Follow up on J. R. Salzman aka Logboy July 28, 2009 7:07 AM   Subscribe

Follow up on J. R. Salzman aka Logboy in the New York Times today regarding his 7th win in the Lumberjack World Championships last weekend. A long time Mefite, he lost his right arm in Iraq in 2006, discussed previously here and here.
posted by Argyle to MetaFilter-Related at 7:07 AM (95 comments total) 6 users marked this as a favorite

What a story, holy crap.
posted by The Straightener at 7:36 AM on July 28, 2009


Wow - I had no idea this awesome specialty skill existed on MeFi. Way to be. What a story of strength and focus.
posted by Miko at 7:36 AM on July 28, 2009


What a story! I now get to add "One Armed Log-Roller" to my list of Awesome Internet Friends.
posted by Jofus at 8:00 AM on July 28, 2009


Wow, most excellent - I am delighted to hear that! There is a great video on his website from last year when he just got back to logrolling - it's worth watching.
posted by madamjujujive at 8:04 AM on July 28, 2009 [1 favorite]


frickin awesome. go logboy!
posted by rmd1023 at 8:36 AM on July 28, 2009


Salzman’s carbon-fiber prosthetic — “my Tinkertoy arm,” he called it — is waterproof and hollow. Inside are thin rolls of lead for weight. In last year’s event here, he filled it with sand from the shore of Lake Hayward to try to find the right balance.

That's kind of legendary stuff right there.
posted by Burhanistan at 8:44 AM on July 28, 2009 [2 favorites]


I love Logboy's description of himself on his profile page. It's direct and to the point:
Professional log roller, multi ESPN Great Outdoor Games Medalist, 5 or 6 time World Champion, and ESPY award winner. Went to Iraq in 06. Got blown up, lost my right arm, came home.
May you roll and win for many more years!
posted by ocherdraco at 8:51 AM on July 28, 2009 [1 favorite]


I think it's about time we start calling him Logman.
posted by Floydd at 8:54 AM on July 28, 2009 [9 favorites]


I love Meatbomb's comment from that original thread. And by love, I mean really cannot fucking believe.

Anyway, congratulations, Logboy - that's phenomenal. I agree with Floydd - I think it's about time we started calling you Logman. :)
posted by kbanas at 8:56 AM on July 28, 2009 [1 favorite]


Thank you for posting this. This guy ought to get dinner at the White House. This is a far greater feat than winning Tour de France with one testicle.
posted by bukvich at 10:12 AM on July 28, 2009 [3 favorites]


Awesome!

Is it wrong that I add him as a contact of "Muse"? Too bad. He is.
posted by ObscureReferenceMan at 10:15 AM on July 28, 2009


I love Meatbomb's comment from that original thread. And by love, I mean really cannot fucking believe.

Not that I necessarily agree with him, and not to derail the thread. But Meatbomb spent time in Afghanistan himself I think, and most likely saw a lot of Afghanis sans limbs.

posted by atrazine at 10:33 AM on July 28, 2009


Wow, what a great story. Thanks for posting this here. Really amazing.
posted by lazaruslong at 10:38 AM on July 28, 2009


LogMAN is right. Thanks for posting this!
posted by redfisch at 11:06 AM on July 28, 2009


People like this amaze me. Same planet, different worlds.

I did the Guard from '87-'93. I so did not want to go to the Gulf. This was part of my reasoning for not staying in once my enlistment was up. The idea of going someplace and shooting at people was disturbing to me. The idea of having them shoot at me even more so!

I did not have to go, but for the last year of my enlistment, and for my years of IRR I had the idea hanging over my head.

So I can admire any man that feels such a connection to his country that he seeks a deployment out! I can't wrap my head around it, but I can admire it.

I also admire anyone who dedicates themselves to something most people think is a waste of time like logrolling.

Cool story, cool guy, that video is worth watching.
posted by cjorgensen at 11:22 AM on July 28, 2009


Thank you for posting this. This guy ought to get dinner at the White House. This is a far greater feat than winning Tour de France with one testicle/

Not sure he would accept. See his March 26th comments. (Not sure how to get it right to those comments.)

Logboy is a real man. Proud to be his fellow citizen.
posted by JohnnyGunn at 12:44 PM on July 28, 2009


What admirable courage!
posted by Cranberry at 12:52 PM on July 28, 2009


It's tough he lost an arm and all, but from looking at his blog, it's apparent the dude's a big, big fan of FOX News. It'd be interesting to hear what he has to say about being featured in a pinko rag like the NYT.
posted by Sys Rq at 3:20 PM on July 28, 2009


Logman is a total stud.
posted by dhammond at 3:23 PM on July 28, 2009


Hell of a dancer too, I bet.
posted by CKmtl at 3:47 PM on July 28, 2009 [1 favorite]


You know, you can disagree with a persons politics while still respecting the person. To do otherwise speaks to the weakness of your own convictions. Of course, this assumes the person in questions behaves in a similar manner.

