Total Posts:50|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

My comptuer...it's alive!

bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 2:08:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Yeah, so, I've been gone for like...over a month.

I got real sick, then had my computer sh*t the proverbial bed on me, and just a whole host of other crap. I just barely fixed the compy a few days ago, and this is the first time I've been able to get on.

What'd I miss?
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
Magic8000
Posts: 975
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 2:11:38 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 2:08:08 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
Yeah, so, I've been gone for like...over a month.

I got real sick, then had my computer sh*t the proverbial bed on me, and just a whole host of other crap. I just barely fixed the compy a few days ago, and this is the first time I've been able to get on.

What'd I miss?

Airmax's reign is over and we now have TUF ruling over us. People are mad about the weekly stupid again. DDO updates coming Friday. I'm not up to date on much DDO news, but that's some big stuff.
404 coherent debate topic not found. Please restart the debate with clear resolution.

"So Magic8000 believes Einstein was a proctologist who was persuaded by the Government and Hitler to fabricate the Theory of Relativity"- GWL-CPA
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 2:13:02 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 2:11:38 PM, Magic8000 wrote:
At 1/23/2014 2:08:08 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
Yeah, so, I've been gone for like...over a month.

I got real sick, then had my computer sh*t the proverbial bed on me, and just a whole host of other crap. I just barely fixed the compy a few days ago, and this is the first time I've been able to get on.

What'd I miss?

Airmax's reign is over and we now have TUF ruling over us. People are mad about the weekly stupid again. DDO updates coming Friday. I'm not up to date on much DDO news, but that's some big stuff.

Thanks!

I can't decide if I'm sad or not that I didn't have a bunch of things to respond to when I logged back in. Just some love spam. Sad trombone.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
YYW
Posts: 36,426
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 3:45:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 2:08:08 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
Yeah, so, I've been gone for like...over a month.

I got real sick, then had my computer sh*t the proverbial bed on me, and just a whole host of other crap. I just barely fixed the compy a few days ago, and this is the first time I've been able to get on.

What'd I miss?

Welcome back, man! I was kind of concerned... because you just went dark... like you'd been deployed to a black site or something. lol

So, the news:

1. The Weekly Stupid has been the subject of immense controversy, as one new (and nearly wholly unwelcome member) went crusading against it... and with similar results as the Templars, however less noble in the present case.

2. TUF won a hard-fought presidential campaign. This was the closest, and probably the dirtiest election yet. Cody is TUF's VP, and neither of them are moderators.

3. Airmax continues to serve as a moderator, even though he opted not to run for re-election.

4. Juggle is putting ads on the site this friday, and some other updates that I don't think will be of any real consequence to anyone who mainly posts in the forums.

5. Flame wars abound, mostly among the usual suspects and some new people.

6. DDO Walking Dead has returned, and I think with some success.

7. I think substantive forum discussions are down, but I might be biased. There seems to be less stuff I give a sh!t about now, but that might change now that you're back!

8. There was an epic thread where Airmax schooled a whole lot of anti-Israel people. It was kind of nice.

9. There are a lot of weird people on the site now, and especially a lot of weird sexual stuff (one is even an admitted zoophile). I'm sure you'll meet him because he seems obsessed with commenting on virtually everything I post.

10. Some of the old and good members are even less active than they once were, but that's just the way of things I guess.

11. Some new people got elected to the hall of fame.

That's about it!
Tsar of DDO
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 3:52:52 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 3:45:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 1/23/2014 2:08:08 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
Yeah, so, I've been gone for like...over a month.

I got real sick, then had my computer sh*t the proverbial bed on me, and just a whole host of other crap. I just barely fixed the compy a few days ago, and this is the first time I've been able to get on.

What'd I miss?

Welcome back, man! I was kind of concerned... because you just went dark... like you'd been deployed to a black site or something. lol

I got really sick (called off work sick, fetal position sick), at the same time my computer died (long-winded, boring and angry linux explanation as to why it got sick would be long-winded and boring, so I won't go into it. Suffice to say it was a software issue that shouldn't have existed, that meant my computer died every, oh, 30 seconds.), and then I went on a vacation me and Mrs. Bladerunner planned a year ago, syncope be DAMNED. I don't remember most of the roller coasters...but some people pay good money to pass out that often (and every 3+ hour line gave me opportunity to lean, force myself not to throw up, and recover sorta).

So, the news:

1. The Weekly Stupid has been the subject of immense controversy, as one new (and nearly wholly unwelcome member) went crusading against it... and with similar results as the Templars, however less noble in the present case.

2. TUF won a hard-fought presidential campaign. This was the closest, and probably the dirtiest election yet. Cody is TUF's VP, and neither of them are moderators.

3. Airmax continues to serve as a moderator, even though he opted not to run for re-election.

4. Juggle is putting ads on the site this friday, and some other updates that I don't think will be of any real consequence to anyone who mainly posts in the forums.

5. Flame wars abound, mostly among the usual suspects and some new people.

6. DDO Walking Dead has returned, and I think with some success.

7. I think substantive forum discussions are down, but I might be biased. There seems to be less stuff I give a sh!t about now, but that might change now that you're back!

8. There was an epic thread where Airmax schooled a whole lot of anti-Israel people. It was kind of nice.

9. There are a lot of weird people on the site now, and especially a lot of weird sexual stuff (one is even an admitted zoophile). I'm sure you'll meet him because he seems obsessed with commenting on virtually everything I post.

10. Some of the old and good members are even less active than they once were, but that's just the way of things I guess.

11. Some new people got elected to the hall of fame.

That's about it!

I did miss a bunch! Thanks ...gotta try to find that Israel one, now. There are several members who I like reading, but Airmax's infrequent desire to go all "schooling" makes his that much more delicious.

Are there really going to be ads?
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
YYW
Posts: 36,426
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 3:55:37 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 3:52:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 1/23/2014 3:45:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 1/23/2014 2:08:08 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
Yeah, so, I've been gone for like...over a month.

I got real sick, then had my computer sh*t the proverbial bed on me, and just a whole host of other crap. I just barely fixed the compy a few days ago, and this is the first time I've been able to get on.

What'd I miss?

Welcome back, man! I was kind of concerned... because you just went dark... like you'd been deployed to a black site or something. lol

I got really sick (called off work sick, fetal position sick), at the same time my computer died (long-winded, boring and angry linux explanation as to why it got sick would be long-winded and boring, so I won't go into it. Suffice to say it was a software issue that shouldn't have existed, that meant my computer died every, oh, 30 seconds.), and then I went on a vacation me and Mrs. Bladerunner planned a year ago, syncope be DAMNED. I don't remember most of the roller coasters...but some people pay good money to pass out that often (and every 3+ hour line gave me opportunity to lean, force myself not to throw up, and recover sorta).

Is it safe to assume that your posting here and now is an indication that you're better?


So, the news:

1. The Weekly Stupid has been the subject of immense controversy, as one new (and nearly wholly unwelcome member) went crusading against it... and with similar results as the Templars, however less noble in the present case.

