[David-kyo]

Brilliant. Their specialty will probably be the lobster.



(Shit that was dark.)

This post has been edited by David-kyo: 14 April 2009 - 01:04 PM

[ftr]

Wasn't her infamous line regarding kebabs?

[Game Over]

I had made a promise a few hundred posts ago not to talk about this again, but apparently I have proven myself to be unreliable in such case.

All I'm asking for is a little tact. I'm not the only person who came to the same conclusion, if you hadn't noticed.

On these forums??

I am not a spam bot, thanks for asking.




Alright, I give in; you win; I feel bad about exploting a woman's death for commical purposes. Happy now?






*obviously lying*

[barend]

You don't need confetti or parties to celebrate, dipshit.

It's not much of a celebration then.

I was making an amusing remark, and you respond by calling me dipshit? Congratulations on being were born without a sense of humour.

Thanks for bringing Hitler up, too. It killed your argument before it had a chance to germinate.

Again, it was just a witty remark, you're an idiot. THere's no serious argument here.

How about because Jade Goody != Hitler. Unless she committed a genocide that I'm unaware of.

First of all, using someone as an expamle to undermine a remark is by no means a comparison to the person about whom the conversation started.

Secondly, Hitler's didn't commit Genocide, he attempted genocide. He failed to commit it by leaving survivors. So neither of them have successfully wiped out an entire race they didn't like. So I guess they have that in common, but that wasn't my point.

[Patch]

I like you Barend, though I have a feeling you'd have some choice words on some of my posts.

[civilian_number_two]

Silly Barend: genocide is "the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group."

You don't need to kill every last one of them to be accused of genocide. Killing or dislocating, removing children to another group, etc, specifically due to race or religion or nationality, is genocide.

Also, apparently this Jade Goody was racist, but likely she hadn't committed any genocide. Agreed.

[Patch]

Not agreed. Her racist remarks no doubt damaged a community desperately trying to break free of a stereotype. Her harsh words and cruel use of language destroyed some of the spirit of these people.

Yes ladies and gentlemen, Jade Goody commited spirit genocide.

[joshofalltrades]

Witty remarks generally require wit. Dry humor does not translate over the internet.

If you were trying to make a point in regards to the whole Hitler thing, you failed by obfuscation. Either make your arguments clear or satirize the opposing view perfectly, because if there's even a hint of doubt as to your frivolity people will assume you're being serious.

I apologize for resorting to ad hominem. I'll make an attempt to be less abrasive on serious topics.

[joshofalltrades]

Also, apparently this Jade Goody was racist, but likely she hadn't committed any genocide. Agreed.

Which was the point I was making.

[Game Over]

Can't we all just get along?


(Oh, yeah; Happy Columbine day)

[barend]

Silly Barend: genocide is "the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group."

You don't need to kill every last one of them to be accused of genocide. Killing or dislocating, removing children to another group, etc, specifically due to race or religion or nationality, is genocide.

So if I kill two people of the same race I've technically committed genocide?

That's a bit easy.

Also, apparently this Jade Goody was racist, but likely she hadn't committed any genocide. Agreed.

No, but she managed to broadcast her manifesto (Chavifesto) on national (apparently international) television.

Witty remarks generally require wit.

I have an ample supply.

Dry humor does not translate over the internet.

gist-quote:

You: You're celebrating her death
Me: Well, we're not wearing funny hats or inflating balloons

I don't know... That seemed pretty clear.

If you were trying to make a point in regards to the whole Hitler thing, you failed by obfuscation.

I did no such thing.

gist-quote:

You: Celebrating a persons death makes you a jerk
Me: Even a tyrants?

You assumed I was making a bigger point. That's hardly my fault.

Either make your arguments clear or satirize the opposing view perfectly, because if there's even a hint of doubt as to your frivolity people will assume you're being serious.

My argument was clear. Very clear.

Some chav on some reality show that didn't broadcast here dying is not our national news. Especially in a country (Australia) that only ever tells us how many Australians died in an international plane crash or natural disaster. a point that always disgusts me.
All those people that are just numbers, because they didn't mouth off on some show designed to parade humanities most pathetic and mediocre. She is of no interest. Her death is only a tragedy to those who cared about her. To the rest of us she was just some cow famous for being common.

I apologize for resorting to ad hominem. I'll make an attempt to be less abrasive on serious topics.

This is not a serious topic. Serious topics are in the 'debate club' everything else is open for pisstakery. To resort to insulting someone over this is just sad. Especially as you ask for tact from the people you insult. Absurdity ensues.

[Patch]

Technically killing one person means genocide...

[Gobbler]

I think it's the intent that counts.

[joshofalltrades]

A lot of stuff

You obviously didn't do as good of a job as you thought. I assumed you were totally serious, especially about making bigger points. The subtext of your post regarding Hitler was that my statement was somehow false because there are people's deaths that we should be celebrating.

If you came into a topic titled, "The Top 10 People I'm Glad Were Murdered" and said, "Um, hey, I don't think we should be glad about any murders," and I replied with, "So you wouldn't murder Hitler?," it wouldn't matter how many people were joke-posting in the topic, because whether that was my intent or not I did just open that can of worms. Particularly if the first post in the topic is a seemingly serious, "GOOD RIDDANCE, PHIL HARTMAN!"

The party hats, confetti etc. was taken as a literal, "If we're not having a party, we're not really celebrating." There was no indication of sarcasm there and so you came across as a dick.

And as far as tact goes, taken seriously your post was pretty dipshitty, and upon your claim that it was meant to be taken humorously I apologized. I even apologized for something I shouldn't have, since I wasn't actually making an ad hominem attack (which would have been the case if I'd said, "Your argument sucks because you're a dipshit," and not, "Your argument sucks because of this and this, also you're a dipshit,"). Regardless, I wasn't making the case that we have to respect every person all the time.

gist-quote:

You don't have to admire them or wish you had spent time hanging around them when they were alive. You just need to at least give the appearance that you're not happy they're dead.

And as long as you don't mind looking like an ass, I suppose you (not literally you, barend) have the right to oppose this viewpoint because this is TEH INTARWEBS!

This post has been edited by joshofalltrades: 22 April 2009 - 09:40 AM

[AdamM]

Somehow, josh is managing to be right on most points, and still make barend look like the bigger man.