This is a lesson that more people need to learn.
posted by Loto at 4:43 PM on July 28, 2009 [5 favorites]


As inspiring as it is the way he has overcome his injuries, his blog is a horrible mess of wrongness.
posted by tellurian at 4:46 PM on July 28, 2009 [2 favorites]


To do otherwise speaks to the weakness of your own convictions.

I think my conviction that he lost his arm over a fucking lie is about as strong as it will ever be.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 5:44 PM on July 28, 2009 [4 favorites]


I wonder if he ever thinks about people he helped kill for cheap gas while he's rolling logs.
posted by Mayor Curley at 6:52 PM on July 28, 2009 [4 favorites]


That's pretty harsh Mayor Curley - and way too personal. I think it sucks that you would make a comment like that.
posted by madamjujujive at 7:05 PM on July 28, 2009 [3 favorites]


I agree with madamjjj, sucks. You don't have to like the guy or even comment in this thread; that's a cheap shot.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:29 PM on July 28, 2009


Conditioning and identity programming can run very deep in humans. What may seem to be foolish may seem to another a valuable service. Where we can derive any meaning is the place that logboy overcame obstacles. He may indeed have the wrong notion, but it's possible to appreciate his success. In the light of losing an arm and still being able to perform complicated acts of balance, we can perhaps have less of an excuse to blame our own shortcomings. Anyway, try to hold the two ideas (stupid war vs. capacity for recovery) in your mind at the same time and see where that tension can lead you rather than trying to get locked into one sentiment or another.
posted by Burhanistan at 8:36 PM on July 28, 2009 [1 favorite]


You know, you can disagree with a persons politics while still respecting the person. To do otherwise speaks to the weakness of your own convictions.

"Weakness of your convictions??" That is what convictions *are.* I do my best to not excuse or even associate with people whose positions I find reprehensible and, indirectly, the cause of a hell of a lot of human suffering. Convictions don't shift in the wind, and they don't disappear under "peer pressure to support the troops."

Yes, I'm not perfect myself. Yes, I feel sorry for anyone who gets injured in a rather horrific way, but I'd be lying if I said I could respect any person who agrees with Ann Coulter that waterboarding is "just a bath."
posted by drjimmy11 at 9:24 PM on July 28, 2009 [4 favorites]


I wish we could pay to ban people from Metafilter.
posted by Argyle at 9:32 PM on July 28, 2009


I was made to understand there were comments about logrolling here.

Being from Iceland there's a whole lot of hot summer shenanigans I've never done. Logrolling is one of these things that seems like it's a lot of fun that I've never tried. I need to get my feet up on a log one of these days.
posted by Kattullus at 10:29 PM on July 28, 2009


what kind of summer shenanigans do you get in Iceland?
posted by boo_radley at 10:37 PM on July 28, 2009


what kind of summer shenanigans do you get in Iceland?

Nude straddling of the geothermal steam vents.
posted by Burhanistan at 10:38 PM on July 28, 2009 [1 favorite]


I got no issue with his right to write whatever he wants in his blog or with the man. Only thing I have with Logboy is RESPECT. The issue is with the politicians, not the soldiers.
posted by JohnnyGunn at 10:47 PM on July 28, 2009 [1 favorite]


Logboy became one of my heroes after reading the story of his homecoming posted here. This is awesome and inspiring news. Logboy you are the man.
posted by caddis at 2:34 AM on July 29, 2009


You don't have to like the guy or even comment in this thread
I think I understand where you are coming from jessamyn, but this isn't AskMe. His blog has been introduced and it has some pretty objectionable stances in it.
posted by tellurian at 4:57 AM on July 29, 2009


I really, REALLY love it when people whose greatest commitment in life is at which pub they'll be meeting their friends try to make comments about the commitments of soldiers.

Regardless of how anyone can feel about any conflict, the correct, proper, and necessary thing in this case is to say the same thing you say when you find out someone's a Vietnam Vet, or a vet of any conflict:

"Welcome Home."

You don't have to say "thanks", or "yea man fuck them hajis!", you simply say "Welcome Home." And you mean it.

