User talk:Surreal-one

Your comments on the Talk:Surrealism page are either tangential to the development of the article or have no relevance to it whatsoever. The page is not a place to discuss your own petty jealousies and absurd theories about the movement but to discuss how the subject is best to be written about and how others have fared in doing so. --Daniel C. Boyer 20:33, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually my statements are quite on point. Rosemont is a fraud and a scoundrel and he and the many so called "groups" have no business there in the surrealism article, except as groups of amateur followers of surrealism.

Once again, I'm really at a loss to how a group, any group, can be "so-called," unless this is meant in a very literal sense without any aspersion-casting. A group is just some conglomeration of individuals acting together in some sense of common purpose. That your view (which you haven't seen fit to support, but oh well) is that that common purpose is fraud, or to weaken the surrealist project, or whatever it might be, doesn't make them less groups. And "amatuer followers"? As opposed to what, professional followers? Be serious. --Daniel C. Boyer 19:11, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel, you appear to be a bit more intelligent than your colleagues. Did it ever occur to you that you could have built a decent career as a scholar rather than ruin your life by arguing for an intellectually bankrupt fraud? Those people who follow that ridiculous "love Black people, hate White people" idea because they "love all people regardless of race" is absurd. The best way is to try to get all people of all races to work for the common good, not divide people. I defend White people because of all of the asshole liberals who want to show how "nice" they are to the poor ignorant dinges. It makes you Black-asshole-kissers all feel so superior to the people you are protecting, doesn't it? More fraud. If and when the Blacks take over they will hang guys like you by the balls, because they know exactly the kind of fraud you are trying to pull. You are simply not treating Blacks with true respect. They respect the White Nationalists more than they do the White-assed liberal progressives like the Rosmonts...and YOU, until you get wise, because the Nationalists are truthful to their motives..

Also, the Iowa show could never have been a success because, even if the art were good, which it was not, you all go out of the way to offend anybody who can advance your reputations and careers. Does that make sense to you? You can tell me that yu "do not care," but every indication is that you and your friends want to be admired and respected for your art and thinking. If you contend with me, it will not happen.

Even if you managed to get your own name and Rosemont's mentioned in every article in Wiki, you would still not be highly thought of, because you have not built a credible reputation outside of Wiki. The best you can do is diminish Wiki as a source of credible information.

Your would-be FriendSurreal-one 21:55, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And then another Wigdor persona answers: (--Daniel C. Boyer 19:11, 26 September 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Surreal-one, Daniel C.Boyer has been DESPERATELY Trying to get ALL his friends on Wikipedia for the past three years. There are numerous complaints and VFD's on him from other Wikipedians. Daniel has this LONG History of Bogus articles he created.

Again, how can an article be a "bogus" article? The claims made in it might be bogus; is this what you mean? --Daniel C. Boyer 19:11, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My favorite is The Portland Surrealist Group and their online Blog! I do admit that I go to the Blog for a good laugh. Its so NOT Surrealist!Classicjupiter2 23:21, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]