Cyber ridicule of an autistic man... TODAY!

Post Reply New Topic

Don't be absurd. My conclusion is a conclusion based on actual evidence, which is definitive. It is relevant. So it is not megalomania. I don't expect to change anything, just tell the truth. So I am not extressing omnipotence or power. So no megalomania.

It is clear that people were saying Christian Chandler was asking for bullying because it's clear. There is not an actual reason. It is conclusively proofless. It is megalomaniacal. If you can't accept that then you go against medical diagnosis.

That is also an ad hominem comment. What matters is the argument I am making, and that is not false. So to claim this is just defensiveness. You have intrusively attempted medical diagnoses of non-existent traits of what I have whilst making ad hominem comments like this. I can see why you might try to lie about how I am violating my own standards.

And that is what I was saying to begin with. You have misread me. I said it was megalomaniacal at the start.

It can be said to be definitive evidence when someone insists they are right despite the facts.

Aghogday Wrote:
No not necessarily, a person has a right to dispute the facts. If I am color blind and say the light is green when it is red, even though that contradicts the facts, it is a difference of opinion on how I see the world, not a lie. Human perception and judgement and they way they express themselves in language varies from individual to individual; you don't even wait for a clarification of a statement before you call it a lie, I have asked you not to do this several times; it appears you didn't do it in this post, I appreciate that.

You have disputed many facts proven by third party sources, and I have never stated that what you were saying was a lie, because I understand that even though the facts are in front of you, you disagree with them.

It's not a lie to dispute the facts. In my opinion you are wrong when it seems obvious to me that the facts are correct, but you have a right to your opinion that you are right, without some one saying that what you say is a lie.

I doubt that you would like it very much if someone called your counter statement to a fact that was presented by someone else from a third party source, a lie. If I had done that, everytime I presented a third party fact, backed up by peer reviewed research, that you disputed there would be a record of me stating that what you said was a lie, about a hundred times so far.

And beyond that people do make mistakes, by missing or forgetting something they might have said, so it is never proper to call this behavior a lie, when it can be a simple human mistake. Again, it is an intrusive judgement, that is not part of a civil discussion. Asking fro clarification is the proper method in a civil discussion, not calling it a lie.

Of course you did. It's plain as day. Denying the obvious doesn't make it not so. It just makes you arrogant. And it makes you look like you think I and everyone reading this are stupid. Don't insult my intelligence.



The evidence is all over his own web site. I don't have time to go searching, copying and pasting every little shred of evidence just to appease you. Plenty of others here in this thread see it. It's not our problem that you can't. Go find it yourself.



Pay attention. I never said you argue because you think you're right. I said you argue for the sake of arguing. There's a BIG difference. I'm sorry if you find that offensive. Actually, no I'm not, because you're choosing to. You're doing it right now, and have been all over these forums from the day you got here. All one needs to do to see the evidence is read your posts. It is NOT baseless. It is not meant to be hurtful. It's the truth. Plain and simple. The truth does hurt sometimes. If you don't like the truth, then change it.

You are a proponent of self determined destiny are you not? If you don't like what you see in the mirror, do something about it.




Love the way you conveniently remove your original comments from these quotes, so it's harder for people to see what these statements are in response to. I bet you think it makes you look so innocent and persecuted.

How 'bout owning up to how this particular exchange REALLY started?



Not so innocent looking now, are you?

You're an hit and run instigator, baiting people into arguing with you. You throw the first insults, whine when you get them thrown back at you, covering up and denying that you started the idiocy in the first place.

If you can't take it, don't dish it out smart-ass.

Okay, if you might not understand I was using sarcasm. I was saying that what you said is absurd and I turned it around, showing that saying that he isn't simply socially ret*d is hilarious and unlikely.
I am not insulting your intelligence. Why is it that you have to keep insulting me?

This is just an excuse for not trying to find any. I have already given reason for your assertion of Chris Chandler being a masochist as false and you can't accept it. So now you just say for me to search it.