The question is whether you have the fortitude to look them in the eyes when you say it.
posted by TomMelee at 5:49 AM on July 29, 2009 [2 favorites]


drjimmy11 and Blazecock: To clarify, I was not directing my comment at you or people who behave like you. I'm speaking of the type of person who, when confronted with a political sensibility that differs from their own, immediately insult and disrespect the person for holding those beliefs. Of course, this also relies on the other person not being the same kind of jackass of whom I am speaking.
posted by Loto at 6:15 AM on July 29, 2009


Regardless of how anyone can feel about any conflict, the correct, proper, and necessary thing in this case is to say the same thing you say when you find out someone's a Vietnam Vet, or a vet of any conflict
No. Say what you feel.
posted by tellurian at 6:37 AM on July 29, 2009


"Welcome Home" or BOHICA.

Same-same.
posted by McGuillicuddy at 7:16 AM on July 29, 2009


Regardless of how anyone can feel about any conflict, the correct, proper, and necessary thing in this case is to say the same thing you say when you find out someone's a Vietnam Vet, or a vet of any conflict

Wars are conflicts started by wealthy people, for the further enrichment of the wealthy, and fought by people less fortunate than the people behind it. If the ruling class staffs the conflict by conscription, then the soldiers are victims. If the ruling class staffs the conflict by offering people pay and benefits along with a choice whether to enlist or not, the soldiers are collaborators.

This war, fought for resources the aggressor doesn't have rights to (and under false pretenses no less), has currently claimed the lives of about 100,000 Iraqi civilians who just wanted to live their day to day lives. That's the population of Cambridge, Massachusetts. All dead. And many times their number are mourning their friend or family member. Let me repeat this for emphasis, because people like to willfully ignore it: there are 100,000 innocent human beings dead because of this resource grab, and it took the grunt work of people like logboy to accomplish this feat.

They're all volunteers. You can keep your crocodile tears. They signed up, went to another country, and killed people for petroleum. Not to "protect your rights" (as they and their supporters are fond of saying), unless you feel that you have a right to cheap gas.

And I wouldn't have bothered with my first comment except that a quick perusal of the dude's blog revealed that he's a right-wing nut.
posted by Mayor Curley at 7:26 AM on July 29, 2009 [7 favorites]


Good God a'mighty. While y'all are keeping yourselves pure by disassociating yourselves from other human beings who are *gasp* different, shit still blows up.

He's out of the service, go whole hog on how he's wrong.

When they're in, you shut up. When they come home, injured, and make their way back up, you say "good on you!"

That's just common, human decency.

They're all volunteers. You can keep your crocodile tears. They signed up, went to another country, and killed people for petroleum. Not to "protect your rights" (as they and their supporters are fond of saying), unless you feel that you have a right to cheap gas.

And we've done what to stop this? The military is a tool of the government, which is us. Changes don't happen overnight, and they're not clean.

I mourn his losses because I think volunteers who signed up for this mess were sadly deluded. I cheer his success because, damn, that's fucking awesome.

And I wouldn't have bothered with my first comment except that a quick perusal of the dude's blog revealed that he's a right-wing nut.

...and therefore worthy of contempt? Not fit to be called human perhaps? How is that different from the blight-wingers' dehumanizing?
posted by lysdexic at 7:53 AM on July 29, 2009 [1 favorite]


I'm interested in your justification of your attitude, Mayor Curley. I understand the argument that people volunteered for service. But if we didn't have a volunteer military, or had a shortage of volunteers, we would have conscription. The volunteers stand between the general citizenship and conscription - that's the system we have in place, and as we've seen several times during the last century, sometimes the voluntary system isn't sufficient.

I also understand (and agree with) the argument that the war has been fought for purposes other than 'defending freedom' - "cheaper" oil among them (though it's not so cheap when the ongoing cost of war is factored into every gallon) - but I then have to echo lysdexic's question: what are your responsibilities as a citizen when it comes to the use of your government's forces? Do you engage in enough activism and communication with your representatives to be sure that you have done all you can to oppose the conflict? Do you ever drive, fly, or eat food that's been shipped across the country using cheap oil? Or do you expect that your views should insulate you from your own complicity in this war?
posted by Miko at 7:59 AM on July 29, 2009 [2 favorites]


... the soldiers are collaborators.

Says the person who has chosen not to emigrate to Canada to avoid having their tax dollars being used as Iraq-related payroll. Collaborator.
posted by CKmtl at 8:09 AM on July 29, 2009



Mayor Curley - There may not be traditional conscription, but there certainly is economic conscription. As a roadtrip enthusiast, I have made a point to be aware of depressed areas and their dispropotionate amount of soldiers overseas. In Miles City, Montana or Ishpeming in the UP of MI you see displays of locals serving in Afganistan and Iraq. Choices are slim for some folks. The cream of the crop will be able to get scholarships and get a life for themselves somewhere where there is opportunity, but what's left for the rest?

