We are taking steps to handle this … problem. It might be for the best if everyone simply drops the subject.
[little girl voice on]Finagle, you’re funny![/little girl voice]
(Um, UncleBeer, does that mean you don’t want anymore posts in this thread? I’m not quite understanding what you’re saying.)
Well, it’s clearly been a long time since your last logic course, because none of your posts in this thread have shown any understanding of it.
“Ad hominem” means that you attempt to invalidate your opponent’s argument by attacking the person rather than the argument. Rather like your “bitch” comment in your first response. Which, incidentally, would have been forwarded to a moderator if I hadn’t been equally guilty in calling someone a “putz” yesterday (in a somewhat more deserved situation).
As for your second point, you are familiar with the term a “religious argument”? It stands for any argument in which neither side is going to change their mind because the subject of the argument is not subject to resolution based on known facts. OS wars are a religious argument. So are opinions about gun control and abortion. They tend to get very heated. They’re also not going to go away just because Demo shakes his finger and goes “Now, now”.
I stand by my original post. You don’t want to get flamed, even mildly, don’t post in the pit. Don’t use an inflammatory topic heading.
And if what you’re really complaining about is people flaming each other in MPSIMS, strain your limited linguistic abilities enough to express yourself clearly in the OP.
Yeah, I know. Attacking a [person’s character, like by putting words in their mouth?
Heh, you were going to forward that to a moderator, but you didn’t because you called someone else a name?
Wow, you really are a bitch!
I don’t really have a preference. My advice though, which you are, of course, free to ignore without the slightest repercussion, is to move on shortly. This thing has been more than beaten to death over the last half dozen threads.
Windows sux.
heeheehee
:runs away and slams door behind him:
:comes back out “Crap! That was the closet”:
:runs away and slams OTHER door behind him:
It’s all about Windows Bob Motherfuckers!
Ah, I didn’t realize. Sorry, I guess I should have searched, or something. You can go ahead and wrap this one up if you please.
Finagle, I don’t really care to argue with you any more. It’s become boring already.
Like I said, my advice was merely that, advice. I just think this thread may serve as a temptation to the disputants, who’ve been asked in no uncertain terms to stop their sniping. Let’s let the BBQ mods make the final determination on this thread, okay?
I fucked Bill Gates’ mother too.
unf?
By a strange coincidence, “boring” is the same excuse my 6 year old niece uses when she’s losing at Chutes and Ladders.
unf is just another way to spell “fun”!
Sorry, I just had to add something:
Oh, I see, you should expect to get flamed if you post in the Pit, yet you were ready to take Demo’s “bitch” comment to the mods? Let me add another term to your philosophical lexicon: cognitive dissonance. Or maybe just hypocrisy. Of course, I’m sure you’ll argue that there are degrees of flaming, and Demo’s flame went over the line. To which I’d argue back: stop being such a pussy.
No, no, it was nine unfs. Just one unf means that someone needs viagra, more iron in one’s diet, or something.
Well, maybe I’m just an old fogey, but “Don’t put words in my mouth, bitch” is way over the line for what had, up to that time, been a totally rancourless discussion of the OP.
Enlighten me. Has “bitch” become devalued in usage among the college age crowd so that it’s not considered extremely offensive?
I’m not really that thin-skinned, but if I’m going to be insulted, I’d rather that it was done with some degree of wit and creativity.
BTW, I may be being a hypocrite, but it’s hard to judge, not being impartial and all. But “cognitive dissonance” is not really appropriate. From quick reading, (it’s been 25 years since undergrad psych class), cognitive dissonance is (simplified) the resolution of conflict by a rationalization of a change in behavior or belief. For example, if I were losing an argument, I might say to myself, “Boy, this is boring. I’m out of here.”
I fucked Finagle’s mom, too.
And I’m sure you’re the kind of uncle to force her to keep playing until you win the game, too. Ya can’t just let it go, can you?
Sorry, when I mean it’s boring, I mean it’s boring. I’m not in defense mode, really.
Would you be happy if I just said “You win”, or something to that affect? Again, I’m sorry, but arguing with you just doesn’t seem like a worthwile cause to me anymore.
Look, it’s obvious that I think you’re way off base on this particular topic and it’s obvious that you feel the same about me. It’s also obvious that we are not going to come to a resolution on this or any of the above issues. I was trying to drop the whole thing to avoid channeling even more negative energy into it, but I guess that was hopeless.
If you want to continue the debate, I’m sure these fine people don’t have to be subjected to it anymore. Our argument has gone far off topic and, it seems, the topic itself has been covered before anyway. My e-mail is below if you care to drag this deeper.
Demo, it would appear that even mentioning a particular OS, or indeed corporate executives involved in making said OS, is simply a losing proposition around here (and many other places online, for that matter). You couldn’t get flamed faster if you covered yourself in napalm and struck a match.
Strange. I always thought cognitive dissonance referred to the conflict that arose when there was a divergence between what one believed and the way in which one acted. Hence the more negative term “dissonance” being accented, rather than the more positive “resolution” that your definition favors. It’s been a long time for me, too, though. My bad.