Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Mesozoic Mister Nigel

Pages: 1 ... 2107 2108 2109 [2110] 2111 2112 2113 ... 3616
31636
Beyond the wall / Re: The Inevitable Christopher Hitchens has Died Thread
« on: December 23, 2011, 04:00:32 am »
I did quote the parts I wanted clarified. The clarification failed to make it any clearer to me.

ALTERNATELY, since I failed to make note of which poster's words I objected to, if there are two for whom my criticism fails to fit, and one whom it does, then it probably applies to the one.
The criticism seemed to only apply to Kai but then you said it didn't.
Does it not apply to anyone, then?



I'm sorry. I am pretty sure that the person/people I was referring to weren't Kai, but it is late, I am tired, and unwilling to go back through the thread right now, so I am going to stick with "if you think my criticism doesn't apply to you it probably doesn't". Maybe you should quote and define what you think I am accusing who of. Other than the general "celebrating a person's death", which I think I have a decent argument for.
Quote

Or possibly, not at all improbably, that it applies to two or more people even earlier in the thread, because it is very very unlike me to address a single person as a collective if I have the opportunity of grabbing onto and rebutting a single post. That shit is tasty, general rebuttals are greasy and gross.
People even earlier in the thread ignored a point that you made after they were involved in the thread?

This is all making very little sense to me.

Clearly. I meant people who posted before Kai. Not sure what's confusing about that. I made my point (well, tried to and failed) in the second post.

31637
Beyond the wall / Re: The Inevitable Christopher Hitchens has Died Thread
« on: December 23, 2011, 03:37:20 am »
ALTERNATELY, since I failed to make note of which poster's words I objected to, if there are two for whom my criticism fails to fit, and one whom it does, then it probably applies to the one.

Or possibly, not at all improbably, that it applies to two or more people even earlier in the thread, because it is very very unlike me to address a single person as a collective if I have the opportunity of grabbing onto and rebutting a single post. That shit is tasty, general rebuttals are greasy and gross.

31638
Beyond the wall / Re: The Inevitable Christopher Hitchens has Died Thread
« on: December 23, 2011, 03:31:52 am »
Obviously, because I am terrified of calling out any one poster in particular, it was a sideways means of addressing you.
:crankey:

No, just kidding. It was a collective "you", meant to indicate that although I didn't remember the names of any specific individuals who had responded yet failed to address the central point of my objection, I was nonetheless aware that the objection had not actually been addressed in any of the rebuttals.  

Since I'm not addressing a specific person and am objecting to a behavior rather than a personality, in a thread with multiple posters, it gets hard to be specific, so I am trying to clarify (with Kai) that if you feel that my criticism doesn't apply to you, then it probably doesn't, as it is only meant to apply to people who are actually performing the behavior that is being criticized. If that makes sense.
The only reason I ask is that only Roger, EoC and Kai responded between that post and the one where you quote it and say that the alleged PD intelligentsia missed the point and EoC and Roger didn't really get involved with it, either posting tongue-in-cheek replies or comments more vaguely related to the post than Kai's comment which replied directly... so I also assumed you were referring to Kai.

Is the behaviour being criticised the tongue-in-cheek or less directly related responses?

Since everything is literally spelled out in the thread, can you go back and quote the portions you would like to have clarified?

31639
Beyond the wall / Totse shit
« on: December 23, 2011, 02:56:43 am »
I'm reserving judgment.

It took him a while to get started and the trolling is pretty obvious in restricting himself to a couple of threads and watching them intently.

Well, we know for a fact that he's on T2 and Zoklet and that he's posting, uh, we can call them "controversial" rather than "troll" posts if you want, here, but the facts remain.

I KNOW I KNOW I'M JUST TOO JADED AND CYNICAL, GIVE THE NEWB A CHANCE, MY NEGATIVITY IS DRIVING OFF THE NEW BLOOD AND THE FRESH EXCITING PERSPECTIVES.

31640
Beyond the wall / Re: Just smart enough to be into Monty Python
« on: December 23, 2011, 02:53:25 am »
Oh, and, uh... "NI!"

And a shrubbery.

I don't run into them as much as I used to, honestly. Which makes it all the more offputting when I'm alone in a room with one and everything seems to elicit a Monty Python quote.

And your mother was a hamster and your father smelled of elderberries.


What irritates ME the most is tat they quote the least amusing lines from the sketch.  We have a couple in our regular Friday night game wo just won't shut the fuck up AUGH.  It's more the newest guy who does that, and he is otherwise cool, but Jesus Crist we get it, you watched fucking Monty Python.

SHUT

UP.

fucking "h" key won't register I press it sometimes.  :argh!:

Quarter jar, Freeky.  Set out a jar, they have to put in a quarter for every Python quote.