There has to be a way of speaking about this, leaving those that served with a sense that everything they did was not a waste. Yeah, they were sold a bill of goods and did not have access or interest in media that could or would have told them any different. Once such a sacrifice has been made the natural tendancy is to make it part of a noble cause, or else you're just a loser asshole with fewer prospects than you started with.

What needs to be addressed is basic human dignity.

The greatest challenge for Americans moving forward post-war is to allow each other dignity. You see a right wing nut, I see someone trying to make sense of a tragedy and grasping for a reason to keep moving forward. We need to educate and expect those that believed the lies to be defensive and slow to change. That's just human nature.
posted by readery at 8:09 AM on July 29, 2009


But if we didn't have a volunteer military, or had a shortage of volunteers, we would have conscription.

And if we had conscription, we wouldn't have conflicts like this. People of higher socioeconomic class would also get drafted and sent to kill or be killed and their parents wouldn't stand for it. The US government didn't withdraw from Viet Nam because it was the right thing to do-- the government withdrew because people figured out that their sons were being conscripted and dying for no good reason and began to fight back.

what are your responsibilities as a citizen when it comes to the use of your government's forces? Do you engage in enough activism and communication with your representatives to be sure that you have done all you can to oppose the conflict?

You might not have noticed, but your representative doesn't care what you think. Raytheon pays for his vacations, dinners and gifts for his wife, not you or me. Regardless, I vote for representatives who are against foreign wars over the right to waste shit. My responsibility is to not help kill foreigners in exchange for money and benefits. If nobody did this, we wouldn't be having this discussion. And you may say that it's naive to think that will ever happen, but it's no less naive than suggesting that my congressman cares what I think.

Do you ever drive, fly, or eat food that's been shipped across the country using cheap oil? Or do you expect that your views should insulate you from your own complicity in this war?

As you noted, the conflict was so botched that it hasn't affected oil prices. But if you seriously want to hear about my environmental footprint, I'll tell you that I am sitting here typing this in the heat while a perfectly serviceable air conditioner sits in the basement because I don't want to waste the energy. And outside my window is my 15-year-old car that I could afford to replace but opt not to, not that I need it that often because I generally work from home. And when my wife gets home we are walking to the farmer's market because it's Wednesday. Oh, and I haven't eaten meat since 1989. I'm Saint Curley the Smug. Happy? Probably not, because I didn't say "Oh, yeah. they're totally mowing down civilians on my behalf."
posted by Mayor Curley at 8:36 AM on July 29, 2009 [5 favorites]


readery: I hear your argument and it makes a lot of sense. I'm from a state with vast swathes of dead towns that provide a very high per-capita enlistment. And I feel very badly that these people don't have many opportunities beyond this. However, if the cost of "leaving those that served with a sense that everything they did was not a waste" is 100,000 dead innocents, it's not a fair solution. You can't sacrifice people to give others a sense of purpose, even if you didn't know those people and they weren't like you.

Yeah, they were sold a bill of goods and did not have access or interest in media that could or would have told them any different. Once such a sacrifice has been made the natural tendancy is to make it part of a noble cause, or else you're just a loser asshole with fewer prospects than you started with.

You're absolutely right, and you expressed that perfectly. But it's going to keep happening if we put a sheen on it for peoples' dignity. I hate to keep reiterating this, but the self worth of a subset of Americans is not a fair trade for all that real suffering they cause by being party to this.

And there's a subtext here from this discussion (and others on this site) that some people (not you readerly) tacitly acknowledge that this is the trade going on and I should shut up about it because I'm going to alienate moderates and "we" want their votes.
posted by Mayor Curley at 8:50 AM on July 29, 2009 [3 favorites]


Jeez, people. The war is bullshit and people who support it are either oligarchs or misguided dupes. logboy overcoming disability regardless of the cause is an interesting and inspirational thing. It is entirely possible to feel both without having to justify something in between.
posted by Burhanistan at 8:55 AM on July 29, 2009 [2 favorites]


I'm Saint Curley the Smug.

We figured that out already.
posted by The Straightener at 8:59 AM on July 29, 2009 [3 favorites]


I am sitting here typing this in the heat while a perfectly serviceable air conditioner sits in the basement because I don't want to waste the energy. And outside my window is my 15-year-old car that I could afford to replace but opt not to, not that I need it that often because I generally work from home. And when my wife gets home we are walking to the farmer's market because it's Wednesday. Oh, and I haven't eaten meat since 1989.