What? How can you read that from what I say? I say people argue something when they think they are right. Me, aghogday, tequila, everyone. And your assertion that I argue only for the sake of arguing is false. Why the mudslinging?

You don''t have proof of that. I argue because I think what I am arguing is right. I think it is right that Chris Chandler doesn't actually want to be bullied. Your speculation on my motivations without proof is hurtful, and wrong. So why bully me?

This is another logical fallacy, in fact two. It's immunization against error and saying there is evidence without proving any.

Why must you be so harsh? Why are you trying to immunize against error again? I don't mind quoting myself until the cows come home.
If you don't understand, this is sarcasm that says that your inability to comprehend the idea that he might just be clueless is silly.
Also this is ironic given how many times you say search for the proof yourself and that something is evident and don't actually give me an answer.

The last line was about an action or series of actions you have committed. You have constantly assumed that Christian Chandler was pandering for attention because it was obvious, and you didn't ever actually say why.
I however am providing the much more sensible conclusion that he may just have no clue and that it would be silly to assume that he doesn't because he has autism. You are trying to somehow say that this bullying is deserved because he wants it, and that is craven self justification. What do you do in return? You insult me with a childish remark. You tell me to get a life. Why? Why be so hurtful?

You have accused me of being arrogant, self-important, insulting, self-righteous, a baiter, a bully, you told me to get a life, call me a smart-ass as a snide insult and you. You have said all I say is idiocy.

You have never actually proven any of this. Whatever you try to say is proof of me is actually a twisted misrpresentation of what I say, for example saying that I am trying to change the definition of aspie when all I have done is try and say why it is these are considered traits, and then try and dissect them. And in two threads all you have done is descend in to mad, hurtful ranting about me whilst ignoring the original topic.

Last edited by Gedrene on 23 Nov 2011, 7:37 am, edited 5 times in total.

It seems to me that he arrogantly demeans both autistics that are of lower-functioning then himself, which despite what his ego says, he's probably on the lower-side of the bell curve when it comes to his autistic functionality, while also insulting aspies that for "stealing the limelight" from him. I think that if he was born in 1982, it wouldn't be surprising for him to be diagnosed with classic autistic disorder.

But considering his ability level (relatively speaking) with a Global Assessment of Functioning score of 70 (look it up), social ineptitude bordering on hostility, lack of maturity, as well as his obsession with anime and cartoons, he would ironically be diagnosed with severe Asperger's if he was born a decade later.

He may be doing this because he's never had a real role model to show him otherwise. For example one of the complaints is that he receives social security even though he is physically capable of working. That may indeed be valid but he may not have had any experience in putting a good resume together or actually having someone mentor him in terms of a job search. It's easy to complain but if you don't actually show someone, it does not accomplish anything.

I've stumbled upon this thread in a Google search and became fascinated with it. Aghogday hit the nail on the head with this statement because sadly no matter how bad Chris-Chan is, it will give an excuse for NTs who hate people with any mental/neurological disorder to persecute ALL people with such conditions.

As much as Chris-Chan has made questionable choices in his life and lifestyle, it will just feed the grist mill that is Encyclopedia Dramatica. Sadly, for every person like Chris-Chan the trolls at ED make fun of, there are nine others who have his kind of mental condition or something else who do not deserve the bullying they have to put up with from ED. Frankly, ED is a modern day, high-tech minstrel show in that instead of white guys in black face, there are NTs who make fun of people with mental disabilities by perpetuating stereotypes about them.

I'll state for the record that I have ADHD as a primary condition and PDD-NOS as a secondary condition. Unlike Chris-Chan, I do actually have a job (I work at the print shop my parents own and operate) and I don't do a Sonic the Hedgehog recolor like he does, but I can relate in a way to some of the bullying he has to put up with because I was subjected to intense bullying at school due to my conditions (I was in Special Education). While I haven't been in a "Love Quest" like Chris-Chan, one of the things the bullies used to do to me was to go up to me and tell me that "so-and-so girl loves you!" and tell me to go up to her and ask her if it was true. When I did, the girl would invariably run away from me, screaming "Get away from me, you monster!" Other times they'd say cruel things to me like "Your house is on fire!" and "Garfield's dead!", and often that goaded me into getting into fistfights with the bullies.

