No more circumcision in SF?

[One Brow]

Judging from your answer I think you misunderstood what I was asking in this context.

Thak you r for claifying.

I was asking whether you thought physical means where the only way to control someone,

No.

and I was asking if you thought it was still noble to control someone if it was done in order to protect someone else?

It could be.

If you felt one word was more or less venomous than another, it's because of your own predisposition, not my words.

Words have their own history of usage, the cultural connotations that come with them. They don't belong to me, but to the culture as a whole. I know there can be a variety of reasons for a person to be ignorant of such connotations, but most of them are relatively rare.

 

[Hantlers]

I just wanted to say p***

 

[One Brow]

You don't expect me to buy this ridiculous story do you?

I have very few expectations regarding you.

There was absolutely no reason for you to bring up trolls unless you were using it to describe me, especially after you tacitly agreed with Spout's use of it.

A tacit agreement requires that I take some action to approve of the use of the word, not that I merely refuse to dispute it. Tacit means "active, unspoken agreement", not "agreement from silence".

Trolls (to me) are the ultimate example of people who don't say what they really mean, typically, but post anything they can think of to get an emotional response. What you post is consistent enough that it doesn't qualify as "anything they can think of", and not quite outlandish enough for me to claim Poe's law. When I say that even trolls reveals clues to their beliefs by their choice of words, I was using the ultimate example of people who were deliberately ignoring what they believed, and saying that even then you can often glean insights into their beliefs from their word choices. If that applies to them, how can it help but apply to posters who post to express themsleves?

 

[LogGrad98]

It is actually kind of fun watching a troll fight.

 

[One Brow]

It is actually kind of fun watching a troll fight.

Wouldn't that require trolls?

 

[moevillini]

...I said "Even trolls reveal core beliefs by the words they choose and posts they respond to when trolling." That meant since it is true of trolls, it would also be true of those not trolling...

OK, now this is where I start to get confused. How can this be true of non-trolls? If they're non-trolls, they're not trolling, are they? So how can you characterize how "they respond when trolling" if they're not trolling? I just don't get it.

I'm still waiting for an explanation...

It is actually kind of fun watching a troll fight.

apparently there's a whole collection of these, though I'm not sure anyone around here is old enough...

by the way, trolls appear to be without any sort of gender identifying organs, so why are they generally referred to as male?

at any rate, since they're lacking the organ, I guess at least they don't have to worry about the circumcision question.

 

[One Brow]

I'm still waiting for an explanation...

I trhink my last answer to Millsapa covered it already.

 

[LogGrad98]

Maybe they don't lack the organ, maybe it is just in a different place.

 

[TroutBum]

Maybe they don't lack the organ, maybe it is just in a different place.

You mean, like Vinyl the Dick Nose?

 

[PearlWatson]

If you felt one word was more or less venomous than another, it's because of your own predisposition, not my words.

Words have their own history of usage, the cultural connotations that come with them. They don't belong to me, but to the culture as a whole. I know there can be a variety of reasons for a person to be ignorant of such connotations, but most of them are relatively rare.

I'm glad you came to this conclusion on your own after I used your own words against you. Our culture rarely sees the control of women as noble.

If you felt one motive was more or less noble than another, it's because of your own predisposition, not my words.

 

[PearlWatson]

A tacit agreement requires that I take some action to approve of the use of the word, not that I merely refuse to dispute it. Tacit means "active, unspoken agreement", not "agreement from silence".

You weren't silent. Your reply to his post was the action.

 

[One Brow]

I'm glad you came to this conclusion on your own after I used your own words against you. Our culture rarely sees the control of women as noble.

It's a good thing for your point that the choice of words can make an ignoble motive into a noble one, just as the choice of words can mean using one steeped in judgement instead of one not steeped in jusdgement.

Wait, that made no sense at all. I guess your effort was completely pointless. Using different words to describe an ignoble motive is still ignoble. People can disagree over whether a motive is noble or not, but that doesn't change the motive.