*Slow clap*
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 9:05 AM on July 29, 2009 [2 favorites]


*Slow clap*

Dude, she asked. Granted, it was asked less as a question, and more of an insinuation that I drive a Chevy Tahoe, leave the windows open in winter and slowly pour 50-gallon drums of crude down a sewer grate purely because I like the sound it makes. But if I'm the Patron Saint of smug, I think your weak sarcasm makes you an acolyte.
posted by Mayor Curley at 9:19 AM on July 29, 2009


it was asked less as a question, and more of an insinuation

Not really. I just honestly wondered how much effort you make to dissociate yourself from the oil economy. I certainly support such behaviors and take similar measures, but I'm pretty far from saying they justify blanket hostility towards people who choose to enter military service, or absolve you of your portion of responsibility for the national situation we're in.
posted by Miko at 9:28 AM on July 29, 2009


The thing that's so frustrating about you MC, is that you're capable of having decent conversations about these topics, topics that you've thought through in a whole bunch of ways, but you go for the immediate facile throwaway snark as a way of sort of forcing people to make you open up and have an adult discussion about these topics. As if you can't be sincere until you've insulted everyone.

I certainly don't want you to shut up, but it would be sort of nice if you could skip the fake-troll parts of these discussions and go straight to the "hey you want to talk about this, let's talk about it" part.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 9:31 AM on July 29, 2009 [1 favorite]


Dude, don't expect others to expend much care or effort in responding to your weak justifications when you open with mean and trite zingers - you made essentially the same comment in an FPP last week, at least change the record once in a while.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 9:34 AM on July 29, 2009


I wonder if he ever thinks about people he helped kill for cheap gas while he's rolling logs.
Mayor Curleys remark raises an interesting issue.
The default moral axiom is that killing is bad except in self defense. That's why f.i. the DoD has the name it has.
It could be argued that going to Iraq and killing people there is not a form of self-defense. But there are special psychological issues and social axioms around killing in an army context. It is socially sanctioned killing. The 'not in my name' people are explicitly revoking this sanctioning.
As I understand it Mayor C. makes it clear that he doesn't sanction that killing either.
Some people in this thread mention that according to them only the deciders are responsible for the killing. But not the soldiers. One common way of looking at this is that victory retroactively makes actions in war morally right. This is what McNamara meant when he said that if America had lost the war those who where instrumental in the fire bombing of Tokyo, he amongst them, would have been prosecuted as war criminals.

The acceptability of his remark is complicated further by a social mechanism wrt war. In a game-theory perspective being a soldier and running the risk of getting killed or maimed is not a rational thing to do *. Still many societies see a need for war in some cases. To make being a soldier a rational thing to do for an individual, a society needs mechanisms to 'reward' the ultimate sacrifice of getting killed or the penultimate sacrifice of getting maimed. There's a moral axiom in these war-going societies that a (maimed) veteran deserves gratitude and special treatment in reward for his sacrifice. Similarly in some societies the family a killed soldier leaves is taking care of as a reward.
M. C.'s remark goes against this social axiom.

Other axioms that M.C. offends against are: first, that one doesn't kick somebody who's down. Somebody who's maimed has it hard enough as it is and shouldn't be criticised. And second that perseverance in the face of adversity demands admiration and that there's no place for criticism.
M.Cs remark offends against these three moral norms and as a result he's getting bullied to fall into step.

I'm sure my observation won't be popular either. Feel free to disregard it if you want.
I just think there are interesting social mechanisms at play here.

*) see On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society, Lt. Col. Dave Grossman
posted by jouke at 9:51 AM on July 29, 2009 [1 favorite]


This is what McNamara meant when he said that if America had lost the war those who where instrumental in the fire bombing of Tokyo, he amongst them, would have been prosecuted as war criminals.

I wasn't aware of that. I'll have to look that up.

Some people in this thread mention that according to them only the deciders are responsible for the killing. But not the soldiers.

I'll go as far as to say soldiers are responsible for their actions wherever, whenever. I'm not going to say "just following orders" is an acceptable defense at all stages. My objection to the snark was 1) kicking someone while they're down and 2) military personnel, when they're in uniform, can't fight back against that kind of thing.

Because yeah, we need defenders, and even if someone signed up to "get revenge" they still have to follow legal orders to serve and protect people they may or may not like.
posted by lysdexic at 10:07 AM on July 29, 2009


I'm sure my observation won't be popular either.

Most of it was too self-evident to be unpopular, except for your unspoken assumption that social norms are inherently bad and that verbal enforcement of them is "bullying." Watch out for that one, by the way (you wouldn't want to be perceived as trying to enforce the social norm which says that bullying is bad).
posted by sleevener at 10:11 AM on July 29, 2009


I'll have to look that up.
See The Fog of War.
posted by jouke at 10:12 AM on July 29, 2009


Somebody who's maimed has it hard enough as it is and shouldn't be criticised.