I can further relate to Chris-Chan in a way in regard to Sonichu because I used to write Daria fan fiction and I got lots of flaming reviews for my stories from jerks who just did that for kicks. Eventually I gave up writing fan fiction altogether because I couldn't take it anymore.

Also, I am deeply concerned given a recent article in Time magazine where members of the Tea Party blamed kids who have ADHD collecting SSI/Social Security Disability for America's economic woes. Sadly some of these Tea Party folks (and perhaps a good number of the ED trolls) want to bring back the "good old days" where people who had any mental disorder were put into straighjackets, thrown into padded rooms, the doors locked and the keys thrown away so that they would be "Chained, naked, beaten with rods, and lashed into obedience!" as the famed reformer Dorothea Dix wrote in her famous letter to the Massachusetts General Court (State Legislature) in regard to the mental institutions of her day. If such people were lucky and were allowed to go to school, it would be at either a special state-run institution or if it was in the regular public school system, it would be at a separate building apart from the "regular" school--out of sight, out of mind.

Sadly all it would take would be for some of these Tea Party folks (and some of the ED trolls) to take over the White House and/or Congress next year to make this former nightmare a reality once again.

Admittedly people like Chris-Chan make it more difficult for people in the neurodiverse community to paint a more positive image of ourselves, but it we don't defend the Chris-Chans of the world, we will be the next targets.

I will leave you now with a famous quote from German pastor Martin Neimoller:

First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.

If no one speaks for people like Chris-Chan, when our turn comes, no one will speak up for us.

Something to think about, folks.

If one lives long enough no matter what their inherent strengths or fortunes are, they are eventually humbled by the great equalizer, life. And are likely to find themselves as humbled as anyone they humiliated.

I can't really say I agree with a blanket statement like that.

If you are hiding from the Nazis, and someone like CWC thinks it will be funny to start yelling "hey, here we are, over here!", what do you do? I'll even grant you that the person truly does not understand the consequences. At that point, just before the jack booted thugs bust down the door to your hiding place, are you going to think sticking by someone like that was such a good idea, or would you wish you'd let him deal with consequences on his own?

Oh dear, finally it's time for someone to invoke Godwin's Law, people.

I used to think that Chris Chan didn't deserve any of the mistreatment he gets from Internet trolls. But now, I believe that Chris Chan is sort of asking for trouble. CWC's autism may be a factor in his behavior, but I don't see how the trolls who target him are picking on him due to his autism.

Although I don't approve of Internet trolling, the CWCki said it better than I can:

IMO, there are bigoted fools in every demographic. Every race, nationality, and gender has their share of bad people, so it was only a matter of time before one of these discriminatory, insensitive AND lazy people who just happens to be autistic would come to light.

Chris chan has taken a break from internet activity, I think it´d be best if we just let him enjoy his break and try to move on.

As some wise person said on another forum we all do stupid things when we are young and this guy just had the bad luck of having his actions broadcasted over the internet.

I think he deserves some of the flack he got but that his bullies went a bit too far(setting him up on fake dates/giving him false hopes about creating a videogame out of sonichu...)

Also I understand that as godwin stated every internet argument eventually ends up comparing the other party to the nazis but please try to make an effort leaving nazis outside of this one shrox

Yeah, let him be.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1eswGrkMU8[/youtube]

The only clown here is the guy who started talking about nazis...

real imaginative

Substitute "killer clowns from outer space" if you wish.

If you are hiding from killer clowns from outer space, and someone like CWC thinks it will be funny to start yelling "hey, here we are, over here!", what do you do? I'll even grant you that the person truly does not understand the consequences. At that point, just before the rubber nosed, big panted artists bust down the door to your hiding place, are you going to think sticking by someone like that was such a good idea, or would you wish you'd let him deal with the squirting flowers and endless handkerchiefs on his own?

You already lost me at approving of bullying. Now you say it is to save your own skin?

Quit with the dumb analogies