived credible threat.

If someone points a gun at me and tries to rob me, I am going to perceive the gun is real, and loaded. Doesn't matter if it is a toy gun, and there is no real threat of being shot.

As far as Rich getting physical because of insults, that is weird to me. I would need to hear the other guy's side of the story, and witnesses, before I could attempt to make a judgement.

Verbal contracts are "just mouth noises". Insults don't require a response but a perceived credible threat may, even if it is "just mouth noises".

Exactamundo. I agree with all of that. What's really perplexing to me is that everytime this subject has been brought up, "Is it OK to hit the guy who viciously insults your partner?" the quick answer is "NO! Never!" When you get into the details, it's hard not to come to the conclusion that you just mentioned. But there's still resistance for some people. Maybe it just makes some people uncomfortable to think that the way they imagine things going in their head, might not happen.

[MaineShark]

When you get into the details, it's hard not to come to the conclusion that you just mentioned.

No, it isn't.  It's actually very, very easy not to come to that conclusion.

Unless you're a Statist who desires to violently impose your will on others.  Then, I suppose, it might be hard to avoid that conclusion.  But "violently impose your will on others" is the default Statist position, so it's not surprising that a Statist would jump there.

[Russell Kanning]

Hey Tom. I called the headquarters on the Maine coast and Becky said you were down with your NSA buddies. We had fun talking and I think I heard the ex-president say he was ready for you to "bring it on old man" in reference to bootcamp tactics.

[Jay]

Jim says the audio sucks. Now everyone wants to build a studio. I'm skeptical of doing such a show in a studio or having a limited amount of mics, still thinking on that one.

What is the current set up?

Why not a decent onmidirectional mic in the center of everyone?

Done. I got one of these. We gave it a short test, it sounds really great. I'm surprised such a thing exists. It would allow people to sit back on a couch and chat as we did in the video, and still have quality audio. At least, the test seems to suggest so.

http://www.conversationsnetwork.org/levelator

[eglove]

Jim says the audio sucks. Now everyone wants to build a studio. I'm skeptical of doing such a show in a studio or having a limited amount of mics, still thinking on that one.

What is the current set up?

Why not a decent onmidirectional mic in the center of everyone?

Done. I got one of these. We gave it a short test, it sounds really great. I'm surprised such a thing exists. It would allow people to sit back on a couch and chat as we did in the video, and still have quality audio. At least, the test seems to suggest so.

http://www.conversationsnetwork.org/levelator

http://feenphone.com/