We had one for puns (they'd gotten bad enough to disrupt the game).  The worst offender got into the habit of walking in, tossing a fiver in the jar, and we let him know when it ran out.

It funded pizza every couple weeks.

THIS.

is

BRILLIANT!

I have no idea why I've never thought of this before. It's such a great idea.

31641
Beyond the wall / Re: The Inevitable Christopher Hitchens has Died Thread
« on: December 23, 2011, 02:50:32 am »
I'm bringing this thread back from the dead for this take down by Mr. Destructo. After reading it, I'm disturbed a bit by scientists who looked upon him so favorably.

Was I supposed to take that seriously? It was funny as an example of over-the-top ad-hominem in the spirit of TGRR, but I would actually rather read a serious critical analysis.

I sincerely hate that this board will step up and come to consensus that it's just as gross and inhuman as the actions of the people we despise to celebrate the deaths of, say, Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, and Muommar Khaddafi, but perfectly acceptable/admirable to celebrate the death from cancer of a political commentator we don't like.

I'm sorry, but you people disgust me.

Way to totally ignore the central point, alleged PD intelligentsia.

Oh, but it's different when someone we hate dies. Ook, ook.

I think you are ignoring what I said three pages back, where I stated:

Quote
I heard about this first from ND Tyson on Twitter. And I sort of have a mix of feelings between "sad" and "indifferent". I'm not interested in gloating over the deceased, no matter who they are, and I do feel sad for family and close friends who feel that loss. But I really didn't know him at all, and I certainly didn't know him in person. I read one of his books, God is Not Great, in summer of 2007, and I mostly agreed with it. Most of the rest of what I "know" of him is hearsay or propaganda of some sort. I read in I Don't Believe in Atheists by Chris Hedges that Hitchens advocated bombing the middle east out of existence, but I don't know if this is true or not.

In short, I don't care enough to feel strongly about it, but I do feel something. That Tyson would mention his death makes me think that I should investigate further before passing judgment.

Thus I investigated. This is the first thing I've come across that was neither heavy handed praise of his character nor a complete religious screed. And no, I'm not celebrating his death. I'm investigating his life, because as I stated before, some of the high profile scientists that I follow (and I daresay look up to) have been lauding him, while people here are talking about his racism. This may indicate that these scientists did not notice (which I highly doubt) or intentionally overlooked these racist agendas in favor of an atheist voice with charisma. These are things I want to know.

Now, perhaps it would have been more tasteful to put this in another thread, but seeing how it was likely to blow up in my face regardless, perhaps it was best it stayed in this one. "Perfectly acceptable/admirable to celebrate the death from cancer of a political commentator we don't like" does not apply to my reasons since I neither had an opinion of him nor did I celebrate. And I will not involve myself in this endless festival of finger pointing and drama flinging.

If you're not doing it, then my objections to it don't apply to you.

Who was "way to totally ignore the central point, alleged PD intelligentsia." addressing?

Obviously, because I am terrified of calling out any one poster in particular, it was a sideways means of addressing you.

No, just kidding. It was a collective "you", meant to indicate that although I didn't remember the names of any specific individuals who had responded yet failed to address the central point of my objection, I was nonetheless aware that the objection had not actually been addressed in any of the rebuttals.  

Since I'm not addressing a specific person and am objecting to a behavior rather than a personality, in a thread with multiple posters, it gets hard to be specific, so I am trying to clarify (with Kai) that if you feel that my criticism doesn't apply to you, then it probably doesn't, as it is only meant to apply to people who are actually performing the behavior that is being criticized. If that makes sense.

31642
Beyond the wall / Re: The Inevitable Christopher Hitchens has Died Thread
« on: December 23, 2011, 02:43:52 am »
I'm bringing this thread back from the dead for this take down by Mr. Destructo. After reading it, I'm disturbed a bit by scientists who looked upon him so favorably.

Was I supposed to take that seriously? It was funny as an example of over-the-top ad-hominem in the spirit of TGRR, but I would actually rather read a serious critical analysis.

I sincerely hate that this board will step up and come to consensus that it's just as gross and inhuman as the actions of the people we despise to celebrate the deaths of, say, Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, and Muommar Khaddafi, but perfectly acceptable/admirable to celebrate the death from cancer of a political commentator we don't like.

I'm sorry, but you people disgust me.

Way to totally ignore the central point, alleged PD intelligentsia.

Oh, but it's different when someone we hate dies. Ook, ook

It's very simple, really: They were sick of stupid people rejoicing at the death of Bin Laden, and stupid people feeling sorry that Hitchens died. Basically they fell for the "Reverse Stupidity" trap.

This. I am grateful that I am not alone in the sentiment.