I watched the ESPN clip and immediately took away its jingoist vibe. So, on the other hand, one of the serious problems with the other side of this thread and telling people they are not allowed to issue criticism is the glorification of war and of its participants, particularly those who were not conscripted but volunteered of their own free will.

Which, by the way, is one significant difference between the illegal Iraq war and the Vietnam war. The individual who is the focus of this post signed up over an established lie, not out of economic need, or because his birthday was picked out of a barrel. Since 2001, hundreds of thousands of people have been murdered over this lie.

I don't want to "kick someone who's down" — and, for what it's worth, I don't really even agree that this is necessarily what Mayor Curley is doing — but it bears some mention that he continues to support some extreme right-wing political views for someone who was badly maimed as a direct consequence of those political views.

And God Bless America, he's welcome to whatever misguided political beliefs he wants, even if those beliefs cost him a limb and some of his cognitive abilities. But he signed up for it, and even if this thread pulls emotional heartstrings, and as happy as someone can be that he's going back to what he loves doing, one can and should still have the right to question.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:17 AM on July 29, 2009 [3 favorites]


M.Cs remark offends against these three moral norms and as a result he's getting bullied to fall into step.

Yes, he's definitely offending against the noted social norms - however, I don't think that's quite why he's getting the flack that he is. There's a 4th norm that you missed, specifically, the "Time and Place" norm.

I'm fairly confident that most of the posters in this thread don't particularly care what MC happens to think about Logboy's political leanings - I know I sure don't. The concern is that he came into a thread that is theoretically meant as a celebration, a kind of "Hey, this really shitty thing happened to Logboy, but he can still kick some ass at logrolling," and crapped in it. Which is a bad idea in two ways. First, it's just unpleasant - nobody wants to talk about cancer at a birthday party. Second, it's really fucking selfish, essentially a cheap way to turn a respectful thread about a very specific story into what is basically a "LOOK AT ME! I AM SO AGAINST THIS WAR! I AM WILLING TO ALIENATE EVERYONE!" thread.

I happen to think that MC knew exactly what he was doing - almost 7 years in, he knows what happens when you crap in a thread. Add in willful misreading of genuine comments from someone with a long history of intelligent discussion, and it's hard not to call it trolling.

And truthfully, I don't see anyone bullying him to "fall in step" - I think it's more of a "deal with your own issues on your own time, not here."
posted by god hates math at 10:17 AM on July 29, 2009 [2 favorites]


The Psychological Cost of War book is excellent.
posted by lazaruslong at 10:44 AM on July 29, 2009


The gist of that book can be read in this article by Grossman as referenced in this mefi post.
posted by jouke at 10:52 AM on July 29, 2009


Can we get back to the fact that this guy's goal is to be a one-armed shop teacher?

Some day 20 years from now some smart ass kid is going to be joking about how Logboy probably cut his arm off on a bandsaw when he sneezed and then Mr. Shop Teacher is going to drop a little war story on the kid and quite possibly shut him up for a week.

Anyway, good work on the log rolling.
posted by GuyZero at 10:55 AM on July 29, 2009 [1 favorite]


I certainly don't want you to shut up, but it would be sort of nice if you could skip the fake-troll parts of these discussions and go straight to the "hey you want to talk about this, let's talk about it" part.

Why do you hate foreplay?
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 11:16 AM on July 29, 2009


Why do you hate foreplay?

I thought I was clear on that in the past.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 11:27 AM on July 29, 2009 [2 favorites]


Okay, that was an awesome story, jessamyn. That was a laugh I really needed right now, too. Sorry it happened, but thanks so much for sharing!
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 12:07 PM on July 29, 2009


things like this reduce my opinion of this community.

just because you have an axe to grind, doesn't mean you need to turn every thread into a i'm so right and you're so wrong political flame war.

going back to the very top of this thread, you know, what some would like to call the topic - a guy on this site got his arm blown off and then won a competition that is based on balance. that's pretty fucking rad. who cares what uniform he wore or what box he checks in the voting booth? you want to have that fight? well, wait until he's actually in the fucking thread and it's the topic at hand.

what a bunch of assholes.
posted by nadawi at 1:13 PM on July 29, 2009 [1 favorite]


things like this reduce my opinion of this community...
what a bunch of assholes.


I totally agree, dude! I mean—the nerve of you people—spewing such hateful vitriol as:

What a story, holy crap.
...
What a story of strength and focus.
...
Wow, most excellent
...
frickin awesome. go logboy!
...
That's kind of legendary stuff right there.
...
May you roll and win for many more years!
...
Anyway, congratulations, Logboy - that's phenomenal.
...
Logman is a total stud.
...
Logboy is a real man. Proud to be his fellow citizen.
...
Cool story, cool guy, that video is worth watching.
...
Logboy you are the man.
...


