Sometimes I think people in here get off on arguing or something.

that was dumb

 

(i think gay would've fit better)

No, I think we all lost.

We all have been numbed, had our time wasted, etc., etc.

 

I don't mind dicussing issues with people, but when people have no intention of listening it's aggrevating. At the onset of this there was never an intention of doing anything but trying to paint you as a bigot. When it was pointed out that "Hey, Eric's not all wrong" the response, in the end, comes out as "No."

 

That's OK. Maybe it's just a bad night, or something.

Goo.

hahah

richard i love you :kiss:

Goo?

Sometimes I think people in here get off on arguing or something.

 

Sometimes, I like a good discussion.

 

Other times, like this one, I feel foolish for even starting.

 

I need to learn more.

 

Not one of my best moments.

 

It's probably better to let people learn their own way rather than try to save them time and help them out. Every once in a while you have a completely negative experience.

I'll gladly take being ignorant over the wrong usage of the word.

 

OK, now you're just picking fights.

 

Nobody wants to argue, man. Are you going out of your way to annoy now?

as long as you have a dave chapelle avatar everything is cool

I thought you displayed a very good argument. And if this was going somewhere it would of been interesting but I guess...some people just don't want to discuss what they started.

No, I'm not you asshole.

Hey! Richard is NOT an arsehole if that's who you are talking about. :angry:

I'm still arguing over with the word being "gay" being used as dumb.

I thought you displayed a very good argument. And if this was going somewhere it would of been interesting but I guess...some people just don't want to discuss what they started.

 

Thanks. That makes me feel better.

 

How's everything going with you?

Hey! Richard is NOT an arsehole if that's who you are talking about. :angry:

 

Yeah, that's what he was talking about.

 

He's entitled to his opinion.

 

That conclusion he's come to only shows us more about him. Granted, it doesn't grant a favorable view, but it's probably better that we know these things about him now.

 

We're not obligated to endulge him anymore.

Thanks. That makes me feel better.

 

How's everything going with you?

 

No problem. :)

Everything is going quite well with me, thanks for asking. :D

Goo.

looking at the context in which eric uses "gay" almost constantly' date=' i don't think he means dissolute or licentious.[/quote']

 

I think he's saying she's gay because her behavior on the board lacks ethics (something I don't necessarily agree with, but know others who would)

 

 

you dont really believe that someone postin comments as "let's not ban sternly lets just rape her" would want to uphold ethics, do you ??

looking at the context in which eric uses "gay" almost constantly' date=' i don't think he means dissolute or licentious.[/quote']

 

I think he's saying she's gay because her behavior on the board lacks ethics (something I don't necessarily agree with, but know others who would)

 

 

you dont really believe that someone postin comments as "let's not ban sternly lets just rape her" would want to uphold ethics, do you ??

 

See other posts I've made in this thread.

 

I'm not saying Eric is right os Eric is even good. All I'm saying is that Twix's critcism of Eric was inappropriate.

looking at the context in which eric uses "gay" almost constantly' date=' i don't think he means dissolute or licentious.[/quote']

 

I think he's saying she's gay because her behavior on the board lacks ethics (something I don't necessarily agree with, but know others who would)

 

 

you dont really believe that someone postin comments as "let's not ban sternly lets just rape her" would want to uphold ethics, do you ??

 

See other posts I've made in this thread.

 

I'm not saying Eric is right os Eric is even good. All I'm saying is that Twix's critcism of Eric was inappropriate.

 

Yes I`ve read all posts and I'm not saying you are defending Eric, I'm jus referring to your comment starting with "I think he's saying..." and asking you if you still think he uses "gay" due to carla's lack of ethics? Especially him after posting such comments as quoted above.

looking at the context in which eric uses "gay" almost constantly' date=' i don't think he means dissolute or licentious.[/quote']

 

I think he's saying she's gay because her behavior on the board lacks ethics (something I don't necessarily agree with, but know others who would)

 

 

you dont really believe that someone postin comments as "let's not ban sternly lets just rape her" would want to uphold ethics, do you ??

 

See other posts I've made in this thread.

 

I'm not saying Eric is right os Eric is even good. All I'm saying is that Twix's critcism of Eric was inappropriate.