2. TUF won a hard-fought presidential campaign. This was the closest, and probably the dirtiest election yet. Cody is TUF's VP, and neither of them are moderators.

3. Airmax continues to serve as a moderator, even though he opted not to run for re-election.

4. Juggle is putting ads on the site this friday, and some other updates that I don't think will be of any real consequence to anyone who mainly posts in the forums.

5. Flame wars abound, mostly among the usual suspects and some new people.

6. DDO Walking Dead has returned, and I think with some success.

7. I think substantive forum discussions are down, but I might be biased. There seems to be less stuff I give a sh!t about now, but that might change now that you're back!

8. There was an epic thread where Airmax schooled a whole lot of anti-Israel people. It was kind of nice.

9. There are a lot of weird people on the site now, and especially a lot of weird sexual stuff (one is even an admitted zoophile). I'm sure you'll meet him because he seems obsessed with commenting on virtually everything I post.

10. Some of the old and good members are even less active than they once were, but that's just the way of things I guess.

11. Some new people got elected to the hall of fame.

That's about it!

I did miss a bunch! Thanks ...gotta try to find that Israel one, now. There are several members who I like reading, but Airmax's infrequent desire to go all "schooling" makes his that much more delicious.

Yeah, the OP was this dude named HPWKA. I think one might properly describe Airmax's "schooling" as "beast mode." lol

It's worth finding, I think in the politics section.

Are there really going to be ads?

That's what they say. Juggle offered a justification, but meh.
Tsar of DDO
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 4:00:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 3:55:37 PM, YYW wrote:
At 1/23/2014 3:52:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 1/23/2014 3:45:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 1/23/2014 2:08:08 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
Yeah, so, I've been gone for like...over a month.

I got real sick, then had my computer sh*t the proverbial bed on me, and just a whole host of other crap. I just barely fixed the compy a few days ago, and this is the first time I've been able to get on.

What'd I miss?

Welcome back, man! I was kind of concerned... because you just went dark... like you'd been deployed to a black site or something. lol

I got really sick (called off work sick, fetal position sick), at the same time my computer died (long-winded, boring and angry linux explanation as to why it got sick would be long-winded and boring, so I won't go into it. Suffice to say it was a software issue that shouldn't have existed, that meant my computer died every, oh, 30 seconds.), and then I went on a vacation me and Mrs. Bladerunner planned a year ago, syncope be DAMNED. I don't remember most of the roller coasters...but some people pay good money to pass out that often (and every 3+ hour line gave me opportunity to lean, force myself not to throw up, and recover sorta).

Is it safe to assume that your posting here and now is an indication that you're better?

Yup! I've actually been not-sick for like 2 weeks. I just wasn't able to do anything about the lappy until I got better. Well, I was able to curse at it, so there's that. "Fu-*cough*-king-*hack*-piece-*hurk*-of-*whargleblech*" and such.

So, the news:

1. The Weekly Stupid has been the subject of immense controversy, as one new (and nearly wholly unwelcome member) went crusading against it... and with similar results as the Templars, however less noble in the present case.

2. TUF won a hard-fought presidential campaign. This was the closest, and probably the dirtiest election yet. Cody is TUF's VP, and neither of them are moderators.

3. Airmax continues to serve as a moderator, even though he opted not to run for re-election.

4. Juggle is putting ads on the site this friday, and some other updates that I don't think will be of any real consequence to anyone who mainly posts in the forums.

5. Flame wars abound, mostly among the usual suspects and some new people.

6. DDO Walking Dead has returned, and I think with some success.

7. I think substantive forum discussions are down, but I might be biased. There seems to be less stuff I give a sh!t about now, but that might change now that you're back!

8. There was an epic thread where Airmax schooled a whole lot of anti-Israel people. It was kind of nice.

9. There are a lot of weird people on the site now, and especially a lot of weird sexual stuff (one is even an admitted zoophile). I'm sure you'll meet him because he seems obsessed with commenting on virtually everything I post.

10. Some of the old and good members are even less active than they once were, but that's just the way of things I guess.

11. Some new people got elected to the hall of fame.

That's about it!

I did miss a bunch! Thanks ...gotta try to find that Israel one, now. There are several members who I like reading, but Airmax's infrequent desire to go all "schooling" makes his that much more delicious.

Yeah, the OP was this dude named HPWKA. I think one might properly describe Airmax's "schooling" as "beast mode." lol

It's worth finding, I think in the politics section.


Trots off to politics section

Are there really going to be ads?

That's what they say. Juggle offered a justification, but meh.

Weird.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
Caploxion
Posts: 454
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 7:55:53 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 3:45:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 1/23/2014 2:08:08 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
Yeah, so, I've been gone for like...over a month.

I got real sick, then had my computer sh*t the proverbial bed on me, and just a whole host of other crap. I just barely fixed the compy a few days ago, and this is the first time I've been able to get on.

What'd I miss?

Welcome back, man! I was kind of concerned... because you just went dark... like you'd been deployed to a black site or something. lol

So, the news:

1. The Weekly Stupid has been the subject of immense controversy, as one new (and nearly wholly unwelcome member) went crusading against it... and with similar results as the Templars, however less noble in the present case.

Unwelcome member? Ha! What because I called you out on your slanderous elitism (after you attacked me)? You know, every time you tell me how unsuccessful I've been with the campaign against the Weekly Stupid, it steels my resolve.

So thanks for being my inspiration :)
"That's what people do. They breed, and then their children breed, and then their children do it, and their children do it. But, have you ever asked why we do it?" - Jim 'Metamorphhh' Crawford

"There is no doubt that life is given us, not to be enjoyed, but to be overcome; to be got over." - Arthur Schopenhauer

"It's like building a broken building, repairing it and then saying that now I have value in doing so...but it didn't need to be broken in the first place." -Gary 'Inmendham' Mosher
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 7:58:11 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 7:55:53 PM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/23/2014 3:45:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 1/23/2014 2:08:08 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
Yeah, so, I've been gone for like...over a month.

I got real sick, then had my computer sh*t the proverbial bed on me, and just a whole host of other crap. I just barely fixed the compy a few days ago, and this is the first time I've been able to get on.

What'd I miss?

Welcome back, man! I was kind of concerned... because you just went dark... like you'd been deployed to a black site or something. lol

So, the news:

1. The Weekly Stupid has been the subject of immense controversy, as one new (and nearly wholly unwelcome member) went crusading against it... and with similar results as the Templars, however less noble in the present case.

Unwelcome member? Ha! What because I called you out on your slanderous elitism (after you attacked me)? You know, every time you tell me how unsuccessful I've been with the campaign against the Weekly Stupid, it steels my resolve.

So thanks for being my inspiration :)

Cap, aren't there more significant types of bullying you could be protesting against? I agree bullying is a bad thing, but you can't use it as some trump card for everything. People do not have a right to not be offended.
Caploxion
Posts: 454
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 8:02:02 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 7:58:11 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 1/23/2014 7:55:53 PM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/23/2014 3:45:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 1/23/2014 2:08:08 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
Yeah, so, I've been gone for like...over a month.

I got real sick, then had my computer sh*t the proverbial bed on me, and just a whole host of other crap. I just barely fixed the compy a few days ago, and this is the first time I've been able to get on.

What'd I miss?

Welcome back, man! I was kind of concerned... because you just went dark... like you'd been deployed to a black site or something. lol

So, the news:

1. The Weekly Stupid has been the subject of immense controversy, as one new (and nearly wholly unwelcome member) went crusading against it... and with similar results as the Templars, however less noble in the present case.

Unwelcome member? Ha! What because I called you out on your slanderous elitism (after you attacked me)? You know, every time you tell me how unsuccessful I've been with the campaign against the Weekly Stupid, it steels my resolve.

So thanks for being my inspiration :)

Cap, aren't there more significant types of bullying you could be protesting against? I agree bullying is a bad thing, but you can't use it as some trump card for everything. People do not have a right to not be offended.

Look, I understand that what I argued for in the past implied perhaps too much sensitivity, but I'm not using 'bullying' as a crutch. Imabench continuously attacks people on this site; that's a fact that no-one seems to want to admit. His show has a really nasty segment that attributes stupidity to people.
"That's what people do. They breed, and then their children breed, and then their children do it, and their children do it. But, have you ever asked why we do it?" - Jim 'Metamorphhh' Crawford

"There is no doubt that life is given us, not to be enjoyed, but to be overcome; to be got over." - Arthur Schopenhauer

"It's like building a broken building, repairing it and then saying that now I have value in doing so...but it didn't need to be broken in the first place." -Gary 'Inmendham' Mosher
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 8:16:16 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 8:02:02 PM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/23/2014 7:58:11 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 1/23/2014 7:55:53 PM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/23/2014 3:45:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 1/23/2014 2:08:08 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
Yeah, so, I've been gone for like...over a month.

I got real sick, then had my computer sh*t the proverbial bed on me, and just a whole host of other crap. I just barely fixed the compy a few days ago, and this is the first time I've been able to get on.

What'd I miss?

Welcome back, man! I was kind of concerned... because you just went dark... like you'd been deployed to a black site or something. lol

So, the news:

1. The Weekly Stupid has been the subject of immense controversy, as one new (and nearly wholly unwelcome member) went crusading against it... and with similar results as the Templars, however less noble in the present case.

Unwelcome member? Ha! What because I called you out on your slanderous elitism (after you attacked me)? You know, every time you tell me how unsuccessful I've been with the campaign against the Weekly Stupid, it steels my resolve.

So thanks for being my inspiration :)

Cap, aren't there more significant types of bullying you could be protesting against? I agree bullying is a bad thing, but you can't use it as some trump card for everything. People do not have a right to not be offended.

Look, I understand that what I argued for in the past implied perhaps too much sensitivity, but I'm not using 'bullying' as a crutch. Imabench continuously attacks people on this site; that's a fact that no-one seems to want to admit. His show has a really nasty segment that attributes stupidity to people.

Now, I'm not familiar with your general complaints. But insulting someone =/= bullying them.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
Caploxion
Posts: 454
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 8:17:49 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 8:16:16 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 1/23/2014 8:02:02 PM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/23/2014 7:58:11 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 1/23/2014 7:55:53 PM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/23/2014 3:45:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 1/23/2014 2:08:08 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
Yeah, so, I've been gone for like...over a month.

I got real sick, then had my computer sh*t the proverbial bed on me, and just a whole host of other crap. I just barely fixed the compy a few days ago, and this is the first time I've been able to get on.

What'd I miss?

Welcome back, man! I was kind of concerned... because you just went dark... like you'd been deployed to a black site or something. lol

So, the news:

1. The Weekly Stupid has been the subject of immense controversy, as one new (and nearly wholly unwelcome member) went crusading against it... and with similar results as the Templars, however less noble in the present case.

Unwelcome member? Ha! What because I called you out on your slanderous elitism (after you attacked me)? You know, every time you tell me how unsuccessful I've been with the campaign against the Weekly Stupid, it steels my resolve.

So thanks for being my inspiration :)

Cap, aren't there more significant types of bullying you could be protesting against? I agree bullying is a bad thing, but you can't use it as some trump card for everything. People do not have a right to not be offended.

Look, I understand that what I argued for in the past implied perhaps too much sensitivity, but I'm not using 'bullying' as a crutch. Imabench continuously attacks people on this site; that's a fact that no-one seems to want to admit. His show has a really nasty segment that attributes stupidity to people.

Now, I'm not familiar with your general complaints. But insulting someone =/= bullying them.

Yes, but when it's done repeatedly, then it becomes bullying. Imabench isn't exactly insulting people once or twice a year.
"That's what people do. They breed, and then their children breed, and then their children do it, and their children do it. But, have you ever asked why we do it?" - Jim 'Metamorphhh' Crawford

"There is no doubt that life is given us, not to be enjoyed, but to be overcome; to be got over." - Arthur Schopenhauer

"It's like building a broken building, repairing it and then saying that now I have value in doing so...but it didn't need to be broken in the first place." -Gary 'Inmendham' Mosher
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 8:26:38 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 8:17:49 PM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/23/2014 8:16:16 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 1/23/2014 8:02:02 PM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/23/2014 7:58:11 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 1/23/2014 7:55:53 PM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/23/2014 3:45:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 1/23/2014 2:08:08 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
Yeah, so, I've been gone for like...over a month.

I got real sick, then had my computer sh*t the proverbial bed on me, and just a whole host of other crap. I just barely fixed the compy a few days ago, and this is the first time I've been able to get on.

What'd I miss?

Welcome back, man! I was kind of concerned... because you just went dark... like you'd been deployed to a black site or something. lol

So, the news:

1. The Weekly Stupid has been the subject of immense controversy, as one new (and nearly wholly unwelcome member) went crusading against it... and with similar results as the Templars, however less noble in the present case.

Unwelcome member? Ha! What because I called you out on your slanderous elitism (after you attacked me)? You know, every time you tell me how unsuccessful I've been with the campaign against the Weekly Stupid, it steels my resolve.

So thanks for being my inspiration :)

Cap, aren't there more significant types of bullying you could be protesting against? I agree bullying is a bad thing, but you can't use it as some trump card for everything. People do not have a right to not be offended.

Look, I understand that what I argued for in the past implied perhaps too much sensitivity, but I'm not using 'bullying' as a crutch. Imabench continuously attacks people on this site; that's a fact that no-one seems to want to admit. His show has a really nasty segment that attributes stupidity to people.

Now, I'm not familiar with your general complaints. But insulting someone =/= bullying them.

Yes, but when it's done repeatedly, then it becomes bullying. Imabench isn't exactly insulting people once or twice a year.

No, it doesn't. Repetition =/= bullying. Bullying requires a power differential, either real or in practical terms. That it has become popular of late to pretend that's not the case is an absurdity that comes from the same place that pretends its immoral not to like another person.

You are free to say all the things ima does about him. He can't get you kicked off the site. He can't prevent you from making a Youtube video that parodies his. That you are free to say all the same things he does, with the same lack of consequences, makes it not bullying. He's expressing an opinion. Unless you think anytime anyone expresses an opinion that isn't favorable, they're bullying? (Or, to be precise as to your statements, if they do it more than once).
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 8:32:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 8:26:38 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 1/23/2014 8:17:49 PM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/23/2014 8:16:16 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 1/23/2014 8:02:02 PM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/23/2014 7:58:11 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 1/23/2014 7:55:53 PM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/23/2014 3:45:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 1/23/2014 2:08:08 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
Yeah, so, I've been gone for like...over a month.

I got real sick, then had my computer sh*t the proverbial bed on me, and just a whole host of other crap. I just barely fixed the compy a few days ago, and this is the first time I've been able to get on.

What'd I miss?

Welcome back, man! I was kind of concerned... because you just went dark... like you'd been deployed to a black site or something. lol

So, the news:

1. The Weekly Stupid has been the subject of immense controversy, as one new (and nearly wholly unwelcome member) went crusading against it... and with similar results as the Templars, however less noble in the present case.

Unwelcome member? Ha! What because I called you out on your slanderous elitism (after you attacked me)? You know, every time you tell me how unsuccessful I've been with the campaign against the Weekly Stupid, it steels my resolve.

So thanks for being my inspiration :)

Cap, aren't there more significant types of bullying you could be protesting against? I agree bullying is a bad thing, but you can't use it as some trump card for everything. People do not have a right to not be offended.

Look, I understand that what I argued for in the past implied perhaps too much sensitivity, but I'm not using 'bullying' as a crutch. Imabench continuously attacks people on this site; that's a fact that no-one seems to want to admit. His show has a really nasty segment that attributes stupidity to people.

Now, I'm not familiar with your general complaints. But insulting someone =/= bullying them.

Yes, but when it's done repeatedly, then it becomes bullying. Imabench isn't exactly insulting people once or twice a year.

No, it doesn't. Repetition =/= bullying. Bullying requires a power differential, either real or in practical terms. That it has become popular of late to pretend that's not the case is an absurdity that comes from the same place that pretends its immoral not to like another person.

You are free to say all the things ima does about him. He can't get you kicked off the site. He can't prevent you from making a Youtube video that parodies his. That you are free to say all the same things he does, with the same lack of consequences, makes it not bullying. He's expressing an opinion. Unless you think anytime anyone expresses an opinion that isn't favorable, they're bullying? (Or, to be precise as to your statements, if they do it more than once).

You're re-opening a can of worms. If the thread The Weekly Stupid Should Be Banned is still around, it's all there.
Caploxion
Posts: 454
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 8:35:37 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 8:26:38 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 1/23/2014 8:17:49 PM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/23/2014 8:16:16 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 1/23/2014 8:02:02 PM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/23/2014 7:58:11 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 1/23/2014 7:55:53 PM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/23/2014 3:45:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 1/23/2014 2:08:08 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
Yeah, so, I've been gone for like...over a month.

I got real sick, then had my computer sh*t the proverbial bed on me, and just a whole host of other crap. I just barely fixed the compy a few days ago, and this is the first time I've been able to get on.

What'd I miss?

Welcome back, man! I was kind of concerned... because you just went dark... like you'd been deployed to a black site or something. lol

So, the news:

1. The Weekly Stupid has been the subject of immense controversy, as one new (and nearly wholly unwelcome member) went crusading against it... and with similar results as the Templars, however less noble in the present case.

Unwelcome member? Ha! What because I called you out on your slanderous elitism (after you attacked me)? You know, every time you tell me how unsuccessful I've been with the campaign against the Weekly Stupid, it steels my resolve.

So thanks for being my inspiration :)

Cap, aren't there more significant types of bullying you could be protesting against? I agree bullying is a bad thing, but you can't use it as some trump card for everything. People do not have a right to not be offended.

Look, I understand that what I argued for in the past implied perhaps too much sensitivity, but I'm not using 'bullying' as a crutch. Imabench continuously attacks people on this site; that's a fact that no-one seems to want to admit. His show has a really nasty segment that attributes stupidity to people.

Now, I'm not familiar with your general complaints. But insulting someone =/= bullying them.

Yes, but when it's done repeatedly, then it becomes bullying. Imabench isn't exactly insulting people once or twice a year.

No, it doesn't. Repetition =/= bullying. Bullying requires a power differential, either real or in practical terms. That it has become popular of late to pretend that's not the case is an absurdity that comes from the same place that pretends its immoral not to like another person.

If you continue to do something a little nasty over and over, THAT is bullying. Sure, you can not like another person, but that doesn't mean you should go out of your to make cheap-shots several times. You can express your dislike for a person without bullying him/her.


You are free to say all the things ima does about him. He can't get you kicked off the site. He can't prevent you from making a Youtube video that parodies his. That you are free to say all the same things he does, with the same lack of consequences, makes it not bullying. He's expressing an opinion. Unless you think anytime anyone expresses an opinion that isn't favorable, they're bullying? (Or, to be precise as to your statements, if they do it more than once).

Are you serious? Have you not seen his show? What he is doing involves bullying, specifically his 'Best of the Best' segment (the rest of the show is acceptable, although it does create a negative environment). I just want him to change it slightly so it doesn't involve bullying; is that too much to ask for? You can express an unfavorable opinion of someone WITHOUT having to resort to bullying.
"That's what people do. They breed, and then their children breed, and then their children do it, and their children do it. But, have you ever asked why we do it?" - Jim 'Metamorphhh' Crawford

"There is no doubt that life is given us, not to be enjoyed, but to be overcome; to be got over." - Arthur Schopenhauer

"It's like building a broken building, repairing it and then saying that now I have value in doing so...but it didn't need to be broken in the first place." -Gary 'Inmendham' Mosher
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 8:42:18 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 8:35:37 PM, Caploxion wrote:

If you continue to do something a little nasty over and over, THAT is bullying.

No, it isn't.

Sure, you can not like another person, but that doesn't mean you should go out of your to make cheap-shots several times.

Maybe not, but it isn't "bullying". Words mean things.

You can express your dislike for a person without bullying him/her.

Since, according to you, bullying IS expressing dislike for a person, it appears that, to you, you cannot.

Are you serious? Have you not seen his show? What he is doing involves bullying,

No, it doesn't.

specifically his 'Best of the Best' segment (the rest of the show is acceptable, although it does create a negative environment).

What, precisely, is "bullying" about it? Words mean things, friend. Bullying requires a power imbalance (real or justifiably perceived) that is simply not present with bench.

"Bullying is unwanted, aggressive behavior ...that involves a real or perceived power imbalance."

http://www.stopbullying.gov...

I just want him to change it slightly so it doesn't involve bullying;

Since it already doesn't, success!

is that too much to ask for? You can express an unfavorable opinion of someone WITHOUT having to resort to bullying.

Again, since your definition is that any unfavorable expression is bullying, apparently you cannot.

Or is it just the types of unfavorable expression you like that is allowed?

Words mean things. You can not like the show--you can even argue that it's too negative, and should be changed on those grounds. But waving the "bully" flag is just wrong of you--you are using a word that does not apply.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
Caploxion
Posts: 454
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 8:48:45 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 8:42:18 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 1/23/2014 8:35:37 PM, Caploxion wrote:

If you continue to do something a little nasty over and over, THAT is bullying.

No, it isn't.

Well, it is. I'm sorry, but if you don't understand this point, then I can't help you.


Sure, you can not like another person, but that doesn't mean you should go out of your to make cheap-shots several times.

Maybe not, but it isn't "bullying". Words mean things.

You're playing some kind of semantics game. I don't have time for this.


You can express your dislike for a person without bullying him/her.

Since, according to you, bullying IS expressing dislike for a person, it appears that, to you, you cannot.

No, it is only when it is repeated. Please try reading what I wrote, you might understand where I am coming from that way.


Are you serious? Have you not seen his show? What he is doing involves bullying,

No, it doesn't.

...........


specifically his 'Best of the Best' segment (the rest of the show is acceptable, although it does create a negative environment).

What, precisely, is "bullying" about it? Words mean things, friend. Bullying requires a power imbalance (real or justifiably perceived) that is simply not present with bench.

So constantly putting someone down doesn't involve a power imbalance?


"Bullying is unwanted, aggressive behavior ...that involves a real or perceived power imbalance."

http://www.stopbullying.gov...

I just want him to change it slightly so it doesn't involve bullying;

Since it already doesn't, success!

is that too much to ask for? You can express an unfavorable opinion of someone WITHOUT having to resort to bullying.

Again, since your definition is that any unfavorable expression is bullying, apparently you cannot.

Or is it just the types of unfavorable expression you like that is allowed?

REPEATED


Words mean things. You can not like the show--you can even argue that it's too negative, and should be changed on those grounds. But waving the "bully" flag is just wrong of you--you are using a word that does not apply.

You're playing a semantics game. I have clarified your misinterpretation of what I said with this comment. If you continue to play the game, I will discontinue conversation with you.
"That's what people do. They breed, and then their children breed, and then their children do it, and their children do it. But, have you ever asked why we do it?" - Jim 'Metamorphhh' Crawford

"There is no doubt that life is given us, not to be enjoyed, but to be overcome; to be got over." - Arthur Schopenhauer

"It's like building a broken building, repairing it and then saying that now I have value in doing so...but it didn't need to be broken in the first place." -Gary 'Inmendham' Mosher
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 8:57:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 8:48:45 PM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/23/2014 8:42:18 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 1/23/2014 8:35:37 PM, Caploxion wrote:

If you continue to do something a little nasty over and over, THAT is bullying.

No, it isn't.

Well, it is. I'm sorry, but if you don't understand this point, then I can't help you.

I understand the point you're making. You're just wrong. You are saying a thing is a thing that it isn't.


Sure, you can not like another person, but that doesn't mean you should go out of your to make cheap-shots several times.

Maybe not, but it isn't "bullying". Words mean things.

You're playing some kind of semantics game. I don't have time for this.

No, i'm not. You are making a claim which is just and simply wrong. I'm sorry that you don't LIKE that you're wrong, but that isn't my problem. You say a thing is a thing it isn't. I point it out. You claim it's a semantics game to point this out. That sums up the situation. If you don't have time to know WTH you're talking about, you probably shouldn't be talking about it.

You can express your dislike for a person without bullying him/her.

Since, according to you, bullying IS expressing dislike for a person, it appears that, to you, you cannot.

No, it is only when it is repeated. Please try reading what I wrote, you might understand where I am coming from that way.

I HAVE read what you wrote. You clearly didn't read where I did. You say they CAN express it. But apparently only once ever?

Are you serious? Have you not seen his show? What he is doing involves bullying,

No, it doesn't.

...........

Ellipses do not a point make. You are wrong. Simple negation is not an argument.

specifically his 'Best of the Best' segment (the rest of the show is acceptable, although it does create a negative environment).

What, precisely, is "bullying" about it? Words mean things, friend. Bullying requires a power imbalance (real or justifiably perceived) that is simply not present with bench.

So constantly putting someone down doesn't involve a power imbalance?

No. Why would it?

What do you THINK a power imbalance is, precisely? Because I have literally no idea why you would think that repetition is power.

"Bullying is unwanted, aggressive behavior ...that involves a real or perceived power imbalance."

http://www.stopbullying.gov...

I just want him to change it slightly so it doesn't involve bullying;

Since it already doesn't, success!

is that too much to ask for? You can express an unfavorable opinion of someone WITHOUT having to resort to bullying.

Again, since your definition is that any unfavorable expression is bullying, apparently you cannot.

Or is it just the types of unfavorable expression you like that is allowed?

REPEATED

Ah. So you don't like it if someone expresses something you don't like more than once. You dislike to so much that you call it "bullying" despite it not being bullying.

Words mean things. You can not like the show--you can even argue that it's too negative, and should be changed on those grounds. But waving the "bully" flag is just wrong of you--you are using a word that does not apply.

You're playing a semantics game. I have clarified your misinterpretation of what I said with this comment. If you continue to play the game, I will discontinue conversation with you.

What bench does is not bullying. It is not a "semantics game" to point that out. If you would like to back away from your claim, which has been demonstrably disproved despite your attempts at negation, that's fine. You can complain bench is too negative...but that doesn't pack the rhetorical punch you want it to, does it? Claiming he's a "bully" because you don't care for his rhetoric is more satisfying, and it seems less ridiculous to complain about a bully, as opposed to "I don't like that he says mean things". I'm sure this comes across as snider than I really intend it, but the fact of the matter is you're wrong. I've pointed it out. Rather than acknowledge you're wrong, you attempt to dodge the issue by pretending that having words mean things is a "game". That's not intellectually honest of you.

I have a problem with people who bandy about terms they misuse.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
Caploxion
Posts: 454
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 9:09:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 8:57:00 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 1/23/2014 8:48:45 PM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/23/2014 8:42:18 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 1/23/2014 8:35:37 PM, Caploxion wrote:

If you continue to do something a little nasty over and over, THAT is bullying.

No, it isn't.

Well, it is. I'm sorry, but if you don't understand this point, then I can't help you.

I understand the point you're making. You're just wrong. You are saying a thing is a thing that it isn't.



Sure, you can not like another person, but that doesn't mean you should go out of your to make cheap-shots several times.

Maybe not, but it isn't "bullying". Words mean things.

You're playing some kind of semantics game. I don't have time for this.

No, i'm not. You are making a claim which is just and simply wrong. I'm sorry that you don't LIKE that you're wrong, but that isn't my problem. You say a thing is a thing it isn't. I point it out. You claim it's a semantics game to point this out. That sums up the situation. If you don't have time to know WTH you're talking about, you probably shouldn't be talking about it.

Hey, I'm perfectly fine with being wrong sometimes. But you're applying different connotations to the word bullying that defy even the definition that you gave.


You can express your dislike for a person without bullying him/her.

Since, according to you, bullying IS expressing dislike for a person, it appears that, to you, you cannot.

No, it is only when it is repeated. Please try reading what I wrote, you might understand where I am coming from that way.

I HAVE read what you wrote. You clearly didn't read where I did. You say they CAN express it. But apparently only once ever?

Well, once within a reasonable allotment of time. For example, if I followed you around all day and called you something nasty, that would be bullying, right? What if I called you something nasty once every day. I reckon that would be bullying too. What if I saw you only once and called you that nasty thing? That wouldn't constitute as bullying, now would it?


Are you serious? Have you not seen his show? What he is doing involves bullying,

No, it doesn't.

...........

Ellipses do not a point make. You are wrong. Simple negation is not an argument.

It's like disagreeing about the colour of an object when it's clearly blue. You can say it's greenish blue or whatever, but you're just playing a semantics game.



specifically his 'Best of the Best' segment (the rest of the show is acceptable, although it does create a negative environment).

What, precisely, is "bullying" about it? Words mean things, friend. Bullying requires a power imbalance (real or justifiably perceived) that is simply not present with bench.

So constantly putting someone down doesn't involve a power imbalance?

No. Why would it?

What do you THINK a power imbalance is, precisely? Because I have literally no idea why you would think that repetition is power.

The intent behind the repetition is to put somebody down. How can you not get that?


"Bullying is unwanted, aggressive behavior ...that involves a real or perceived power imbalance."

http://www.stopbullying.gov...

I just want him to change it slightly so it doesn't involve bullying;

Since it already doesn't, success!

is that too much to ask for? You can express an unfavorable opinion of someone WITHOUT having to resort to bullying.

Again, since your definition is that any unfavorable expression is bullying, apparently you cannot.

Or is it just the types of unfavorable expression you like that is allowed?

REPEATED

Ah. So you don't like it if someone expresses something you don't like more than once. You dislike to so much that you call it "bullying" despite it not being bullying.

My god. I've explained this to you many times; I haven't the patience to do it again.


Words mean things. You can not like the show--you can even argue that it's too negative, and should be changed on those grounds. But waving the "bully" flag is just wrong of you--you are using a word that does not apply.

You're playing a semantics game. I have clarified your misinterpretation of what I said with this comment. If you continue to play the game, I will discontinue conversation with you.

What bench does is not bullying. It is not a "semantics game" to point that out. If you would like to back away from your claim, which has been demonstrably disproved despite your attempts at negation, that's fine. You can complain bench is too negative...but that doesn't pack the rhetorical punch you want it to, does it? Claiming he's a "bully" because you don't care for his rhetoric is more satisfying, and it seems less ridiculous to complain about a bully, as opposed to "I don't like that he says mean things". I'm sure this comes across as snider than I really intend it, but the fact of the matter is you're wrong. I've pointed it out. Rather than acknowledge you're wrong, you attempt to dodge the issue by pretending that having words mean things is a "game". That's not intellectually honest of you.

Nonsense, you're just manifesting foundless conjecture. And shame on you for calling me "intellectually dishonest" when you're playing this ridiculous semantics game!

I have a problem with people who bandy about terms they misuse.

Funnily enough: me too.
"That's what people do. They breed, and then their children breed, and then their children do it, and their children do it. But, have you ever asked why we do it?" - Jim 'Metamorphhh' Crawford

"There is no doubt that life is given us, not to be enjoyed, but to be overcome; to be got over." - Arthur Schopenhauer

"It's like building a broken building, repairing it and then saying that now I have value in doing so...but it didn't need to be broken in the first place." -Gary 'Inmendham' Mosher
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 9:18:37 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 9:09:54 PM, Caploxion wrote:

Hey, I'm perfectly fine with being wrong sometimes. But you're applying different connotations to the word bullying that defy even the definition that you gave.

Where, precisely, am I doing that? The definition specifically states power imbalance.

Well, once within a reasonable allotment of time. For example, if I followed you around all day and called you something nasty, that would be bullying, right?

No, you're just be an a**hole.

Kids are required to be in school--they cannot leave. As such, they cannot leave a situation that is unpleasant, which changes the dynamics.

Adults can go where they please. If you came *into my house* to do that, and did not leave, you'd be arrested or shot.

What if I called you something nasty once every day. I reckon that would be bullying too.

Then you reckon wrong.

What if I saw you only once and called you that nasty thing? That wouldn't constitute as bullying, now would it?

Your definition is non-standard, and apparently made up by you.

Ellipses do not a point make. You are wrong. Simple negation is not an argument.

It's like disagreeing about the colour of an object when it's clearly blue. You can say it's greenish blue or whatever, but you're just playing a semantics game.

No, I'm not. This is absurdity. You are pointing to a yellow item and calling it green. I'm pointing out it's missing "blue", and you're saying that's just semantics.

A necessary ingredient is missing for bench's behavior to be bullying.

No. Why would it?

What do you THINK a power imbalance is, precisely? Because I have literally no idea why you would think that repetition is power.

The intent behind the repetition is to put somebody down. How can you not get that?

Which has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with a power imbalance. I don't care if his intention IS to be a jerk--it pretty clearly is. But it's not "bullying".

My god. I've explained this to you many times; I haven't the patience to do it again.

You've explained that you negate the definition I provided based solely on your own say-so. That's not a compelling argument.

The definition you use is vague and not standard. I'm not accepting it because you want to call it bullying.

Shall I call you a murderer, and when someone points out that you haven't killed anyone, say that pointing that out is just "semantics"?

What bench does is not bullying. It is not a "semantics game" to point that out. If you would like to back away from your claim, which has been demonstrably disproved despite your attempts at negation, that's fine. You can complain bench is too negative...but that doesn't pack the rhetorical punch you want it to, does it? Claiming he's a "bully" because you don't care for his rhetoric is more satisfying, and it seems less ridiculous to complain about a bully, as opposed to "I don't like that he says mean things". I'm sure this comes across as snider than I really intend it, but the fact of the matter is you're wrong. I've pointed it out. Rather than acknowledge you're wrong, you attempt to dodge the issue by pretending that having words mean things is a "game". That's not intellectually honest of you.

Nonsense, you're just manifesting foundless conjecture. And shame on you for calling me "intellectually dishonest" when you're playing this ridiculous semantics game!

Sorry, but no. This is just you digging deeper. What, precisely is "foundless" about my conjecture?

I think it's perfectly rational and well-founded to think that you like the rhetorical force of the word "bully", which is why you've made up a definition to suit you.

I have a problem with people who bandy about terms they misuse.

Funnily enough: me too.

Clearly, no, unless you're a massive hypocrite who thinks it's okay when YOU do it.

