Il_Paolo

Ah, Romeo1985 - riding the wave of the classics - raises with this review significant themes that would truly deserve further development: what constitutes a good manual, how to develop exposition for educational purposes without losing sight of the problematic nature of science? Secondly: how to frame the "Bologna process" (which refers to the transition to 3+2 and the allocation of credits) within the evolution of the European university? It's a shame that the aforementioned controversies have taken a different direction, as the page would otherwise have been historic. Universally Yours, Il_Paolo

@Fidia: the good lawyer reads the papers and documents well, reacting accordingly. Well, if you had read the phrase <<...Fidia responds with a paralogism unworthy of the classic models he draws inspiration from: he dismisses me as an "idiot" (à la Dostoevsky?) and counters with the classic "reconvencional" that has nothing to do with my reflection>> you would have actually grasped how I never spoke of reconvencional in terms of "demand." Regardless of its qualification, it remains an inadmissible and/or unfounded topic. Exceptionally Yours, Il_Paolo

Dear Bartle, some reviews have sparked interesting debates with the users you mention and others: without which, in fact, little or nothing would have remained of my activity, it's a fact that's glaringly obvious. Other reviews (including "Rimini Rimini") were pure nonsense, but the game was so blatant and obvious that it would mislead or mock no one (unless you truly believe that the site is frequented by fools; which is not the case, especially in these instances). So, I did not deceive those who took seriously what needed to be taken seriously, nor those who read "Rimini Rimini": in my opinion, it was a double game in which everyone participated knowingly, in various possible declensions and perspectives. In all of this, it may annoy some that, especially in recent weeks, a few users have jumped on that type of review to replicate its themes and content, irritating some of the site's users, also because such a game could last, as it indeed has from my point of view, only a few weeks. But I do not feel responsible for others' actions, as I am certainly the last to oppose their conduct. Responsibly Yours, Il_Paolo PS: Carrà was REALLY mysterious.

Gustavo, you too! Always say hi to Mom. As for the debates: beautiful things were written at the bottom of Banana Joe (themes: politics and the left), Romina e Albano (themes: love, wasted talents, hypertext, Borges), Fred Bongusto (themes: decadence, decadentism), Nicola di Bari (themes: distance, detachment). The rest was pure nonsense, but is there really anything wrong with that? In the end, you just had to choose not to participate... Debaser offers this and more. Sincerely Yours, Il_Paolo PS: Anyway, if someone in the world ever types “Kim Gordon + menopause” they will be directed here and not to a medical office or a company for alternative medicines, or to a New York guru's site on female rejuvenation. Let’s even surpass Ondarock! Alternatively Yours, Il_Paolo

Thank you Bartle, if you can get the books reviewed by my "original" in 2008 as well. I will write to you privately.

Yes, but this way you're making a judgment on intentions. In my opinion, <<exchanging opinions, sharing views, getting to know people, and engaging with them>> is possible even starting from what we conventionally call "shit": it depends on the relationship and the debate that emerges from the reviewer and the commentators, and here, of course, common sense comes into play.

Thank you, Commissioner! I want to clarify: rather than an interview with Saviano (whom I do admire), I would have preferred a nice two-hour special, possibly with the author present, focused on investigations regarding the development of the writer's own insights (primarily: the shadow economy and the real economy), seeing how the now "dated" book could spark a new generation of active citizens, active reporters, journalists, and investigators, who would make us feel less "alone". It should be noted that by multiplying the investigative tools and the number of people genuinely interested in the matter, Saviano would no longer be the only one, the sole figure, and therefore the exposed subject. I hope you remember Dalla Chiesa, Giovanni Falcone, Paolo Borsellino: TV broadcasts, countless interviews, deification in life, accompanied by the retreat of the rest of society and institutions as their exposure to risk increased, resulting in them remaining the only ones to deal with certain issues, making them easily exposed to retaliation as well. With this, I am not saying that Fazio's broadcast shouldn't have been made; I am simply saying that it is the usual Italian spectacle. Sincerely yours, Il_Paolo