Yes. Truly a black day for MetaFilter.
posted by Atom Eyes at 1:33 PM on July 29, 2009


The guy is probably so gung-ho anti-Obama and pro-war because to accept the fact that the war was a lie, he would also have to accept the fact that he was mutilated and disfigured pointlessly. That would be a hard -- almost insurmountable -- thing for anybody to deal with, no matter their political persuasion.

I have more thoughts on this but now isn't the time or the place, really. I wish him the best of luck, in all sincerity.
posted by Avenger at 1:47 PM on July 29, 2009


Oh wow, I thought this thread was intended to be a celebration of a person overcoming a serious injury to continue his lifelong passion for a sport that doesn't get a lot of respect or coverage. And a smaller celebration of how science and medicine have combined to give said dude A FUCKING ROBOTIC ARM a slight exaggeration, but one I am sticking to nonetheless

But no, it's a political dick-measuring contest! This'll surely wendell.

It feels disrespectful on every level possible to reduce this man's life and all his achievements into "fuck him, he's a right-winger and deserves nothing but smug derision, haha, I WIN TEH INTERNETS."

I don't agree with logboy's politics, but I guarantee you any discourse I would have with him on any level would not be singularly focused on trying to make him believe he lost his arm in vain and that everything he believes in is wrong.

We live in America. I can choose to celebrate a human being qua human being without dragging my personal political crusades into it because this thread isn't about me and what I think about politics, for fuck's sake.

Oh, and FYI, if your goal is to try and convince people that their political bias is misinformed, it's probably better to treat those people with the respect you'd expect to receive in kind as an intelligent, well-read and enlightened debate opponent on current issues as a courtesy before you attempt to change that person's mind. One that, much like your own, has been molded by a lifetime of personal experiences and accessible information that evolve on a constant basis. Anything less (like name-calling) will probably result in a deadlock... at best.
posted by Unicorn on the cob at 2:13 PM on July 29, 2009 [3 favorites]


The guy is probably so gung-ho anti-Obama and pro-war because to accept the fact that the war was a lie, he would also have to accept the fact that he was mutilated and disfigured pointlessly. That would be a hard -- almost insurmountable -- thing for anybody to deal with, no matter their political persuasion.

I don't disagree. I wish him peace, as much I feel the jingoistic vibe here is ugly.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:15 PM on July 29, 2009


Okay, now it can wendell.

I've appreciated the work of writers, performers, musicians and athletes whose ideology is even more ugly than Logboy (and I oppose calling him Logman, because he is obviously NOT grown-up; maybe we can compromise and call him Logdude).

I still remember and recognize O.J. Simpson as a great football player and all historical accounts show that John Wilkes Booth was a great actor. Just because both of them killed less people than Logboy did is no reason to diss them.
posted by wendell at 3:01 PM on July 29, 2009 [1 favorite]


Real nice, partner.
posted by Burhanistan at 3:08 PM on July 29, 2009


if your goal is to try and convince people that their political bias is misinformed...
then you are engaged in the most futile activity on the internet. The Randians and Dittoheads, like the Stalinists and AlQuedans, are so clearly removed from reality that they are either mentally, morally or psychologically damaged. Don't bother arguing with them. Just pity them and do whatever necessary from letting them hurt you.

That said, Logboy's physical accomplishments are indeed spectacular (but the mental process for playing the sport probably favors the psychologicallydamaged).
posted by wendell at 3:10 PM on July 29, 2009


Christ, you're an asshole.
posted by dhammond at 3:17 PM on July 29, 2009


(but the mental process for playing the sport probably favors the psychologicallydamaged).

Just fucking stop.
posted by rtha at 3:27 PM on July 29, 2009


I'm glad he recovered and did something awesome in a niche sport. His site tells me he's a right-wing nutcase who signed up voluntarily for a despicable cause.
posted by Dumsnill at 3:49 PM on July 29, 2009


I read the website the same way, but I still think lumberjack competitions are teh awesome.
posted by Miko at 4:15 PM on July 29, 2009


MC's comment wasn't bad because it was mean, it was bad because it was stupid and juvenile.
posted by empath at 4:16 PM on July 29, 2009 [2 favorites]


That said, logboy's blog is warmed over instapundit *yawn*
posted by empath at 4:19 PM on July 29, 2009


Not really into the whole negativity on mefi thing today. Yesterday was Trauma day in Documentary class, hours of holocaust films, today was Our Lives are Reality TV levels of crazy coffee klatch. PMS and headache. Mad Men. DOOBYDOO it can be vodka tonic time?
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 4:26 PM on July 29, 2009


Wars are conflicts started by wealthy people

I can think of several counter-examples. We could discuss them. But you'd still be a dick.

