[Jane Sherwood]

2.1 I'm more of an airhead than Jane!

I think I only even went that high because I said people who commit sex crimes deserved much worse than simple imprisonment.

Which they do, the sick twisted bastards...

"Some people are born with an urge to jump from high places."
Personally, I define that more along the lines of, "Some people are naturally bolder and greater risk-takers than others." but that's just me. For all I know it could mean, "Some people are naturally self-destructive." It could even mean both.

[Cyzyk]

I never said he wasn’t oppressive I said their were worst dictators then him throughout history.

If Hussein was oppressive, mentioning him in a conversation about oppression is quite relevant. However, you claim mentioning him here was irrelevant, which definately implies a claim that he was not oppressive. Therefore, you are attempting to minimize his reputation as an oppressive dictator.

I was quoting Vesuvius, obviously you have a mental or optical problem, It was clearly directed at him, please keep your noise out of our discussion.

Or are you the kind of person that goes into a Public Park and starts talking to people at random?

Since you don't know the difference between the superlative and the comparative, I would hazard to guess you don't know what a forum is either. A park is a place to walk, and a forum is "a public meeting place for open discussion." I am engaging in open discussion. You are trying to gloss over the fact you made a baseless statement by attacking me. That doesn't cut it. You're wrong from beginning to end, while I have neither a "mental (n)or optical problem".

Also- smiley faces are not a form of communication. Where I grew up, we used words. A little drawing of a man rolling his eyes is not an argument, it is simply an admission of ignorance or an inability to interact with the verbal universe we call "Teh Intranets".

[David-kyo]

A flamewar is starting to break out. Cool.
Where's my popcorn?

[SimeSublime]

I was quoting Vesuvius, obviously you have a mental or optical problem, It was clearly directed at him, please keep your noise out of our discussion.

Sorry, but I'll have to agree with Cyzyk here. This is a public board, so he has the right to talk. Quite simply, he saw your comment before Vesuvius and took the liberty of answering for him in the interests of moving the discussion along. If Vesuvius disagreed, he could then flesh out his answer when he next came online. No harm done. What I am concerned about is the unneeded flaming. Accusing somebody of having a mental problem in a debate is about as mature as calling them an idiot-face or some such rot. Let's try to refrain from the personal insults.

[Deucaon]

I know Palpatine isn't a real person. I said his name because he's oppresive. So what if he doesn't exist. A good number of people come to these forums (myself included) to talk about Star Wars.

I mentioned Hussein because he was an oppresive dictator. Would it suit you best if I said Mao Tse Dong? Well, hey, I guess I have 999 more oppresive dictators to go.

I didn't name a thousand dictators worse than Hussein because that would take a lot of space on the forums and time on my part to type out.

Anything else?

So why didnt you mention Mao in the first place? Why did you, in comparison, mention a small time thug?

[Gobbler]

Getting into Jyhads over extremely trivial things

Look who's talking... *reads through your signature again*... yeah, just look...

Edit: And you're still Icicle Boy FTW!

This post has been edited by Gobbler: 29 December 2006 - 05:14 AM

[David-kyo]

I just had to create this topic...

So why didnt you mention Mao in the first place? Why did you, in comparison, mention a small time thug?

The heck you say about Hussein being a small time thug! Do you think that the slaughtering of ten thousands and creating an unbearable life for the rest is just some ridiculous little ploy, slightly bigger form of bullying people around?

This post has been edited by David-kyo: 29 December 2006 - 08:51 AM

[Vesuvius]

So why didnt you mention Mao in the first place? Why did you, in comparison, mention a small time thug?

I didn't mention Mao in the first place because oppresive dictators do not loftily float on my conscience. If you are enamored with Mao, then by all means, read his little red book.

As for the "small time thug" comment, look who's being put to death in just a few hours for it. Again, I mentioned Hussein because he was an oppresive dictator.

It's like naming actors. Jude Law, Robin Williams, Ewan Mcgregor. But then someone has a problem that I didn't name Brad Pitt. Big deal. They are all actors none the less.

Hence, the character (Palps) and people (Saddam, Kim, Hitler) that I named were all oppresive dictators. Fictional, famous, or not.

This post has been edited by Vesuvius: 29 December 2006 - 01:10 PM

[Icey]

I left it there lovingly, Gobbler. Because we now have enough of backstory to get naked under a blanket and have montage flashbacks.

[Gobbler]

Oh, so it's official now? Lovely.

[Jane Sherwood]

Awwwww...so can we declare you two the official forum slash "OTP"?

[Icey]

YES!

[Jane Sherwood]

DELIGHT!

[civilian_number_two]

I got the same score as Jane, but possibly for different questions. Liberal airhead, I suppose. I think though the question didn't test enough variables, or test any of those variables enough.

Also knowing what it was measuring certainly biased it. For instance, the question about dividing people into categories of weak and strong is obviously NOT a simple comment on how you can create infinite dualities when comparing people, like tall and short, bald and hairy. The purpose of the question and the assumptions that will be drawn from your response are obvious. Given that the test will return a result based on those obvious assumptions, there's no point in trying to waffle after the fact.

As to the business of whether smilies ought to be allowed in online arguments, I don't see why not. This is teh intranet, and they're a part of the common discourse. Of course they're about as valid as banging one's shoe on the table, but that doesn't mean they should be banned.

[Deucaon]

I didn't mention Mao in the first place because oppresive dictators do not loftily float on my conscience. If you are enamored with Mao, then by all means, read his little red book.

It was you who first mentioned Mao, not me. Pull your head out of your ass.