Fidia's comment confirms, precisely, what was written in the previous post: the splendor of the debaserian hypertext. Let’s proceed in order: Romeo1985 writes a harmless review of a book on mathematical analysis, which can be read, not read, read and commented on, etc. Until his intervention, this review seemed of little consequence, interesting only to insiders or to fans of our young reviewer. Fidia intervenes, in a polemical manner and without sharp justification, raising a sort of censorial spirit, for the fact that Romeo1985 hasn’t, for example, reviewed texts of different merit (what is meant by merit? Why doesn’t he write instead of telling others to write and publish? We are not given that). Editors Sfasciacarrozze and Bartleboom intervene in a commendable way to discuss the boundaries of freedom of thought, of publication, and the infamous concept that de gustibus non est disputandum. I intervene to politely express my opinion and to justify it (Fidia, as a legal expert, knows well the importance of the concept of justification), and Fidia responds with a paralogism unworthy of the classical models he draws from: he dismisses me as an “idiot” (a la Dostoevsky?) and retorts with the classic “conventionality” that has nothing to do with my reflection (arguing about Saviano and showing that he hasn’t read my post with tranquility, being pre-conditioned by my “signature,” because if I had signed with another name...) and that does not clarify the discussion at all, also demonstrating little tolerance for divergent thought. All this is beautiful, and it explains very well why this site has "also" Romeo1985, the Avenger, Birbabirba, Rivoli, Il_Paolo: a matter of pluralism and irony, that is, saying one thing while writing the exact opposite, and then let those who want to understand, understand, the others in the camper. Ironic Yours (but also benevolently Yours), Il_Paolo

Since I occasionally feel involved, I leave some reflections in the margin of this further writing by Romeo1985. Writing, in my humble opinion, is an exercise in freedom, especially emotional and mental freedom; the same goes for exercising freedom in commenting, whether positively or negatively, on what has been written and published on the site. The limit, at least in my view, could be that of criminal legality and that of good taste, as well as, of course, the subject being reviewed, which here on Debaser is music, films/shows, books; within these limits (and assuming the site direction doesn’t think otherwise), everything deserves to be written about and, depending on personal inclinations, to be read. The "beauty" of Debaser, indeed, lies not so much in what is written and published, but in the relationship created between the text and the "glosses" added by users (Bartle and Fidia himself will understand what I mean), in such a way that the review no longer exists in a solipsistic manner, but is instead enriched by the comments and suggestions it triggers, creating a “hypertext” or a “circular text.” Sometimes, these comments and discussions can spark deeper dialogues that always hold surprises. This was, at the time, the most enjoyable aspect of writing here (which, for various reasons, can no longer be the case), and it was the reason why I wrote as Il_Paolo and not with another avatar, and why some "unexpected" users, who understood the game, appreciated it. However, dear Bartle, I never extolled Gegia as much as or more than Martina Colombari (you probably cite the embodiment of beauty; and of the fool, if associated with that silly person who led your beloved team's defense for years), precisely because this would have meant crossing the boundaries of Bongusto, or rather, good taste! Therefore, I tell Mr. Fidia not to take things too personally and to live “free,” as life is short, and judging is pointless (ah, Woodcock was a public prosecutor). Sculpturally Yours, Il_Paolo

Dear Avenger, the talent is there and I won't deny it: as I said yesterday to Romeo, I confirm today that your presence on the site makes the regret for the lack of continuation of my original "mission" superfluous, which was supposed to go through Franco Simone (just yesterday he was winking at me with this cd from the shelf of my trusted store: when we talk about synchronicity). For this, I offer my thanks. However, rising, albeit a little reluctantly, as a "noble father" of the genre, I advise both you and Romeo1985, if he passes by for a comment, to proceed with slow variations in such a way as to satisfy even the most critical readers like the ever-respected Bartle: Franco Simone is fine, but it is necessary to contextualize him better, using him as an “exemplum” for more complex life stories: this singer, for instance, has never accepted the limbo, the semi-anonymity he fell into during the '90s, and at times I could sense the burden of hatred and revanchism typical of the defeated who do not accept being such. Starting from here, describing a wounded fighter, subdued but not enslaved by those who have overpowered him, you could have broadened the perspective, making the Debaserian hypertext something different – even when we talk about “minor” – from a sequence of human types unjustly relegated within the trash phenomenon (I always politely tell Bartle that not always do fakes have a life of their own...; I totally quote Iside on "Cara Droga"). Yours, Il_Paolo