 

Yes I`ve read all posts and I'm not saying you are defending Eric, I'm jus referring to your comment starting with "I think he's saying..." and asking you if you still think he uses "gay" due to carla's lack of ethics? Especially him after posting such comments as quoted above.

 

Yes, I do, more or less. I don't think he means it in those exact terms. I was quoting the acceptable definition. But he means it as a synonym for "lame," a usage error which is common (almost colloquial).

 

At your underlying point: One can be absent of ethics yet still be able to comment on another's possession of them. Sometimes those commentaries are correct. Other times they are not.

 

But we're also going to create a strawman here if we use the terms ethics and morals too rigidly. A better term might be standards, or practices.

looking at the context in which eric uses "gay" almost constantly' date=' i don't think he means dissolute or licentious.[/quote']

 

I think he's saying she's gay because her behavior on the board lacks ethics (something I don't necessarily agree with, but know others who would)

 

 

you dont really believe that someone postin comments as "let's not ban sternly lets just rape her" would want to uphold ethics, do you ??

 

See other posts I've made in this thread.

 

I'm not saying Eric is right os Eric is even good. All I'm saying is that Twix's critcism of Eric was inappropriate.

 

Yes I`ve read all posts and I'm not saying you are defending Eric, I'm jus referring to your comment starting with "I think he's saying..." and asking you if you still think he uses "gay" due to carla's lack of ethics? Especially him after posting such comments as quoted above.

 

Yes, I do, more or less. I don't think he means it in those exact terms. I was quoting the acceptable definition. But he means it as a synonym for "lame," a usage error which is common (almost colloquial).

 

At your underlying point: One can be absent of ethics yet still be able to comment on another's possession of them. Sometimes those commentaries are correct. Other times they are not.

 

But we're also going to create a strawman here if we use the terms ethics and morals too rigidly. A better term might be standards, or practices.

 

 

I don't quite agree to your idea of being able to comment on another's possession of ethics while neglecting them for oneself, how could you then realize other people's lack of them? Well but that's jus my opinion and I don't expect you to understand it.

:stunned: :stunned: :stunned: this is much more exxciting then choco thread

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

oh god i don't mean that :embarrased:

looking at the context in which eric uses "gay" almost constantly' date=' i don't think he means dissolute or licentious.[/quote']

 

I think he's saying she's gay because her behavior on the board lacks ethics (something I don't necessarily agree with, but know others who would)

 

 

you dont really believe that someone postin comments as "let's not ban sternly lets just rape her" would want to uphold ethics, do you ??

 

See other posts I've made in this thread.

 

I'm not saying Eric is right os Eric is even good. All I'm saying is that Twix's critcism of Eric was inappropriate.

 

Yes I`ve read all posts and I'm not saying you are defending Eric, I'm jus referring to your comment starting with "I think he's saying..." and asking you if you still think he uses "gay" due to carla's lack of ethics? Especially him after posting such comments as quoted above.

 

Yes, I do, more or less. I don't think he means it in those exact terms. I was quoting the acceptable definition. But he means it as a synonym for "lame," a usage error which is common (almost colloquial).

 

At your underlying point: One can be absent of ethics yet still be able to comment on another's possession of them. Sometimes those commentaries are correct. Other times they are not.

 

But we're also going to create a strawman here if we use the terms ethics and morals too rigidly. A better term might be standards, or practices.

 

 

I don't quite agree to your idea of being able to comment on another's possession of ethics while neglecting them for oneself, how could you then realize other people's lack of them? Well but that's jus my opinion and I don't expect you to understand it.

 

I understand it. I just disagree with it.

 

Eric's making a conscious effort to neglect ethics. He makes comments to try to get under people's skin. While this is not something I would do, it does show a consciousness of right and wrong behavior. This knowledge can be considered separate from his actions, and as such his assessing an objective value to another's reverence for ethics is possible. The action and the assessment are independent of each other.

 

 

An analogy:

 

You got to restaurant and realize that the food is horrible. Yet you are not a chef, nor have you ever tried to cook. Are you unqualified to evaluate the meal merely because you aren't a practicing cook?

 

Of course not, because as an action eating the meal is independent from preparing it. And beyond that, you are qualified with taste and preference and an idea of what a meal should taste like.

 

 

It's the same thing here. Evaluating Carla's morality is independent of exhibiting one's own morality.

:o