08 Jan 2014

“Yes, Give In to Your Annoyance, and Your Conversion to the DeLong Side Will Be Complete”

All Posts 19 Comments

OK kids, I just zapped a total troll comment left on a recent post that had absolutely nothing to do with the post, and involved merely a familiar jab at another economist on a position that I have never endorsed. Am I going down the slippery slope of total fascism in the comment moderation? Let’s hope not.

But in general, I am going to be more active in policing the discussion threads. Nobody wants to see a certain three of you discuss economic calculation and flex pricing again, particularly in a post about kittens karaoking. Etc.

19 Responses to ““Yes, Give In to Your Annoyance, and Your Conversion to the DeLong Side Will Be Complete””

  2. Reply
    Daniel Kuehn says:
    at

    But if you do that someone might miss the news that no Keynesian has ever understood Austrian economics!

    • Reply
      Daniel Kuehn says:
      at

      I never quite got the point of that line… it doesn’t seem to speak very well of Austrian economics.

      • Reply
        Bob Roddis says:
        at

        Taking advantage of the new rules, DK?

      • Reply
        Richie says:
        at

        Trolling.

        • Reply
          Daniel Kuehn says:
          at

          I don’t know – the first comment was way to out in the open to be trolling. It was outright mocking. And the second comment was entirely sincere. It always has puzzled me.

          Trolling is the coward’s way. I am a mocker.

        • Reply
          Daniel Kuehn says:
          at

          It’s very subjective though, now that I think about it. There are two evaluations required for establishing trolling:

          1. Does A make B upset/get B worked up

          2. Was it for the purpose of making them upset or some other more legitimate purpose like making a joke or making an important point.

          Alleged trollers and alleged trollees almost always agree on 1 (although in this case Bob doesn’t seem to be too upset to me – but maybe he is). Number 2 is extremely subjective. In this case I was just joking. Sometimes I may be making what I think is a serious point and someone calling it “trolling” would be dodging the point.

          But it’s a very tough problem now that I think about it.

          Misdiagnosis of trolling is almost guaranteed unless there is a very strong bond between the two people engaged in the discussion – they know each other, they know their motives, etc.

            • Reply
              Richie says:
              at

              “Troll = annoys an austrian.”

              Um, yeah, that is the purpose of trolling. You are so smart.

          • Reply
            Bob Roddis says:
            at

            DK: Some time prior to my 80th birthday in 2031, weren’t you supposed to prove a) that the market fails; and b) that those failures require the Keynesian “cures”? A week ago I asked Keynesians to prove (in either a deep philosophical manner, or otherwise) that “economies” suffer from “slack”. Did I miss the response?

            And it’s still true: No Keynesian seems to be able to (or wants to) grasp basic Austrian concepts or the non-aggression principle, much less combine the two together to understand the nature of voluntary exchange. LK took his best shot and missed. I’m satisified with the results and there is no need to go over the same themes again and again unless the opposition comes up with something new. I’m not holding my breath for that.

            • Reply
              Lord Keynes says:
              at

              ” No Keynesian seems to be able to (or wants to) grasp basic Austrian concepts or the non-aggression principle”

              lol… So Bob Murphy is now “active in policing the discussion threads” — yet outrageously ignorant comments like this are just fine.

              Bob roddis is telling us that Keynesians do not understand basic concepts like supply, demand, prices, market clearing, profit and loss etc. etc.

              Bob Murphy is nowhere to be seen.

              • Hank says:
                at

                This coming from someone who thinks a survey of business people under unrealistic conditions qualifies as empirical evidence.

                All hail the God of scientism!!!

    • Reply
      Bob Roddis says:
      at

      We all appreciate your long list of Keynesians who understand Austrian concepts and your detailed descriptions of their analysis.

  3. Reply
    Gamble says:
    at

    Regarding MK and his willful and purposeful unwillingness to understand prices, Jesus said it first and best when He said don’t feed the trolls. See here,

    Matthew 7:6
    “Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.

    • Reply
      Gamble says:
      at

      Sorry it is not MK but LK. Where is that darn edit button when you need it…

  4. Reply
    Andrew Keen says:
    at

    WAR IS PEACE
    FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
    IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

    • Reply
      Gamble says:
      at

      And satan is the great deceiver…

    • Reply
      bob rooney says:
      at

      INFLATION IS GROWTH
      DEBT IS MONEY
      SPENDING IS INCOME

  5. Reply
    Gamble says:
    at

    Bobs title said give into your annoyance and lose. I will try to learn from this.

    However there is an honest assessment process that must take place. Are you making progress? How about Cool Hand Luke, did he make progress?

Leave a Reply