When people are allowed to say idiotic things unchallenged

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Becky

Lately I have noticed a lot more posts that do get into name calling, and obvious attacks.Fortunately I believe this is just a temporary phase D&T is in right now

Yes, I am sure you are correct , they will learn soon enough to coyly address their debate mate with the same surly slur tactic that person is using on them! They just haven't figured out the nice way to call a person ignorant yet!

But really mine was a different point, one where in a debate on facts, such as primary colors....what is the nice way to tell a person they obviously do not grasp the concept without them crying foul?

[NinaBrooke]

Originally Posted by Becky

I agree with you that disagreeing with a persons views no matter how many times it is done is not attacking them on a personal level, and never will be, but do feel that calling them ignorant, or other derogatory names is.We can all read the posts, and responses written on a subject , and think for ourselves to decide if what we read has some merit to it.We really do not need the truth police to hunt anyone down, and shoot them for the protection of our minds.
I can think of plenty of times when I have made stupid comments on this forum, and no one has ever responded in a way where I felt attacked...disagreed with plenty of times, but never attacked.It would be nice to see everyone treated with the same respect.

i agree with you on what you stated, wholeheartedly. but i think the same should apply to people who don`t think a lot before posting (also i sometimes am such, i could be more polite) but i think stupidity can be seen as attack also sometimes, and i think it is disrespectful to call someone rude just because the truth hurst.

I think we neither do need the truth police , but we could use a little more self reflection , and we also don`t need the rude police on making flaws that another person has sticking out as so outrageous. even more outrageous than posting outrageous stupidity.

i mean we are all humans, and as such no one is perfect. but to police one behaviour without policing the other. that is not how reality works. When two people or more than two people have a problem it can`t be solved by just the pot calling the kettle black.
And i have at least the decency to admit my mistakes and i don`t need a babysitter. be it rude or truth police wise. I mean - sorry to say - but if people can`t handle life or reality without others bossing them or everyone around and putting them in a rosy cloud instead of harsh reality then i wonder how progress should happen. I admitted my mistakes in said matter and i think its completely rude and unpolite to just ignore that. I think its a two way street. some people are judgemental and arrogant and don`t even realize it until they encounter someone who throws it in their face uncensored. If everyone in my life had always reacted civil and polite to my shenanigans - i don`t think i would have learned so much. And its a strange fact that the harmony addicted are always the ones who trigger the most fights, because they are violent with velvet gloves around their fists. Its not blatantly obviously rude people like me who have the most people disliking them and being latent aggressive about them.

I think if people need to be babysitted after being 18 years old its a bit strange to me - and my way too european mind. I hope that was not arrogant or uncivil. Its just my honest opinion. Its the same when i see couples buying someone and he always talks for her because she is unable to have an opinion. When i was working as a shop assistant this was so common that it started to become funny for me.

For me i can move in various enviroments and i am very flexible. my father is an academic and my mother is working class. I can handle both enviroments. (although the most stunning results i received when i was acting like an english lady and snobbishly amongst the working class and like a streetwalker with a bit of naughty language thrown in for the academics - hilarious ;-).....)

[WTF]

Originally Posted by ninasastri

i agree with you on what you stated, wholeheartedly. but i think the same should apply to people who don`t think a lot before posting (also i sometimes am such, i could be more polite) but i think stupidity can be seen as attack also sometimes, and i think it is disrespectful to call someone rude just because the truth hurst.

I think we neither do need the truth police , but we could use a little more self reflection , and we also don`t need the rude police on making flaws that another person has sticking out as so outrageous. even more outrageous than posting outrageous stupidity.

i mean we are all humans, and as such no one is perfect. but to police one behaviour without policing the other. that is not how reality works. When two people or more than two people have a problem it can`t be solved by just the pot calling the kettle black.
And i have at least the decency to admit my mistakes and i don`t need a babysitter. be it rude or truth police wise. I mean - sorry to say - but if people can`t handle life or reality without others bossing them or everyone around and putting them in a rosy cloud instead of harsh reality then i wonder how progress should happen. I admitted my mistakes in said matter and i think its completely rude and unpolite to just ignore that.

and being ignorant or not posting answers to tricky questions about tourplans when pretending to only see regulars or facts about science vs. religion when starting a topic is also rude and in my eyes highly uncivil. When i am wrong i have at least the decency to admit that. Plus , when for example Charles Tudor attacked me, i could also handle it myself. I think if people need to be babysitted after being 18 years old its a bit strange to me - and my way too european mind. I hope that was not arrogant or uncivil. Its just my honest opinion. Its the same when i see couples buying someone and he always talks for her because she is unable to have an opinion. When i was working as a shop assistant this was so common that it started to become funny for me.

I'm going to take you under my wing and school you on how to say the exact same thing, only nicer!

Where is Sisyphus? Help a brother out!

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by WTF

I do not want to make this about any one person but there are things people can have opinions on, such as your favorite color , but there can be no opinion on what constitutes say primary colors you can't let go unchallenged someone claiming yellow is a primary color.

There are seven colors defining wavelengths of visible light. They are red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, and violet.
However, the three "primary colors" for ADDITIVE combination (such as the colors on these web pages) are red, blue and green. All edited colors in computer images use a combination of these three. When added together, these component colors form the color "white".

For SUBTRACTIVE coloration, as in art, the primary colors are red, blue and yellow.

In printing, these three colors were superceded (just as they were for light primaries), the modern equivalents being cyan, magenta, yellow and black.


Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_t...#ixzz1ClHwuDRR

[NinaBrooke]

Originally Posted by atlcomedy

Obviously a perfect world would be all truth. The problem is it isn't practical in our world. It goes back to the classic question (or many similar to it), "Do these jeans make my butt look big?"

