Yeah, I know. That’s why we put justice in the hands of people who have read one sentence in a news report.
Yeah, that whole “I could see it in his eyes” thing is what I was making fun of, and it’s just as ridiculous on a second reading, being about 99% crap and all.
Whether his criminal history was enough to give you the jitters, or whether you were picking up, dimly, on a whole range of behaviors that would have made a averagely-perceptive person even more nervous, or whether you’re merely indulging in some self-serving hindsight, the vacant expression in the eyes of your students is much less likely to be a reflection of their character than of your charisma. In any event, sloppy thinking (another example: what the hell is "dean’s-list caliber? There’s dean’s-list, and not dean’s-list, which is the point) is lamentable but no excuse for promoting pseudoscience with jellolike anecdotes like yours.
I like Danceswithcats and all but I have to admit, this twisting of username made me laugh out loud.
I can’t take credit, i’m afraid; i think i picked it up from The King of Soup in a recent thread.
It’s rather serendipitous, i think, and perfectly appropriate.
Personally I think it’s a cheap shot, even in the pit, to alter someone’s username. Maybe it’s just me, but I think that there are certain protocols of behavior that ought to be adhered to unconditionally, for the sake of maintaining a classy discourse even when we disagree with each other. I think peoples’ usernames are one of those.
Ah, so when he said ‘this is completely untrue’ he wasn’t denying it, he was - something or other.
So, each of the assertions made are true, but I am the one misrepresenting. Gotcha.
No - again, that would be you.
No, you have already stated that I raised some actual issues. Now that I have begun to explore those issues, you are raving so as to distract from that fact.
So you were unsuccessful in attempting to distract from the OP? Pity.
I can’t take credit for that - see the other posts in the thread, from the race-baiters. But you are correct - it didn’t work.
Regards,
Shodan
Call it crap if you want, but the guy’s face looked like someone wearing a mask.
Couldn’t have. I didn’t find out about that until I read it in the newspaper - after he had been arrested for the eight murders.
If you want to call it that. I interpret it as pretending to be human. Something was just wrong about the guy, and I wasn’t the only one who noticed it. He acted perfectly calm and polite and rational the entire time, but several of us picked up on the fact that it was an act and something was very wrong with him. Did anybody predict he’d go and kill eight people? No. But there was a general feeling that one should avoid making him angry.
There is a difference between a bored expression and the one this guy wore. He made an effort to ask questions, to look interested, to say the kind of things normal people say, and every time it just seemed wrong. The inflection in the voice was wrong, the smile was pasted on as if for a picture.
If you don’t have a dean, you can’t have a dean’s list. Saying ‘honor student’ makes it sound rather like high school, not post-secondary. His GPA was high, and no I don’t remember it to 3 decimal places, but it was definitely between 3.50 and 4.00 on a 4 point scale.
Think what you want. I can’t stop you. There is a term for people who don’t have emotions like normal people do, and they really exist. I may not be a doctor, and I may not be qualified to diagnose someone as a sociopath, but you certainly are not going to shake my opinion that this particular killer is a monster, and that he will kill again without any kind of remorse if he would ever be let out of prison.
You really are priceless. The fact that you think the OP actually had some sort of point says all we need to know about you.
To morons like you, race-baiting is, by definition, any attempt to discuss race that you don’t happen to agree with. It’s pretty clear who the real race-baiters are. It’s people like you and the OP.
I think you, like him, are just trolling now, so i’m done with you. Have fun with your masturbation.
Yep, it’s just you. Get the fuck over it.
The fact that you think the pun lacks class, but have nothing to say about the actual OP, says much about your priorities, and about what class means to you.
All the OP is is a link to a news article and a brief description. Maybe it was intended to stir up a bickering debate - I don’t know. But we’re talking about two sentences here. No, I don’t have much to say about them.
Now I know why I generally stay out of the pit. I hate seeing the snippy, rude side of posters who I otherwise like.
Thanks. It’s crap.
Funny thing. When a guy wears a mask, usually his eyes are the only thing that can express emotion, not the only thing that doesn’t. Don’t fret: I don’t grade certain posters based on consistency. But about the fact that you knew about his criminal past:
After that, certainly, yet well before you started spouting off here about your prescient but apparently useless (or, alternatively, criminally negligent) knowledge of character divination through eyeball-gazing.
I’ll admit I’m not as familiar with the nuances of audience boredom as you probably are. Still, if the face was that far off the norm, maybe you’re the one who lacked sufficient interest. But it’s good to know that you really think he would have made the dean’s list, had there been an actual dean or an actual list. I was afraid you were just guessing.
Don’t feel bad. Real doctors aren’t allowed to diagnose sociopathy based on the kind of crap you’re spouting, either.
One more time: this is kind of easy to do in hindsight, now isn’t it?
Silly me.
I assumed that if you had gotten far enough down the page to comment on my name pun, you might also have come across, say, post#15, in which the OP expands on his “argument.” And that you were interested enough to actually have an opinion on the subject of the thread.
