Sorry, Zook, but my focus is and always has been on uncovering the truth. I don't claim to know the truth, but I do try to pursue it. I absolutely agree with your desire to put me on a leash if I were to infect every thread with contrived charges of "Zook is a sociopath". I would be the first to help you attach the leash. But the charges are not contrived at all, and as a result, they are pertinent to every post you make on this forum. The same could be said for Andy, where I regret having been fooled for so long.

I hope you understand that it's nothing personal. It's something truthful.

Sorry, Chico ... there is a disconnect between your opinion and the evidence, namely, in all my years on the internet - including usenet - only two, possibly three individuals (if we include Andy) had ever called me a sociopath. If we reasonably assume that I've met and interacted with over a 100 individuals on these various forums, that's at least 97% who have not called me a sociopath or even implied as much. The vast majority understand me to be a real human being with both normal empathy and normal faults ... a small minority have even characterized my patience with those who like to rabble rouse the forums, as saintly. Indeed, I had not been selected to moderate on three vastly different forums ... the choral assembly at Avalon, the social assembly at Nexus, and the reasonably effective debate assembly at Universal ... because I was deemed a sociopath.

Enter United People ... and pow! ... let the charge of Zook is a sociopath take root and tree.

So who am I to believe ... the 97% who believe me to be a real, normally-adjusted human being ... or the 2-3% that believe me to be a sociopath? Especially when those three have been effectively locked out of the same aforementioned forums for reasons of deviant conduct?

I hope you understand that it's nothing personal when I bring attention to your deviant conduct.

Pax

Zook your statistics do nothing for your favor and actually prove Chics stats on sociopathic ratios with our species...

I'm trying to be nice to you but you put me in the awkward position of identifying your grade-school level comprehension skills (time and again), Mags. Show an ability to comprehend what is being tabled, or go to a circus to munch peanuts or something.

The 97% statistic is about people's opinion of me as not being a sociopath ... as opposed to the 2-3% statistic that have called me a sociopath. It has nothing to do with whatever percentage of the population that is guesstimated to be sociopathic.


Pax

Your so dense Zook your taking on another form of gravity and matter. It actually makes you look even more stupid that my grammar does not fit your perfectionist english lit to wit, you peanut munchkin, golem from never never land. Of course 99% of the people would not think your a sociopathic dufuss and in your travels you will always find 1-3 % identifying you as a lunatic. Get it? This confirms Chics theory. My god your a babe in the woods here. Your an emperor with no clothes, a thief wearing polka dots, a shadow in the sun.

So the "evidence" that you are not a sociopath is that only a couple of people have identified you as one? Can you imagine a cancer patient reasoning like that? "The doctor is the only one saying I have cancer, so I believe I'll be just fine."

There are very good reasons why your acquaintances haven't identified you as a sociopath.

• Most people don't know sociopaths exist. They assume everyone has feelings (empathy) like they do.
• Most people don't know what behaviors are characteristic of sociopaths.
• Sociopaths mimic normal people and their behaviors while in public, allowing them to remain hidden in plain sight.
• Sociopaths do everything in their power to avoid being identified, including lying, character assassination, and reflecting the charges back onto the accuser.
• Most non-sociopaths tend to avoid "rocking the boat" by confronting a sociopath.

Look at Henry Kissinger even today. How many people identified him as a sociopath? Same for Bill Clinton. The public doesn't have a clue.

By the way, it wasn't the United People forum that dared identify you as a sociopath. It was Chicodoodoo. And I took my sweet time about it so that I could be reasonably sure of my diagnosis. I've studied you for a long time, Zook, and you have been very consistent. I've also studied sociopathy for an even longer time, so I have a good knowledge base to draw upon. I have two friends who are sociopaths, and I have known several others. I don't make the diagnosis lightly. The forums are rich with sociopaths, especially at the higher levels. Bill Ryan is one, as is Atticus, GypsyWoman, IceCold, 9eagle9, Andywight, digitalindustry (Kolin Evans), and jpmorgansnose. You often find them even in moderator positions, which you correctly point out is your usual stomping ground.

Note that my one foray into moderating at Nexus ended with me quitting after discovering the extent of the cronyism and corruption that existed behind the veil. You, on the other hand, were perfectly content to operate in the midst of the outrageous hypocrisy there, as long as you could hold onto your power and prestige as moderator. You typified the behavior of a sociopath by behaving that way, while I typified the behavior of a non-sociopath by pursuing fairness and justice at my own peril. The difference is like night and day, and yet you continue to twist it around to make yourself look good with your typical "twist and shout" behavior. It's truly incredible to behold the consistency of your sociopathy. Andy didn't stick around long enough after being exposed to make a good study subject, but you Zook have been a goldmine. Note that this probably means that you are less sociopathic than Andy, so you can maybe take some comfort in that.

Good stuff, Chico.

You ignore Mags obvious statistical gaffe - which Cupid tries to defend when he should be offering a mea culpa as any honest person would - and focus instead on a further attack against Zook. That's not only a display of egregious bias - which brings your objectivity into question on this issue and hints at lack of objectivity in other issues ... but your lack of fairness (empaths, by contrast, are very fair, so this is yet more evidence of your nonempathy). Also, the redirect from Mags mistake (e.g. a message feature) to an attack on yours truly underscores your zeal to focus on the messenger and not the message (contrary to your own claims of message focus). Hypocrisy, anyone?

Suffice to say, you'll tag team with any idiot who supports your warped perspective and futile pursuit of sociopathy. Millennia hasn't made a dent into understanding sociopathy but Batman Chico and his l'il buddy Robin will save the species, no doubt.

Of course, when someone actually goes after the root cause of the global corruptions expanding into FSD, namely, organization of sociopaths, nonempaths, and nonsociopathic minion monkeys that hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil but will munch bananas ... secrecy ... and fiat money ... then you'll peck at them like a half-crazed moonbat.

This forum is a valuable source to understand the enablers of the bankster empire ... and you two batmobile occupants are the standard of false flag truthseeking.

C'mon Chico, self-proclaimed truthseeker ... did Mags make a gaffe in his statistical interpretation or not?


Pax

That's not the only evidence. It's part of the greater preponderance favoring Zook's empathy. I made reference to only one piece of evidence, for my argument did not require the other pieces. Of course, as usual, you isolate that one piece of evidence and grandstand with it. What gall you must have to accuse others of binary thinking and oversimplification. After all, isolating evidence and making wholescale conclusions from it is nothing if not oversimplification. By contrast, preponderating evidence, which I often do and which allows me to see patterns ... vectors towards complexity. Again, your Orwellian game of switching meanings is too obvious to ignore.



Yes. The obvious reason being that you can't make a penguin fly no matter how many condor feathers you glue on its flippers. My acquaintances have always seen me as a penguin and never seen me fly ... all excepting the aforementioned two (and possibly Andy), who have often seen me fly as a condor high in their psychedelic mushroom painted sky. Perhaps the solution for you three is to stop eating magic 'shrooms?



You left out one thing on your list. Most people know a bad egg when they see one. A sociopath is just a glorified name given to a bad egg, e.g. a bad hatch in a good batch. Replace the term 'sociopath' in the above list with 'bad egg' and see if you can't locate a dancing solipsist fool in the mirror.

Again, what gall you must possess in order to call others ego-driven, narcissistic, self-absorbed, etc. Your mirror is the best study there is of the things you accuse of others. Still, I wouldn't call you a sociopath in my 4-category model of psychological states. You are too mechanistic. Nonempath is the more fitting term for you, Chico. Take a measure of pleasure in the treasure that you're not a sociopath. But only a measure, for nonempaths are quite the devious scheming trucks. In fact, the capstone of the bankster pyramid is almost certainly ruled by the nonempaths, who prefer giving orders like mafia dons ... over engaging in the bloodlets themselves.