The question is where is the line? When is politeness unacceptable?

hmmm.... i think you can state politely that someone is posting a huge pile of hogwash. I just have not figured out how. I am trying.
What i think is worse are people backstabbing others behind their backs and then being all polite and complementing in the face. Boy, i knew people doing that. i was always thinking if i were that person i`d rather have a huge fight and have some things in the face instead of being blown smoke up my behind.

but that is just me. some prefer it the actual other way round. but that does not make them favourable relationship wise.

i think catering to extremes is never a good thing. i think true diplomacy has the ability to say what you want to say it in a way that is acceptable.

[discreetgent]

Tsk, tk, WTF you quoted Nina before she edited her note

Originally Posted by ninasastri

and being ignorant or not posting answers to tricky questions about tourplans when pretending to only see regulars or facts about science vs. religion when starting a topic is also rude and in my eyes highly uncivil.

Guess it was too obvious so got edited, fortunately WTF saved it for posterity.

Look, if people wish to start a thread on a particular person, then assuming they do not violate any eccie guidelines, that is one thing. But to start a thread on some purported question and make it about one person is neither polite nor truthful.

[atlcomedy]

Originally Posted by WTF

I'm going to take you under my wing and school you on how to say the exact same thing, only nicer!

Where is Sisyphus? Help a brother out!

WTF as Henry Higgins:lig htning:

[NinaBrooke]

Originally Posted by WTF

I'm going to take you under my wing and school you on how to say the exact same thing, only nicer!

Where is Sisyphus? Help a brother out!

thanks darling, i will let you proofread all my posts in the future and i am sure you will learn me all the skills needed...That said....ALL the skills needed :-)..... merci...... oh, i am sisyphus sister....as they say in europe:" you can get a whore off the street but you can never get the street off the whore" ..... he he.....that said it was just a symbolic analogy. I was not referring to myself and my hypothetical career as a streetwalker.... just explaining the sisyphus`sister thingie ;-)

[WTF]

Originally Posted by discreetgent

Tsk, tk, WTF you quoted Nina before she edited her note



Guess it was too obvious so got edited, fortunately WTF saved it for posterity.

Look, if people wish to start a thread on a particular person, then assuming they do not violate any eccie guidelines, that is one thing. But to start a thread on some purported question and make it about one person is neither polite nor truthful.

Why is it fortunate DG? If I change my mind about something I said and think better of it, is that such a bad thing? Why are you up nina ass?

As to why I started this thread, that is rather presumptuous. I have neither the time nor inclination (thank you Mr. Nightlinger) to figure out just why on earth everyone true inclinations for starting a thread is but if the shoe fits, wear it I say

I have offered to lend my services to nina to properly reply back to folks who are disingenuous in their manner, in kind. What more can you ask for?

Originally Posted by atlcomedy

WTF as Henry Higgins:lig htning:

That is some funny chit there!

[discreetgent]

Why is it fortunate DG? If I change my mind about something I said and think better of it, is that such a bad thing?

No not at all; my point is Nina seemed to instinctively think this thread was targeted at a specific individual as well - even if she later changed her mind.

Why are you up nina ass?

I didn't know she did greek lol

[TexTushHog]

Truth means less and less these days. Part of the reason is that journalists are increasingly lazy and their notions of objectivity are no longer to find the truth and report it, but to report a sound clip from each side. Finding the truth about relatively complex matters requires 1) a willingness to work; 2). education and training; 3) time and effort, and 4) judgment. Journalists are increasingly lacking all of these qualities.

Add this to the partisan nature of the non-journalists masquerading as journalists and there is really no room for the truth in public discussion today. It's an endangered species on those rare occasions when it is even seen.

And with confirmation bias being as strong as it is, once someone reports a version of the "truth" that jibes with what most people want to believe, no amount of real evidence will change their minds anyway.

No wonder that Karl Rove spoke derisively about the "reality based community" in his then off the record comments to Ron Suskind in 2004:

The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." ... "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."

People are so stupid and ill-educated, and the media is so lazy and incompetent, truth almost doesn't exist anymore. At least as a factor in public debate.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by discreetgent

No not at all; my point is Nina seemed to instinctively think this thread was targeted at a specific individual as well - even if she later changed her mind.

You are entitled to your opinion!

Originally Posted by discreetgent

I didn't know she did greek lol

That ain't my thing, butt ya never know!

[discreetgent]

Desmond takes a trolley to the jewellers stores

[NinaBrooke]

Originally Posted by WTF

Should people be able to have opinions? Absolutely, but should they be able to charade them as facts? Or hide behind the completely shallow cover of ''Prove me wrong" Prove that a cow can not jump over the moon.

The problem with this kinda of protectionism for idiotic statements is that it leads to folks like Jenny McCarthy making misleading statements under the guise of , "That is my BELIEF!" Politeness towards ignorance in this case leads to more and more parents not getting their kids childhood shots and viruses that were almost eradicated are now making a come back. All because people like Oprah (who had McCarthy on her show) were to lazy to check facts or to polite to tell Jenny she was being an idiot.

So my question , do we prefer the truth or politeness?

well at least pravda had no problems stating that Sarah Palin is:
and its a well written combination of uncivil intellectualism. And i think Palin had it coming :-):

"If Sarah Palin is not some kind of a massive political joke in the USA, wheeled out to liven up the political scene from time to time with nonsensical and pastiche (one hopes) displays of sheer and utter ignorance, then it is worrying. It is even more so if anyone other than a manic depressive suffering from a chronic lack of lithium takes this...female...seriously."


http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/col...ankin_sarah-0/

[guest042011]

the sophian siren | authentic courtesan | polyamorous escort | bohemian companion | omni-orgasmic enigma tantalizing tra-la-pa-looza from just around the corner from Dr. Jung's home.