LoL .. calm down bro... my post wasn't meant to be directed at any particular sex. A bad man can be just as toxic to any girl.
Lamar Odom!
- Thread starter Jaymz
- Start date
addictionary
Well-Known Member
WTF is this TMZ ****? Why not someone bash these assholes' skulls up to date?
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
NAOS
Well-Known Member
I'm sure, guis. I hear you talk about those things all teh time.
done
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
Dear NAOS,
Yeah, as we've already established I do find that process amazing, but that doesn't mean I'm in favor of the way every person uses it. How about you? Are you offended that these TMZ capitalist pigs are exploiting the intrinsic value of yet another limited resource? Does it worry you that we might soon run out gossip because they are using up more than their share, or that the byproducts of this process might eventually cause our coastal cities to slip into the sea?
Joe
NAOS
Well-Known Member
Joe, I just wanted you to expose the fact that it isn't the process itself that inspires you, it's some particularly shiny aspect of it. It was a moral argument all along, anyway. So, here we are: good vs. bad, Apple vs. TMZ.
(And, as it turns out, my position can't be boxed-in by that caricature that you just tossed out.)
As far as this miraculous process is concerned: you can't have the "good" without the "bad"... both come from the same birth. And neither can you do anything about the moralizers and fanboys... they'll be around, barking, after the christenings.
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
I have no idea what you believe you've just proven. And on top of that I never said you could have the good without the bad. Nice try. Back into your box.
NAOS
Well-Known Member
You're right: you only ever said wildly enthusiastic and lopsided things (which you later tried to characterize as a "slight overstatement"). ...It seems like you might be ready to downgrade them further?
Nearly laughed my face off when you, jazzfanz's great economic regurgitator, told me to get back into my "box".
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
I guess I shouldn’t have responded to what I thought was your lighthearted jab through alt because it has led us into the same feedback loop that has become so unpleasant and familiar every time we communicate. Your characterizations in the post above are completely inaccurate.
I have no need to convince you to see the world in the way I do because I have no doubt that for you the world works in the ways you describe. The differences in our realities are because, among other things, it’s obvious that we have a fundamental disconnect in the way we see things. I will not characterize how I believe you see the world because I’m certain I would inadvertently get some nuance that is important to you wrong, but I will tell you that I believe man has a fundamental right to exploit the world for his own use. I'll also add that unlike many people who see things this way my basis is not religion.
I recently read a book called The Four Agreements which surprised me with the eloquent way it described how I believe the world works. There's a lot more to it than this, but one of the important points is that every one of us are living our own private dream. When we are awake this dream is linear, but it is nevertheless still a dream, and that dream is our reality. It does not, and will never, match the realities that our fellow dreamers are experiencing. As a result, I believe that you have the right to see the world in the way you do. It does not bother me that you don’t think I have the right to see the world in the way I do, or that you feel like it’s necessary to insult my intelligence in order to make your points because I don't need to listen to your rants. Technology has blessed me with an ignore button and as a result I can usually avoid becoming engaged. That's what I meant by “back in your box.”
Goodbye.