New members thread

TheArtist · Post by **TheArtist** » 2003-05-23 11:26pm

My girlfriend and I have been dating for 2 years, and we're not having sex. And I make it a point to spend quite a bit of money on her. Because she deserves it.

So, the personal threats and whatnot are okay?

I framed a perfectly logical response based upon facts, but, If I choose to, I can simply say "fuck you ... I disagree ... fuck you again?"

Okay then. So noted.

Post by **RogueIce** » 2003-05-23 11:27pm

Colonel Olrik wrote:That's why the "Hi" threads that usually don't get locked are the ones where the thread creator puts some effort into presenting himself right at the beggining. That's usually not the case, though.

You could do what I did...

"First Post and a Question" or something along those lines.

What pokes I recieved were usually inside the answer to the question. And, so far as I know, it never did get locked.

Just my two cents.

Post by **RogueIce** » 2003-05-23 11:31pm

TheArtist wrote:
My girlfriend and I have been dating for 2 years, and we're not having sex. And I make it a point to spend quite a bit of money on her. Because she deserves it.
So, the personal threats and whatnot are okay?

I framed a perfectly logical response based upon facts, but, If I choose to, I can simply say "fuck you ... I disagree ... fuck you again?"

Okay then. So noted.

Not like that, no... But, "You're a fucking idiot for saying that because..." is alright. Or variations on that.

At least, that's my take on it. Correct me if I'm wrong, Mods.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-05-23 11:31pm

TheArtist wrote:So, the personal threats and whatnot are okay?

Only because he's obviously not being serious. He said in the same message that he was a pacifist, and that he would not actually do anything. Any threat that can be taken seriously is obviously not allowed.

I framed a perfectly logical response based upon facts, but, If I choose to, I can simply say "fuck you ... I disagree ... fuck you again?"

As long as you explain why you disagree.

Okay then. So noted.

Simple enough, no?

TheArtist · Post by **TheArtist** » 2003-05-24 02:12am

Darth Wong wrote:
TheArtist wrote:So, the personal threats and whatnot are okay?
Only because he's obviously not being serious. He said in the same message that he was a pacifist, and that he would not actually do anything. Any threat that can be taken seriously is obviously not allowed.
I framed a perfectly logical response based upon facts, but, If I choose to, I can simply say "fuck you ... I disagree ... fuck you again?"
As long as you explain why you disagree.
Okay then. So noted.
Simple enough, no?

I've never trusted a pacifist that laid out threats. Call it the Heinlein pardox. A pacifist is only someone that hasn't had the opportunity to hoist the jolly roger. If it was humor, it was deliberatly obtuse and left little indication that the writer was anything but serious. No smilies.

I was dead serious in my post - that is way I dated in college. I was accused of joking. Was the assumption that I was joking, therefore I would see the pacifist was making joke threats?

THere is a another paradox - a guy who calls himself "queen" and a pacifist that makes threats. If he is confused about his gender, I can assume that he's confused about his other opinions, ie: his claiming a moral position agaist violence and then making threats.

So, you're down with the :

{flaming threat/Insult}
{Logical talk}
{flaming threat/Insult}

Format?

Okay. Its fucking inconsistant and you're all a bunch of assholes for thinking its anything other than stupid.

Do I have this correct?

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2003-05-24 02:18am

1. It is Queeb...look at the spelling before hurling insults.

2. Crass generalizations are never a way of looking at anything...usually akin to putting foot in mouth.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-05-24 02:23am

TheArtist wrote:I've never trusted a pacifist that laid out threats. Call it the Heinlein pardox. A pacifist is only someone that hasn't had the opportunity to hoist the jolly roger. If it was humor, it was deliberatly obtuse and left little indication that the writer was anything but serious. No smilies.

Go ahead. Be paranoid. No police officer would ever interpret that as an actual threat.

I was dead serious in my post - that is way I dated in college. I was accused of joking. Was the assumption that I was joking, therefore I would see the pacifist was making joke threats?

THere is a another paradox - a guy who calls himself "queen" and a pacifist that makes threats. If he is confused about his gender, I can assume that he's confused about his other opinions, ie: his claiming a moral position agaist violence and then making threats.

He calls himself Queeb, dumb-ass, not "Queen". And the paradox only exists if you interpret his remark as a serious threat, which it is not.

So, you're down with the :

{flaming threat/Insult}
{Logical talk}
{flaming threat/Insult}

Format?

Of course. Mind you, if you do it at every opportunity just because you can, and not because you're sincerely offended by something, people will start treating you like shit and you'll deserve it.

Okay. Its fucking inconsistant and you're all a bunch of assholes for thinking its anything other than stupid.

Do I have this correct?

You obviously do not understand the "logical talk" part.

TheArtist · Post by **TheArtist** » 2003-05-24 02:32am

Darth Wong wrote:You obviously do not understand the "logical talk" part.

Ha.

Nothing paranoid about questioning a threat made by a pacifist. Hell, I've never seen a post by "queeb" before - how would I know a joke from not. Sounded dead serious to me. Hell, it sounded like I accidently struck a nerve.

Oh well, I think we see eachother's points.

I find it curious that "queeb" was nowhere to be found in this.

Lonestar · Post by **Lonestar** » 2003-05-24 03:11pm

Montcalm wrote: You can do it Lonestar 20 something more post and you`ll be a Jedi.

[interest piqued] Is that an invitation to spam?[/interest]

Post by **RogueIce** » 2003-05-24 03:36pm

Lonestar wrote:
Montcalm wrote: You can do it Lonestar 20 something more post and you`ll be a Jedi.
[interest piqued] Is that an invitation to spam?[/interest]

Sure, if you want all of your posts to be locked...

J · Post by J » 2003-05-24 10:11pm

TheArtist wrote:Format?

Okay. Its fucking inconsistant and you're all a bunch of assholes for thinking its anything other than stupid.

Do I have this correct?

No it's incorrect, and it's because you touch yourself at night but that's besides the point. The fact of the matter is you just don't get it yet, and at this rate things don't look good. Listen, forget about all this format/debate/form/whatever stuff and just sit back, relax and chill. You remind me of the one they call "funboy" at my BF's work, what was that saying they had..."the guy's about as sharp as a plastic spoon".

Crayz9000 · Post by **Crayz9000** » 2003-05-24 11:04pm

But plastic spoons can be damned sharp! I nearly cut myself on one once...

aerius · Post by **aerius** » 2003-05-24 11:18pm

SPOON!!!
Jesus...funboy...that kid was about as bright as a broken lightbulb, nice kid, but he was kinda slow. He was as fast as a speeding snail.

Anyways, what Snuggles said.