Of course not. Now take your tablet.
Changes To the Word Event & Politics Subfora
- Thread starter superstring01
- Start date
Of course not. Now take your tablet.
GOOD! For a moment I thought you had gone complete insane and began copulating with a car exhaust.
Holy moly. Now that is politically correct. :m:
in the real world......
people are beaten to death for a buck
presidents are heckled, booed and killed
kids are blown to bits
it is there that opinions are muted due to fear of persecution
thus they turn towards us, the cyberworld, only to get banned for using "cunt, dick, hussein, asshole, hussein, etc"
people are beaten to death for a buck
presidents are heckled, booed and killed
kids are blown to bits
it is there that opinions are muted due to fear of persecution
thus they turn towards us, the cyberworld, only to get banned for using "cunt, dick, hussein, asshole, hussein, etc"
Last edited:
...for the ends?
Key word, expected.
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
Expected but fall short of as we have seen by those who oppose health care reform at town hall meetings all over the U.S
This and that
I think your scale is off just a bit, sir. And your perspective is slightly askew.
As to that latter, let's start with the simplest version: If you set out with the specific intention of offending people, and people are offended by your behavior, are you really being persecuted? Or have you simply accomplished your goal?
Just for starters.
And?
Gustav said:
I think your scale is off just a bit, sir. And your perspective is slightly askew.
As to that latter, let's start with the simplest version: If you set out with the specific intention of offending people, and people are offended by your behavior, are you really being persecuted? Or have you simply accomplished your goal?
Just for starters.
• • •
StrawDog said:
And?
In the real world my friend, perhaps one would expect Restraint, Dignity, and Honesty. Look around at the hypocrisy, carnage and mayhem. No, they are as elusive as they are in sciworld.
string i understand why you did it but its quite annoying that all the threads i have posted on australian politics (which tend to get fewer posters over a much longer time frame than the US ones) have been closed.
Especially the one on slavery and climate change because that was one i intended to revisit after the legislation was reintroduced into the parliment
Especially the one on slavery and climate change because that was one i intended to revisit after the legislation was reintroduced into the parliment
hmm
no, of course i am not being persecuted, i am actually being ministered to by some island girls in hawaii. i do however fear the portal to ngc3523652 will close soon so i better make the best of it
hmmmmm
if i persecute somebody, am i really being offended?
/pondering
alright
lets move on to the next level.....tiassa?
come now
stop being lazy
just recreate the threads
ask for some time off from work, and get cracking
your wellbeing is not a concern of ours
the... the... the...whatever we are doing here is
now quit whining
nobody really cares that much about "good/bad faith" and whatnot
they do care about the closures (thread in sf, requests, complaints)
so do a poll
open or keep closed
if vote goes for open, you mods will line up while we egg your sorry asses
The next stage ....
Alright. So ....
The world is harsh, people seek refuge:
That's a deliberate ellipsis in order to highlight that portion of the proposition.
So one seeks refuge. And in that refuge they seek to be offensive.
Now then, the other part:
So you seek refuge by heading down to a tavern for a drink. As Darwin put it, "Conversation of clever men at clubs, perhaps quarreling".
So in that quarrel you find the next fellow's outlook intolerable. Well, there are certainly ways to express that, aren't there?
If a guy hauls off and smacks you for calling him a cunt, are you really being persecuted?
You really think so?
Gustav said:
Alright. So ....
The world is harsh, people seek refuge:
That's a deliberate ellipsis in order to highlight that portion of the proposition.
So one seeks refuge. And in that refuge they seek to be offensive.
Now then, the other part:
So you seek refuge by heading down to a tavern for a drink. As Darwin put it, "Conversation of clever men at clubs, perhaps quarreling".
So in that quarrel you find the next fellow's outlook intolerable. Well, there are certainly ways to express that, aren't there?
• "Yeah, right, Bob. Heard that before."
• "I don't think it works that way. Consider this ...."