You mean in contrast to someone who comes into a thread solely to question someone else’s use of protocol in a forum that, by his own admission, he generally avoids?
I do have a snippy, rude side. I’m sure there are a bunch of people who think i’m an asshole. I accept that; hell, i own it. And the OP of this thread has, by his constant race-baiting and trolling in the Pit, become a trigger for it. Maybe i should be a better person and just ignore him; perhaps i’ll try that in future. God knows, i’ve tried pretending that he actually has genuine arguments to make, but he consistently demonstrates a complete unwillingness to engage in honest debate. If you don’t spend time in the Pit, you can be excused for not knowing this, but you now know why your comment struck me as a case of misdirected priorities.
Fair enough.
I can see how you’d take my comment as being arrogant. I guess there needs to be a place here where courtesy can be suspended and posters are free to unleash whatever they want to - for the sake of free speech and everything. (No, that’s not sarcasm, either, I actually mean it.)
Oh, blah. Your comments (arrogant indeed, as it happens) serve merely to assert your own moral superiority over those you label “snippy.” The best thing that can be said about this choice (given the context) is, “Oops!.”
Holy shit, this is the stupidest argument I’ve ever participated in. You’re right. You have me all figured out. It was all an elaborate scheme to assert my moral superiority over everyone else. Good work, Dr. House, you’ve solved the puzzle.
Argent Towers, my friend, everybody does have you all figured out, this is at best the third-stupidest argument you have ever participated in, and there’s really no point in discussing your moral superiority any more.
Better to have just said “Oops.” Huh?
Inasmuch as it sailed neatly over, or perhaps through the heads of mhendo and his sidekick, Bouillon Boy, the OP had nary a trace of mention regarding race. Not a bit. Race isn’t spoken of at all until post #6, which comes not from me, but the one who levels the accusation of racebaiting. The OP was and is about one of a group of fellows who claimed to have been ill served by the justice system after they committed an act of assault, who then proceeds to reoffend in similar fashion.
Next up from our pair of stuporheroes will be the charge that I only start Pit threads about a given topic. An attempt at proving this, statistically, was undertaken by the Boy Wonder recently, only to amply demonstrate his dismal abilities at mathematics. Furthermore, it is no different than the query heard on these boards re: why did a Moderator do x in my thread and not in others which were similar? the answer being, I read several online newspapers daily, as well as some summary sites, and if an individual or situation seems Pit-worthy, I may start a thread on that topic. The Moderators don’t read every single post, and I don’t read every available news source.
Just the same, in an effort at fairness, I’ve considered situations in which a group of young men were charged with a crime, great public attention was attracted to the matter, and one of the accused reoffended in a similar manner within a few years after the original case. The closest I can come to a situation which fits a few of those parameters won’t be pleasing to the Dysenteric Duo, as the charges were unfounded, the plaintiff a liar, the prosecutor a grandstander with his own agenda, and none of the innocent defendants have had any problems with the law since. If I’ve missed an applicable case, they will no doubt bring it to our attention, but I’m not going to hold my breath.
Thank you, Shodan for pointing out that those who are so quick to accuse others of having an agenda, seem to have one of their own, much as they protest to the contrary. Fear not, they will return, refreshed, in a short while, ready to cast new aspersions upon any and all who don’t drink their flavor of Kool Aid.
I know i’m going to regret (again) dealing with you as if you were an honest person, but let’s give it another whirl. I’ll keep it extremely simple, since walking and chewing gum at the same time seems to be beyond your everyday abilities.
Do you believe that it’s possible that a person can be both:
(a) a reoffending thug,
and
(b) ill served by the justice system?
If no, why not? If yes, then what’s the point of your thread?
And, twelve hours later, don’t you wish yet again you hadn’t? Sure, you can win your argument if you can get the truth, but you keep trying to get the truth by squeezing an empty vessel that never had any truth in it. For Pete’s sake, toss it aside and move on.
The fact that a loud and ignorant bigot hasn’t yet been silenced isn’t your fault, mhendo, it’s just the downside of free speech. The upside is that the dunce will, as I said, be forgotten as fast as his descendants can manage it, and that no one will own up to being his grandson or granddaughter. 'Cause that’s what happens to bigoted morons on the wrong side of racial and judicial progress: they just keep on talking, in smaller and smaller circles, sure that they’re too clever to be caught, until eventually even amateur provocateurs get sick of the association, and then they fade out, shouting inane gibberish about the Baltimore Fire Department.
Try to emulate the Dunce’s descendants – make every effort to forget him. He’s a big embarrassment to them, and only a small one to the rest of us. Let his ghost choose between obloquy and oblivion, and let yourself move on to more important things.
Really?
Well, let’s review.
Where is the evidence that shows the defendants had a specific intent to commit murder – that they planned on killing?
You’re right, i’m a slow learner.
The problem with morons like this is that, if you refuse to engage them, they believe that they’ve proven their point.
On the other hand, if you do engage them, they still suffer the same delusion. Probably better to avoid the hassle, especially given that reason will never convince them.