I wonder if he ever thinks about people he helped kill for cheap gas while he's rolling logs.

So ... wha .. huh? Were you out there throwing fucking twenties into the gas station attendant's tip jar out of principle?

Fuck. You.
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 5:50 PM on July 29, 2009


That comment was simplistic and stupid, but:

(em>Were you out there throwing fucking twenties into the gas station attendant's tip jar out of principle?

Now who's being a fucking moron?
posted by Dumsnill at 6:11 PM on July 29, 2009


Well, I'm being a fucking moron for fucking up the tags.
posted by Dumsnill at 6:15 PM on July 29, 2009


So ... wha .. huh? Were you out there throwing fucking twenties into the gas station attendant's tip jar out of principle?

you totally (willfully) missed the point.

dick... Fuck. You.

such eloquence. You've really made me feel ashamed.
posted by Mayor Curley at 6:16 PM on July 29, 2009


I really feel sorry for the people who can not appreciate what Logboy has done merely because he is different from them. Rather than see his magnificent accomplishment they see merely someone with whom they disagree and then that person becomes other. Prejudice at its finest. "We only appreciate and find good in people just like us."

Logboy is still the man, and more so than most men will know.
posted by caddis at 6:54 PM on July 29, 2009 [2 favorites]


Logboy is still the man, and more so than most men will know.

I refuse to accept this. Would you accept this if he were a volunteer in a non-NATO army?

(Would you not find your own comment grotesquely sexist if it weren't about the American army?)
posted by Dumsnill at 7:17 PM on July 29, 2009


Good lord. I strongly disagree with logboy's political stance, but unlike many pro-war bloggers he has walked the walk and as such has more than earned the right to express his views.

Can't we just accept that people have complex, multi-faceted reasons for joining the U.S. army, and simply offer support for a member of this community?
posted by lalex at 7:26 PM on July 29, 2009


We're all of us pawns in someone else's game and/or products of our environment, to varying degrees. I think the things I think mostly because of my education and the friends I've been blessed to have. I'm only occasionally able to change my own mind by rearranging the furniture in there -- something I'm trying to get better at. Most people are probably about the same.

I've been reading Salzman's blog since his injury. This is an incredible, intense young man, married to an equally intense young woman (who's a truly talented writer). He didn't just lose an arm: he lost a couple of fingers on his other hand, but more crucially his brain was injured as well. I can only imagine what it must be like to get used to a mind that doesn't work like it used to.

I've felt heartsick reading his blog posts, not so much because of the politics (which are pretty standard for his part of the country) but because he seems deeply, soul-crushingly angry, and he deserves a better inner life than that. Well, whether he deserves it or not is something none of us are qualified to say, but I hope the answer's yes. Whatever the case, his logrolling victory is great news and a huge step in the right direction. Congratulations, Logboy!
posted by sleevener at 7:35 PM on July 29, 2009 [2 favorites]


....he has walked the walk and as such has more than earned the right to express his views.


This is crazy. The guy is nuts, but, yeah, he can express his views. I have not walked the walk, and the world is a better place for it. My views are sane. Even liberal Americans seem to bring out the "well he's a real man with balls, who followed orders, so *respect*!"

It's horrible what happened to him, and it's awesome what he has achieved. But he's still a fucking lunatic whose views deserve no respect whatsoever.
posted by Dumsnill at 7:39 PM on July 29, 2009 [1 favorite]


Would you not find your own comment grotesquely sexist

Sexist? Wuh...? Where does Logboy's gender factor into this?
posted by Cyrano at 9:33 PM on July 29, 2009


Logboy is still the man, and more so than most men will know.
posted by Dumsnill at 9:48 PM on July 29, 2009


Methinks you don't understand American colloquialisms as much as you think you do.
posted by Cyrano at 10:38 PM on July 29, 2009


Methinks people who start comments with methinks should be banned from the internet.
posted by Dumsnill at 12:42 AM on July 30, 2009


you totally (willfully) missed the point.

Nope, you did. You benefit from a collective action, then question the individual. Around here, jackass, that's generally called "hypocrisy."
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 7:02 AM on July 30, 2009


I am glad that Dumsnill finally got to sleep off that alcohol binge. Frankly, with the name, it is a bit eponysterical.
posted by caddis at 6:46 PM on July 30, 2009


« Older MeFi Auctions   |   Do my subreddits qualify for MeFi Projects? Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments