Philosophism - Page 2

garnet · 02-11-2005, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lookout123

garnet, did you take any flak when you first popped up?

Yes, and I probably probably deserved most of it. My skin is pretty thick, so I stuck around. I don't think this guy deserved to get slammed the way he did. He's new, and went out on a limb to start a new thread. What's so hard about giving him a little encouragement? He he made a polite post and got slammed for it. If you disagree with him, fine--but it's not neccessary to attack him.

I'll never understand the stong desire around here to drive away new people. It's not a contest, and I for one wouldn't mind hearing some new points of view once in a while.

Beestie · 02-11-2005, 11:43 AM

I guess my answer to this would be that sm treated Dunlavy the exact same way he would have treated me or you or any other poster. I respect that. Why should Dunlavy get a pass because he's new. sm has gored people in the past over this and, if Dunlavy had lurked and explored the history of this place before walking in and blurting out, he'd have known. But he didn't and I think Dunlavy needs to take responsibility for that and not sm. sm shouldn't have to modify his response based on the characteristics of the poster. sm, it appears to me, replys to posts and not posters.

Personally, I think that's how it ought to be.

garnet · 02-11-2005, 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beestie

if Dunlavy had lurked and explored the history of this place before walking in and blurting out, he'd have known. But he didn't and I think Dunlavy needs to take responsibility for that and not sm.

HUH? So dunlavy is now responsible for what SM said? Shouldn't people be held responsible solely for their OWN words?

jaguar · 02-11-2005, 11:59 AM

He is in a sense, he talked crap and got bitchslapped for it, SM wouldn't have been able to shred him if he didn't talk crap in the first place.

lookout123 · 02-11-2005, 12:01 PM

was SM's post harsh? yep, actually i thought it was a little uncharacteristic of him, but that is ok. When it comes to philosophizin' and structuring a case for a belief SM is top notch. if you want examples, see his periodic grilling of Radar, among others, when their arguments become circular or nonsensical. he saw an immature approach to life's great questions trying to pass itself off as deep thinking and original - he responded to the post.

lookout123 · 02-11-2005, 12:05 PM

keep in mind that if Jaguar had responded, rather than SM, it would have sounded a little something like...

Quote:

You stupid effing american. You are too stupid and self absorbed to realize that this is not a new line of thinking, but a very old one. But, you as a stupid ugly american who probably smells bad, oppresses the poor, rubs asbestos in the faces of the old, and purposely hunt endangered animals... where was i going with this??? oh yeah, you are stupid and america sucks.

garnet · 02-11-2005, 12:16 PM

Ok, lookout, so you're saying that I can personally insult you the next time I think one of your abortion arguments or pro-Bush statements is nonsensical? You'll be OK with that then, right?

lookout123 · 02-11-2005, 12:26 PM

actually garnet, you do post in an insulting manner sometimes, as we all do. like i said, i was a little surprised at SM's approach, but his translation of the original post was pretty darn accurate. he didn't name call, he didn't say "you are a stupid poopy-head" he simply restated, in a more obvious fashion, what the thread started with. he replied to a post without regard to who the poster was. new or old cellarite, the original post was begging for someone to walk by with an auger and set to work.

Dunlavy · 02-11-2005, 01:13 PM

I enjoy debating about beliefs and the such, but I don't think what SM said counts as a "debate start". I would have gladly debated my point if someone had asked me to elaborate on certain things, or state why they are skeptical rather than purposefully insult me.

wolf · 02-11-2005, 01:27 PM

So now that you have been specifically questioned you're not willing to respond?

Brown Thrasher · 02-11-2005, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by garnet

And it also serves to drive away potentially intelligent individuals who aren't interested in taking crap from strangers. Sad.

I Can't believe you made that statement. Is that not like calling the kettle black. I am sure your response will be the same as others. You doubt my intellegence, because of my lack of using proper english.That's o.k. you won't find anyone more thickskinned or as hardheaded as me. However, I do agree with you on this subject. Who are we to decide the intelligence of others.
You know I have a brother who is severely dyslexic and he happens to own three buisnesses and lives in a 2 million dollar home. He has an mba. If you saw his writing you would think it was that of a fifth grader. You know the peoples whose checks he signs don't seem to mind........ Sorry for any spelling or grammatical errors........

garnet · 02-11-2005, 01:38 PM

Sweetheart, you really need to relax. You've said the same thing in your last five posts, and in case you don't get it, nobody cares.

And BTW, you've been around since last October I can see, so you therefore aren't exactly "new." Regardless, when someone attacks me the way you did (go back to your original thesaurus comment in the other thread), I will respond in kind. Now go take your pills.

Brown Thrasher · 02-11-2005, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lumberjim

cmon, ya just know this is an 18yr old stoner. weren't you that guy once, smooth? i know i was. i've refined that into my current pickandchoosist religosophy. but is it any different really? dont beat up on the young and vulnerable. save it for dicks like mr condescendingman above me here.

Sir, your use of the english language has me encouraged. Beat me please.
I guess every site needs someone to be the token bully. But please, say something that makes sense ever so often........You don't have to be 18 to be a stoner. Apparently, you already knew that......

"Your socks are untied"

Wear sandles instead.

Brown Thrasher · 02-11-2005, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by garnet

Yes, and I probably probably deserved most of it. My skin is pretty thick, so I stuck around. I don't think this guy deserved to get slammed the way he did. He's new, and went out on a limb to start a new thread. What's so hard about giving him a little encouragement? He he made a polite post and got slammed for it. If you disagree with him, fine--but it's not neccessary to attack him.