A necessary component is missing. You focus on the "intent" which has nothing to do with the necessary component that is lacking--this leads me to believe that you recognize it's lacking, but that you don't care. The most plausible reason I can think of for this is that you like the rhetorical force, facts be damned. Perhaps that's not the case, I certainly am willing to give the benefit of the doubt...but, again, necessary component = missing. Trying to distract from that appears dishonest, since I don't believe I've been unclear, nor do I believe you can honestly focus on things like bench's intent to insult, when the issue is the power imbalance, or rather, the lack thereof.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
Caploxion
Posts: 454
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 9:35:12 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 9:18:37 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 1/23/2014 9:09:54 PM, Caploxion wrote:

Hey, I'm perfectly fine with being wrong sometimes. But you're applying different connotations to the word bullying that defy even the definition that you gave.

Where, precisely, am I doing that? The definition specifically states power imbalance.

But then I used that definition accurately, and you disagreed with me.


Well, once within a reasonable allotment of time. For example, if I followed you around all day and called you something nasty, that would be bullying, right?

No, you're just be an a**hole.

Excuse me? Don't you call me that.


Kids are required to be in school--they cannot leave. As such, they cannot leave a situation that is unpleasant, which changes the dynamics.

It's still bullying if the power imbalance is exploited repeated. Yes, people can leave, but if they don't, it doesn't mean that it isn't bullying.


Adults can go where they please. If you came *into my house* to do that, and did not leave, you'd be arrested or shot.

Whatever


What if I called you something nasty once every day. I reckon that would be bullying too.

Then you reckon wrong.

Says you, the person who is wrong.


What if I saw you only once and called you that nasty thing? That wouldn't constitute as bullying, now would it?

Your definition is non-standard, and apparently made up by you.

Oh ffs, I used YOUR definition.


Ellipses do not a point make. You are wrong. Simple negation is not an argument.

It's like disagreeing about the colour of an object when it's clearly blue. You can say it's greenish blue or whatever, but you're just playing a semantics game.

No, I'm not. This is absurdity. You are pointing to a yellow item and calling it green. I'm pointing out it's missing "blue", and you're saying that's just semantics.

No...........................................................


A necessary ingredient is missing for bench's behavior to be bullying.

No. Why would it?

What do you THINK a power imbalance is, precisely? Because I have literally no idea why you would think that repetition is power.

The intent behind the repetition is to put somebody down. How can you not get that?

Which has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with a power imbalance. I don't care if his intention IS to be a jerk--it pretty clearly is. But it's not "bullying".

If he is being a jerk to a person constantly, then THAT is bullying. PLEASE tell me you get that.



My god. I've explained this to you many times; I haven't the patience to do it again.

You've explained that you negate the definition I provided based solely on your own say-so. That's not a compelling argument.

fffffffffffffffffff


The definition you use is vague and not standard. I'm not accepting it because you want to call it bullying.

I USED YOUR DEFINITION, WHAT I SAID IS CONSISTENT WITH YOUR DEFINITION!!!!


Shall I call you a murderer, and when someone points out that you haven't killed anyone, say that pointing that out is just "semantics"?

What bench does is not bullying. It is not a "semantics game" to point that out. If you would like to back away from your claim, which has been demonstrably disproved despite your attempts at negation, that's fine. You can complain bench is too negative...but that doesn't pack the rhetorical punch you want it to, does it? Claiming he's a "bully" because you don't care for his rhetoric is more satisfying, and it seems less ridiculous to complain about a bully, as opposed to "I don't like that he says mean things". I'm sure this comes across as snider than I really intend it, but the fact of the matter is you're wrong. I've pointed it out. Rather than acknowledge you're wrong, you attempt to dodge the issue by pretending that having words mean things is a "game". That's not intellectually honest of you.

Nonsense, you're just manifesting foundless conjecture. And shame on you for calling me "intellectually dishonest" when you're playing this ridiculous semantics game!

Sorry, but no. This is just you digging deeper. What, precisely is "foundless" about my conjecture?

I think it's perfectly rational and well-founded to think that you like the rhetorical force of the word "bully", which is why you've made up a definition to suit you.

I just don't get you...


I have a problem with people who bandy about terms they misuse.

Funnily enough: me too.

Clearly, no, unless you're a massive hypocrite who thinks it's okay when YOU do it.

Wow! I'm a massive hypocrite? Get real!


A necessary component is missing. You focus on the "intent" which has nothing to do with the necessary component that is lacking--this leads me to believe that you recognize it's lacking, but that you don't care. The most plausible reason I can think of for this is that you like the rhetorical force, facts be damned. Perhaps that's not the case, I certainly am willing to give the benefit of the doubt...but, again, necessary component = missing. Trying to distract from that appears dishonest, since I don't believe I've been unclear, nor do I believe you can honestly focus on things like bench's intent to insult, when the issue is the power imbalance, or rather, the lack thereof.

The power imbalance is created when Bench does it constantly. Where am I wrong on this? Tell me!
"That's what people do. They breed, and then their children breed, and then their children do it, and their children do it. But, have you ever asked why we do it?" - Jim 'Metamorphhh' Crawford

"There is no doubt that life is given us, not to be enjoyed, but to be overcome; to be got over." - Arthur Schopenhauer

"It's like building a broken building, repairing it and then saying that now I have value in doing so...but it didn't need to be broken in the first place." -Gary 'Inmendham' Mosher
dtaylor971
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 9:41:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 2:08:08 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
Yeah, so, I've been gone for like...over a month.

I got real sick, then had my computer sh*t the proverbial bed on me, and just a whole host of other crap. I just barely fixed the compy a few days ago, and this is the first time I've been able to get on.

: What'd I miss?

A bunch of crap.

And oh yeah, I joined the site.
"I don't know why gays want to marry, I have spent the last 25 years wishing I wasn't allowed to." -Sadolite
thett3
Posts: 14,382
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 9:56:41 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 9:51:34 PM, YYW wrote:
history repeats itself...

*rolls eyes*

Blade, there is no point, man.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 10:04:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 9:35:12 PM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/23/2014 9:18:37 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 1/23/2014 9:09:54 PM, Caploxion wrote:

Hey, I'm perfectly fine with being wrong sometimes. But you're applying different connotations to the word bullying that defy even the definition that you gave.

Where, precisely, am I doing that? The definition specifically states power imbalance.

But then I used that definition accurately, and you disagreed with me.

No, you did not. Still missing that power imbalance. You also have claimed I'm "applying different connotations to the word bullying that defy even the definition [i] gave". I asked where I did that. You haven't provided it, and now you make a flatly untrue claim that you "used the definition accurately", when the crux here is that you did NOT. Still lacking that power imbalance.

Well, once within a reasonable allotment of time. For example, if I followed you around all day and called you something nasty, that would be bullying, right?

No, you're just be an a**hole.

Excuse me? Don't you call me that.

That was, for the record, a typo on my part: It was supposed to say "you'D just be an a**hole", as in, in your hypothetical, you would not be bullying, but you would be an a**hole--it wasn't a direct insult, it was a description of what my opinion of you would be if you DID do what you stated in the hypothetical.

Kids are required to be in school--they cannot leave. As such, they cannot leave a situation that is unpleasant, which changes the dynamics.

It's still bullying if the power imbalance is exploited repeated. Yes, people can leave, but if they don't, it doesn't mean that it isn't bullying.