31643
Beyond the wall / Totse shit
« on: December 23, 2011, 02:40:14 am »
 :lulz: Apparently, we have our first really effective troll in what? Over a year? Congratulations!

31644
Beyond the wall / Re: The Inevitable Christopher Hitchens has Died Thread
« on: December 23, 2011, 02:03:44 am »
I'm bringing this thread back from the dead for this take down by Mr. Destructo. After reading it, I'm disturbed a bit by scientists who looked upon him so favorably.

Was I supposed to take that seriously? It was funny as an example of over-the-top ad-hominem in the spirit of TGRR, but I would actually rather read a serious critical analysis.

I sincerely hate that this board will step up and come to consensus that it's just as gross and inhuman as the actions of the people we despise to celebrate the deaths of, say, Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, and Muommar Khaddafi, but perfectly acceptable/admirable to celebrate the death from cancer of a political commentator we don't like.

I'm sorry, but you people disgust me.

Way to totally ignore the central point, alleged PD intelligentsia.

Oh, but it's different when someone we hate dies. Ook, ook.

I think you are ignoring what I said three pages back, where I stated:

Quote
I heard about this first from ND Tyson on Twitter. And I sort of have a mix of feelings between "sad" and "indifferent". I'm not interested in gloating over the deceased, no matter who they are, and I do feel sad for family and close friends who feel that loss. But I really didn't know him at all, and I certainly didn't know him in person. I read one of his books, God is Not Great, in summer of 2007, and I mostly agreed with it. Most of the rest of what I "know" of him is hearsay or propaganda of some sort. I read in I Don't Believe in Atheists by Chris Hedges that Hitchens advocated bombing the middle east out of existence, but I don't know if this is true or not.

In short, I don't care enough to feel strongly about it, but I do feel something. That Tyson would mention his death makes me think that I should investigate further before passing judgment.

Thus I investigated. This is the first thing I've come across that was neither heavy handed praise of his character nor a complete religious screed. And no, I'm not celebrating his death. I'm investigating his life, because as I stated before, some of the high profile scientists that I follow (and I daresay look up to) have been lauding him, while people here are talking about his racism. This may indicate that these scientists did not notice (which I highly doubt) or intentionally overlooked these racist agendas in favor of an atheist voice with charisma. These are things I want to know.

Now, perhaps it would have been more tasteful to put this in another thread, but seeing how it was likely to blow up in my face regardless, perhaps it was best it stayed in this one. "Perfectly acceptable/admirable to celebrate the death from cancer of a political commentator we don't like" does not apply to my reasons since I neither had an opinion of him nor did I celebrate. And I will not involve myself in this endless festival of finger pointing and drama flinging.

If you're not doing it, then my objections to it don't apply to you.

31645
Beyond the wall / Totse shit
« on: December 23, 2011, 01:52:59 am »
Guys, dude is from T2.

Just saying.


_______________________
|DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS|
                         |
                         |
                         |
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

:(  Weren't we just talking about ignoring the trolls to boost signal and reduce noise?

Yep. We just were.

31646
Beyond the wall / Re: KIM JONG IL DEAD
« on: December 23, 2011, 01:52:24 am »
I was thinking about the public weeping.

31647
Principia Discussion / [Thread Split] Re: A Parable
« on: December 23, 2011, 01:41:09 am »
I'm just trying to give the man what he wants.
Which is what?

Attention.
And what kind of behaviour would you expect to see if that isn't what he wanted?
Because it seems like ANYTHING can be framed as justification for shitting all over a thread, even when the interpretation which lead to that reaction is challenged.

Feels like a buttload of Ook Ook.

Nah, it's a lot more deliberate than that.

31648
Principia Discussion / [Thread Split] Re: A Parable
« on: December 23, 2011, 01:26:53 am »

31649
Principia Discussion / [Thread Split] Re: A Parable
« on: December 23, 2011, 01:21:41 am »
I guess it's just a funny coincidence. Especially since RWHN doesn't read anything I write. :)

Did he say he doesn't read anything you write, or did his making a "frequent point of mentioning that he never ever looks at that one thread" convince you somehow that he had given his word he would avoid looking directly at your posts?

I didn't see him say that, but I might be wrong.

It just seems like this whole clusterfuck entirely boils down to determined misrepresentation and insistence on ignoring attempts at clarifying, which is stupid.
That's not specifically targeted at the quoted, but an observance of a general and fucking annoying trend.

That bit about not reading anything I write was sarcasm. :)

I'm just trying to give the man what he wants.

31650
Beyond the wall / Totse shit
« on: December 23, 2011, 01:15:40 am »
Guys, dude is from T2.

Just saying.

Pages: 1 ... 2107 2108 2109 [2110] 2111 2112 2113 ... 3616