Nor do you. Which is why you need to push your argument to cases like Kissinger (or Clinton) who is a creature of secrecy, organization, fiat money, and nonempathy - in the public office - and not just nonempathy alone. Who knows what Kissinger represents in the mind of his friends and acquaintances in the privacy of his relations? Who can identify a garden variety 2-set sociopath (4-set nonempath) better than those that have private relations with that sociopath? A bad egg can only be experienced first hand. Accuracy fails in second and third hand accounts. And we all know a bad egg when we see it.

To wit, do you know Kissinger or Clinton as 2-set sociopaths from anything other than their secretly organized and fiat-financed ascension to power? Of course you don't. You only know them from their public origins and durations, their behaviors and devious policies. That's no different for the public. The public only knows waht is put out by the mainstream media, and what has been researched by truthseeking media.

Given that, it is intellectually dishonest of you to portray the identification of sociopaths as a task best reserved for experts, like yourself ... for to compare those putative sociopaths ascended to power by secrecy, organization, and fiat money with those that are not so ascended is stuffing oranges into the apple bin and vice versa. Identifying a cellar dwellar like Andy and a penthouse fellar like Kissinger require different tools of study ... surgical tools for Kissinger and a pointing stick for Andy. Anyone one of us can hold a pointing stick. We do it all the time when we see a bad egg in our midst.

In your 2-set model, you may substitute sociopathy for nonempathy (in the above).



There's no question you've had regular long sittings in front of your bedroom mirror, Chico ... which is why you may indeed be an expert on 2-set sociopathy. Great dragonslayer and hero of our times, you alone put out my fire. Then again, you alone put in the coals and stoked it. Me a bad bad dragon.




My best guess is that you've had a run-in with everyone mentioned on the list above ... and you're venting without care or concern over whose reputation you may ruin. Mind you, some on those list are indeed bad eggs (e.g. Bill Ryan; our own stasi-style stooge Andy who enjoys playing with people's private information) ... but others confirm your general piss poor discernment about things.



Your penchant for hyperbole as garnered you a charge of drama queen before. I was in the moderating chamber
longer than you and it was nothing like you have portrayed it here.



There was no power and prestige in being a Nexus moderator. There was just mutual acquaintanceship and friendship while it lasted, and then there was a parting of the ways. Humans being humans ... with follies, faults, and funnies. It was more a burden than a privilege. No one got paid, so there was not even incentive to be a moderator. Of course, thinking like a 2-set sociopath, you're projecting your own expectations of what being a moderator entails, namely, power and prestige. You have my pity. No longer do I care enough to hold contempt against minds that are as broken a yours.



Thank you for that outpouring of charity, benevolent one.


Pax

Your old news zook. You might have been "cutting edge" a decade ago but that time is long long gone. Your out of your leagues. You can't chew gum and walk at the same time. You are so gone gone gone it sorry my friend. You should hang out in the Ryan Dawson board you would fare well. Lots of peeps there think everything is with the Jews. And when the patsy Jew narrative is satisfied sociopathy will be farther down the memory hole and in more control. Just like the Nazis you yard. Im so sick of your shit Zook, your like this scared dummy looking at the world through a peep hole. And thats all you see, and 3% of your interactions are telling you to get away from the peep hole and open the door. But your so narcissistic, your like NO NO NO look at this peep hole I have, this is the truth and your crazy. SAD SAD SAD.

Mags can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe you have fallen victim once again to your debilitating handicap of poor comprehension. I understood that Mags was referring to my theory of how the world works. If my percentages are close to being correct, maybe only 10% of the Independents would have the knowledge required to identify you as a sociopath, which is about 1% of the total population. None of the Sociopaths or the Minions are going to expose you, and the Followers are incapable of doing so. Only the Independents would do so, and most of them are still uninformed on the subject of sociopathy.

Given that a sociopath will associate more frequently with Minions, Followers, and other Sociopaths, we're very lucky that even one person could correctly identify you as a sociopath. That's another illustration of how sociopaths succeed so dramatically, despite their tiny proportion in the human population. Like I said, they practically have a free ride to the top of the human "power and control" pyramid.