• "Oh, you fucking cunt. My God, what kind of dick thinks that? You, sir, are an asshole!"
• "I don't think it works that way. Consider this ...."
• "Oh, you fucking cunt. My God, what kind of dick thinks that? You, sir, are an asshole!"
If a guy hauls off and smacks you for calling him a cunt, are you really being persecuted?
• • •
StrawDog said:
You really think so?
Sort of depends. I'm not as paranoid as gustav about this, but I've seen you 'reason out' my 'disingenuousness', so clearly I couldn't be hugely impressed by a global supposition of the sincerity of every moderator. I suppose that overall the change should probably be to the good, if actually acted on.
But his name is Dick Hussein Cunt!
Well, it's a likable level. I think. Er ....
Anyway, to consider the next level, and we might be approaching a threshold here:
So you're in a bar and the bouncer seizes your collar and starts hauling you out. "What?" you ask. "What did I do?"
"You can't talk like that in here," he tells you.
"Like what?"
"You can't call people dicks."
"What? I wasn't calling him a dick. His name is Dick!"
Okay, so that's not quite the actual issue, but it highlights that the word itself isn't the problem.
The suspensions are not purely based on words used.
So let's try the idea of condemning the mentally ill as "whiny cunts". Does that strike you as potentially offensive in any way?
Gustav said:
Well, it's a likable level. I think. Er ....
Anyway, to consider the next level, and we might be approaching a threshold here:
So you're in a bar and the bouncer seizes your collar and starts hauling you out. "What?" you ask. "What did I do?"
"You can't talk like that in here," he tells you.
"Like what?"
"You can't call people dicks."
"What? I wasn't calling him a dick. His name is Dick!"
Okay, so that's not quite the actual issue, but it highlights that the word itself isn't the problem.
The suspensions are not purely based on words used.
So let's try the idea of condemning the mentally ill as "whiny cunts". Does that strike you as potentially offensive in any way?
depends on the severity of the illness, dont you think?
could it be possible they have their lucid moments and waste it by being whiny cunts?
a quick aside
i think the churchill/disraeli exchange might have never taken place
infact, it might be wise to look with suspicion, all quotes attributed to the aforementioned two and that twain character
*The exchange between John Wilkes and John Montagu, 4th Earl of Sandwich ("Mr Wilkes, will you die by the pox or by the hangman?" "That depends, my lord, on whether I embrace your lordship's principles or your mistress.") is also attributed to Samuel Foote; the same story was told of Mirabeau, answering Cardinal Maury, during the French Revolution. (link)
*In a famous exchange with Samuel Foote, Sandwich declared, "Foote, I have often wondered what catastrophe would bring you to your end; but I think, that you must either die of the p-x, or the halter." "My lord", replied Foote instantaneously, "that will depend upon one of two contingencies; -- whether I embrace your lordship's mistress, or your lordship's principles."This retort is often misattributed to John Wilkes.(link)
could it be possible they have their lucid moments and waste it by being whiny cunts?
a quick aside
i think the churchill/disraeli exchange might have never taken place
infact, it might be wise to look with suspicion, all quotes attributed to the aforementioned two and that twain character
*The exchange between John Wilkes and John Montagu, 4th Earl of Sandwich ("Mr Wilkes, will you die by the pox or by the hangman?" "That depends, my lord, on whether I embrace your lordship's principles or your mistress.") is also attributed to Samuel Foote; the same story was told of Mirabeau, answering Cardinal Maury, during the French Revolution. (link)
*In a famous exchange with Samuel Foote, Sandwich declared, "Foote, I have often wondered what catastrophe would bring you to your end; but I think, that you must either die of the p-x, or the halter." "My lord", replied Foote instantaneously, "that will depend upon one of two contingencies; -- whether I embrace your lordship's mistress, or your lordship's principles."This retort is often misattributed to John Wilkes.(link)
superstring01
Moderator