I'll never understand the stong desire around here to drive away new people. It's not a contest, and I for one wouldn't mind hearing some new points of view once in a while.

I was going to be an ass, but Arthur Miller died and I am in a greiving mode.
You may want to check your senteces in this post, for I'm afraid they are flawed. I think your final paragraph may need to be questioned; not by me, but you........ Again, I apologize for any spelling or grammatical errors.

Dunlavy · 02-11-2005, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wolf

So now that you have been specifically questioned you're not willing to respond?

I was specifically questioned? Give me a second as I go through the posts again. Seems that i've become lost through other conversations going on.

Ok, well. As responding to some. I am at a young age, and I will likely look at the things I say now and laugh at them in the future after i've come to learn more. What I wrote likely didn't make sense, guess it was "newby instincts" to try and boost myself up. Bit of a common thing for newbies... Guess i'll start on something new now.

Let's see if I can make more sense. I stated that I was bothered by those who have their own beliefs and state them as facts, when really I meant I was bothered by those who have their facts and try to force them upon me.

Secondly, I know I didn't create this myself. I've actually read multiple books and writings based on similar beliefs, which is what inspired me to be what I am now. I can't find many groups and/or people that share the same interests, so around where I am, it's somewhat of something I started here in the area, for those who haven't come in contact with such theories.

And now that I look at what I typed before, I do laugh at it. Because it does not make sense. I hold my beliefs as truths, so i'm contradicting myself. I don't feel like questioning everything, but rather take a wider look on things that have not been proven yet. If that makes any sense.

Sorry if i've come off as a noob. Situations in the real world are probobly adding to it, and i'd enjoy being able to "prove myself" in order to gain respect here.

peace

-Dunlavy

02-11-2005, 11:43 AM	#17
Beestie -◊\|≡·∙■·∙≡\|◊- Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Parts unknown. Posts: 4,081	I guess my answer to this would be that sm treated Dunlavy the exact same way he would have treated me or you or any other poster. I respect that. Why should Dunlavy get a pass because he's new. sm has gored people in the past over this and, if Dunlavy had lurked and explored the history of this place before walking in and blurting out, he'd have known. But he didn't and I think Dunlavy needs to take responsibility for that and not sm. sm shouldn't have to modify his response based on the characteristics of the poster. sm, it appears to me, replys to posts and not posters. Personally, I think that's how it ought to be. __________________ ♠ ♥ ♣ ♦ Last edited by Beestie; 02-11-2005 at 11:46 AM. Reason: corrected misspelling of Dunlavy

02-11-2005, 11:59 AM	#19
jaguar whig Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 5,075	He is in a sense, he talked crap and got bitchslapped for it, SM wouldn't have been able to shred him if he didn't talk crap in the first place. __________________ Good friends, good books and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life. - Twain

02-11-2005, 12:01 PM	#20
lookout123 changed his status to single Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Right behind you. No, the other side. Posts: 10,308	was SM's post harsh? yep, actually i thought it was a little uncharacteristic of him, but that is ok. When it comes to philosophizin' and structuring a case for a belief SM is top notch. if you want examples, see his periodic grilling of Radar, among others, when their arguments become circular or nonsensical. he saw an immature approach to life's great questions trying to pass itself off as deep thinking and original - he responded to the post. __________________ Getting knocked down is no sin, it's not getting back up that's the sin

02-11-2005, 12:26 PM	#23
lookout123 changed his status to single Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Right behind you. No, the other side. Posts: 10,308	actually garnet, you do post in an insulting manner sometimes, as we all do. like i said, i was a little surprised at SM's approach, but his translation of the original post was pretty darn accurate. he didn't name call, he didn't say "you are a stupid poopy-head" he simply restated, in a more obvious fashion, what the thread started with. he replied to a post without regard to who the poster was. new or old cellarite, the original post was begging for someone to walk by with an auger and set to work. __________________ Getting knocked down is no sin, it's not getting back up that's the sin

02-11-2005, 01:27 PM	#25
wolf lobber of scimitars Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Phila Burbs Posts: 20,774	So now that you have been specifically questioned you're not willing to respond? __________________ wolf eht htiw og "Conspiracies are the norm, not the exception." --G. Edward Griffin The Creature from Jekyll Island High Priestess of the Church of the Whale Penis

02-11-2005, 12:16 PM	#22
garnet ... Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 657	Ok, lookout, so you're saying that I can personally insult you the next time I think one of your abortion arguments or pro-Bush statements is nonsensical? You'll be OK with that then, right?

02-11-2005, 01:13 PM	#24
Dunlavy High Propagandist Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Forgotten Grove Posts: 117	I enjoy debating about beliefs and the such, but I don't think what SM said counts as a "debate start". I would have gladly debated my point if someone had asked me to elaborate on certain things, or state why they are skeptical rather than purposefully insult me.

02-11-2005, 01:38 PM	#27
garnet ... Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 657	Sweetheart, you really need to relax. You've said the same thing in your last five posts, and in case you don't get it, nobody cares. And BTW, you've been around since last October I can see, so you therefore aren't exactly "new." Regardless, when someone attacks me the way you did (go back to your original thesaurus comment in the other thread), I will respond in kind. Now go take your pills.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)