I never said it was about me. Katy started pointing fingers at me and I refuted her pointing.Dan Rowden wrote:Katy and Elizabeth,
Why do women always find a way to make things, especially so-called dramas, about them?
St. Valentine
-
Elizabeth Isabelle
- Posts: 3771
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:35 am
-
Elizabeth Isabelle
- Posts: 3771
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:35 am
It was about something David said, which got misunderstood, which was why you decided it was about you, packed up your website and went home? Yeah, why do "women" always make so-called "dramas" about them?Dan Rowden wrote:Why do women always find a way to make things, especially so-called dramas, about them? It's ridiculous. The "drama", such that it is, is entirely about a notion David expressed and the reaction it got in certain quarters.
I think we're talking about different "this". If you're talking about your position regarding Quinn's statement, I agree that you're not getting pushed around there.Ok, so you're going to insist this is Cloudy's doing?
I don't think I should spell things out further, Nat. I'll probably say much more than I should, and end up getting in trouble for it. It must be a feminine thing or something.
I like cheese pizza. Not as good as pineapple, or bbq or peperoni, but still... it's tasty, and it's cheaper!Dan Rowden wrote:Nat,
Depends on which positions, exactly, you're talking about. There's nothing reasonable, for example, about your position on cheeze pizzas. They are disgusting. Everyone knows this.
-Katy
- Trevor Salyzyn
- Posts: 2420
- Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 12:52 pm
- Location: Canada
Uni,
It was very kind of you to dig deeply into the problem that David presented to point out how unethical you think the killing of old people is. I don't think anyone else could have figured that out without your assistance. You really cut to the heart of the matter with that picture of Adolf Hitler. After seeing that image, I no longer had any illusions as to whether or not there was anything esoteric going on: David is clearly homicidal.It wasn't misunderstood. It was understood properly, and David was asked to confirm this. He did.
-
Elizabeth Isabelle
- Posts: 3771
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:35 am
Oh, my gosh! An actual, true and pure, completely unadulterated and undisguised ad hominem! Usually people stick these things inside a longer blurb that is actually on topic - but this one is pure! Textbook pure, actually.Unidian wrote:Trevor, were you formerly known as "mookestink?" If so, weren't you in the nuthouse a while back? Just curious.
Yeah, I try for perfection. But let's see what his answer is.Oh, my gosh! An actual, true and pure, completely unadulterated and undisguised ad hominem! Usually people stick these things inside a longer blurb that is actually on topic - but this one is pure! Textbook pure, actually.
I live in a tub.
- Dan Rowden
- Posts: 5740
- Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
- Contact:
-
Elizabeth Isabelle
- Posts: 3771
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:35 am
- Dan Rowden
- Posts: 5740
- Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
- Contact:
- Trevor Salyzyn
- Posts: 2420
- Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 12:52 pm
- Location: Canada
Uni,
But for the time being, let's stay on topic. You think DQ is homicidal. Are you sure that his intention, when advocating the murder of the elderly, was what you thought it was?
For instance, when I read what he said, I thought to myself: "ok, this is obviously unethical on so many levels. I'm not going to agree with it, and nobody is really ever going to agree with something like this. From what I know of David, he is certainly aware of this fact. Now... why did he bring it up?"
Sher,
Dan, thanks for the defense, by the way. But I'm quite sure Uni is the only person here who thinks that a history of mental illness is an argument against a philosophic point.
Yes, I was mookestink. But no, I've never been in a "nuthouse". I have, however, been commited to a hospital. Psychiatry certainly has changed a lot in the last hundred and fifty years! Maybe you should read up on it, before you start spouting something ignorant. In fact, if you want an introduction to what mental illness actually is like, it could even make the topic for an interesting thread. I am more than willing to share my experiences....Trevor, were you formerly known as "mookestink?" If so, weren't you in the nuthouse a while back? Just curious.
But for the time being, let's stay on topic. You think DQ is homicidal. Are you sure that his intention, when advocating the murder of the elderly, was what you thought it was?
For instance, when I read what he said, I thought to myself: "ok, this is obviously unethical on so many levels. I'm not going to agree with it, and nobody is really ever going to agree with something like this. From what I know of David, he is certainly aware of this fact. Now... why did he bring it up?"
Sher,
Yeah, there was me, and there was mr mooky. I can't remember if I was the nice one or not. All I remember is having a few discussions with you about life, depression, medications, and the like in the chat.
There were two mookies at TPG. I could never keep them straight. One of them was a real nice guy.
Dan, thanks for the defense, by the way. But I'm quite sure Uni is the only person here who thinks that a history of mental illness is an argument against a philosophic point.
-
Elizabeth Isabelle
- Posts: 3771
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:35 am
My first reaction (as documented somewhere on these threads) was - I'll even quote myself - that he was thinking "yanno this is illogical" - then people kept making a bigger and bigger deal out of it, so I upgraded it to literary device, and as it turned out, it was originally as I originally thought - pretty much an off-hand comment. Now it's days later and has cascaded into an unbelivable amount of nonsense. The sheer ridiculousness of the amount and duration of attention is baffling is only expanded by the scope of other things this one offhanded comment has spilled over onto. This is silly.Trevor Salyzyn wrote:For instance, when I read what he said, I thought to myself: "ok, this is obviously unethical on so many levels. I'm not going to agree with it, and nobody is really ever going to agree with something like this. From what I know of David, he is certainly aware of this fact. Now... why did he bring it up?"
- David Quinn
- Posts: 5708
- Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
- Location: Australia
- Contact:
It's mainly been an exercise in demonizing me. That comment was just the sort of thing they were looking for to give vent to all the resentment and frustration they have with this place.
It is the privilege of the emotional and the compassionate to engage in the blackest of emotions and the vilest of hate campaigns. Like George Bush, they automatically have right on their side, so how could their behaviour be anything but just? Hide the blackness behind a few jokes and bouts of laughter, what is the problem?
-
It is the privilege of the emotional and the compassionate to engage in the blackest of emotions and the vilest of hate campaigns. Like George Bush, they automatically have right on their side, so how could their behaviour be anything but just? Hide the blackness behind a few jokes and bouts of laughter, what is the problem?
-
-
Elizabeth Isabelle
- Posts: 3771
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:35 am
- Dan Rowden
- Posts: 5740
- Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
- Contact:
Ethics is Hard!
Wait, are you saying I shouldn't be killing old people?
That can't be right. Now I'm really confused.
{frowny face}
That can't be right. Now I'm really confused.
{frowny face}
-
Elizabeth Isabelle
- Posts: 3771
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:35 am
Re: Ethics is Hard!
Oh, no, this wasn't you was it? That started about the time we were talking about eliminating unnecessary people... Mall rats are pretty unnecessary.DHodges wrote:Wait, are you saying I shouldn't be killing old people?
That can't be right. Now I'm really confused.
{frowny face}