Where is the power imbalance, specifically? As I have already stated, you have the *exact same power* as ima. Thus, no imbalance is present.

Adults can go where they please. If you came *into my house* to do that, and did not leave, you'd be arrested or shot.

Whatever

Ah, yes, the refuge of those who don't want to acknowledge a valid point.

What if I called you something nasty once every day. I reckon that would be bullying too.

Then you reckon wrong.

Says you, the person who is wrong.

No. I gave the definition, and pointed SPECIFICALLY to how it did not apply. Again, simple negation is not an argument. I have provided an argument, you have failed to rebut it.

What if I saw you only once and called you that nasty thing? That wouldn't constitute as bullying, now would it?

Your definition is non-standard, and apparently made up by you.

Oh ffs, I used YOUR definition.

No, you VERY CLEARLY did not. You have yet to address the lacking of the power imbalance. Again, words mean things. If you can do the same thing I can in exactly the same way, how, precisely, is there any imbalance.

Ellipses do not a point make. You are wrong. Simple negation is not an argument.

It's like disagreeing about the colour of an object when it's clearly blue. You can say it's greenish blue or whatever, but you're just playing a semantics game.

No, I'm not. This is absurdity. You are pointing to a yellow item and calling it green. I'm pointing out it's missing "blue", and you're saying that's just semantics.

No...........................................................

So, more simple negation, then?


A necessary ingredient is missing for bench's behavior to be bullying.

No. Why would it?

What do you THINK a power imbalance is, precisely? Because I have literally no idea why you would think that repetition is power.

The intent behind the repetition is to put somebody down. How can you not get that?

Which has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with a power imbalance. I don't care if his intention IS to be a jerk--it pretty clearly is. But it's not "bullying".

If he is being a jerk to a person constantly, then THAT is bullying. PLEASE tell me you get that.

It is not--there is no power imbalance. repetition doesn't make you right. I gave a definition. You're ignoring the parts you don't like.

My god. I've explained this to you many times; I haven't the patience to do it again.

You've explained that you negate the definition I provided based solely on your own say-so. That's not a compelling argument.

fffffffffffffffffff

Not an argument.

The definition you use is vague and not standard. I'm not accepting it because you want to call it bullying.

I USED YOUR DEFINITION, WHAT I SAID IS CONSISTENT WITH YOUR DEFINITION!!!!

No, it is not. No. Power. Imbalance.

Shall I call you a murderer, and when someone points out that you haven't killed anyone, say that pointing that out is just "semantics"?

What bench does is not bullying. It is not a "semantics game" to point that out. If you would like to back away from your claim, which has been demonstrably disproved despite your attempts at negation, that's fine. You can complain bench is too negative...but that doesn't pack the rhetorical punch you want it to, does it? Claiming he's a "bully" because you don't care for his rhetoric is more satisfying, and it seems less ridiculous to complain about a bully, as opposed to "I don't like that he says mean things". I'm sure this comes across as snider than I really intend it, but the fact of the matter is you're wrong. I've pointed it out. Rather than acknowledge you're wrong, you attempt to dodge the issue by pretending that having words mean things is a "game". That's not intellectually honest of you.

Nonsense, you're just manifesting foundless conjecture. And shame on you for calling me "intellectually dishonest" when you're playing this ridiculous semantics game!

Sorry, but no. This is just you digging deeper. What, precisely is "foundless" about my conjecture?

I think it's perfectly rational and well-founded to think that you like the rhetorical force of the word "bully", which is why you've made up a definition to suit you.

I just don't get you...

You don't get that words mean things, and that you aren't allowed to just ignore the parts of a definition that don't suit your rhetorical purposes?


I have a problem with people who bandy about terms they misuse.

Funnily enough: me too.

Clearly, no, unless you're a massive hypocrite who thinks it's okay when YOU do it.

Wow! I'm a massive hypocrite? Get real!

You are misusing a word. I have demonstrated you have. Yet you claim to have a problem with people who bandy about terms they misuse. The only way that could be true in light of your misuse is if you were a hypocrite. QED.

A necessary component is missing. You focus on the "intent" which has nothing to do with the necessary component that is lacking--this leads me to believe that you recognize it's lacking, but that you don't care. The most plausible reason I can think of for this is that you like the rhetorical force, facts be damned. Perhaps that's not the case, I certainly am willing to give the benefit of the doubt...but, again, necessary component = missing. Trying to distract from that appears dishonest, since I don't believe I've been unclear, nor do I believe you can honestly focus on things like bench's intent to insult, when the issue is the power imbalance, or rather, the lack thereof.

The power imbalance is created when Bench does it constantly. Where am I wrong on this? Tell me!

Explain what power is in play here, and how it is unbalanced?

A power imbalance is, for example: A boss who constantly belittles you. You can't respond, because he could fire you. Therefore, he is a bully--he is repeatedly abusing you when you cannot respond (t
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 10:05:14 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
A bit got cut off...the end of that parenthetical was "(that last part is the power imbalance)."
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 10:21:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 9:41:42 PM, dtaylor971 wrote:
At 1/23/2014 2:08:08 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
Yeah, so, I've been gone for like...over a month.

I got real sick, then had my computer sh*t the proverbial bed on me, and just a whole host of other crap. I just barely fixed the compy a few days ago, and this is the first time I've been able to get on.

: What'd I miss?

A bunch of crap.

And oh yeah, I joined the site.

Hi!
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
Caploxion
Posts: 454
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 10:23:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 10:05:14 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
A bit got cut off...the end of that parenthetical was "(that last part is the power imbalance)."

Okay, I've calmed down now (I had to deal with Imabully momentarily).

Bullying involves a power imbalance, right? What are the other components?

Give me a concrete definition of 'power imbalance' and let's work from there.
"That's what people do. They breed, and then their children breed, and then their children do it, and their children do it. But, have you ever asked why we do it?" - Jim 'Metamorphhh' Crawford

"There is no doubt that life is given us, not to be enjoyed, but to be overcome; to be got over." - Arthur Schopenhauer

"It's like building a broken building, repairing it and then saying that now I have value in doing so...but it didn't need to be broken in the first place." -Gary 'Inmendham' Mosher
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 10:26:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 10:23:55 PM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/23/2014 10:05:14 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
A bit got cut off...the end of that parenthetical was "(that last part is the power imbalance)."

Okay, I've calmed down now (I had to deal with Imabully momentarily).

Bullying involves a power imbalance, right? What are the other components?

Give me a concrete definition of 'power imbalance' and let's work from there.

Well, it is when the amount of power is not equal. In the case of imabench, for example, he has no authority on the site, and there is no reason you can't respond to him in exactly the same way he does. No imbalance in the power wielded.

In person, there are issues with intimidation that aren't present in online communication that could cause an imbalance.

How do you see a "power imbalance"? What power is he wielding that you, or his targets, cannot wield themselves?
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2014 10:28:40 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/23/2014 9:51:34 PM, YYW wrote:
history repeats itself...

*rolls eyes*

Blade, there is no point, man.

When have I ever showed skill in letting a thing drop?
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!