Either my sarcasmometer has been broken yet again, or you need a hug more than anyone I’ve ever met. I… cant decide.
I’m also split on the issue. Either he really needs that help I suggested, or he is an incredibly silly person. And I’ve never noticed that about him before.
Oh yes, I need professional help. A useless venemous little monster needs only professional help into the grave. You do not redeem the irredeemable. You destroy it. But as I disapprove of suicide, I can only hope for an accident to befall me before I do too much more damage to the world.
But regardless, I humbly apologize and beg forgiveness for allowing my the perverted grotesquerie of my thoughts to . Please accept my apologies. I will consider refraining from starting or replying to threads following this day, since, although atonement or repayment is impossible for my corrupted self, I should avoid making further reponses.
But are you enjoying your time as the Martyr? That is what is important.
Actually, I will admit, I hate the flip semi-serious statements to seek help that always pop up in pit threads too.
Careful though, if you take this too seriously, you will make **Liberal ** jealous that you are the pretender for the throne of Drama-Queen. Keep your humor about it, like it appears you are doing.
Jim
I think maybe he’s drunk. Or trolling. Or deeply dysfunctional. Hell, I don’t know what to do with posts like that.
A drunk dysfunctional troll? The horror!
Revtim:
Well, I guess I’ll buck the trend and say I have no problem with type of post. We see where the poster got the info, and should realize that it has a higher potential for being wrong than other better cited posts. I’d rather see more posts with more information (that can be properly judged for accuracy) than to miss some info because someone is afraid to post something because they can find no other cite besides remembering something from conversation or perhaps not remembering where something was read.
I agree. If it’s not something like medical or legal advice, there’s not much harm in speculation that is prominently labeled as such. It also can be interesting if somebody debunks the speculation.
For the 10th time, it’s not so much about the speculating, it’s about the way he reacted when called on it. If he had just said: Yeah, maybe I got it wrong, then this would never have happened. I think all of us have posted incorrect info in GQ at one time or another. But when called on it, the proper thing to do is to back away, not get all defensive and agro.
For the 10th time, it’s not so much about the speculating, it’s about the way he reacted when called on it. If he had just said: Yeah, maybe I got it wrong, then this would never have happened. I think all of us have posted incorrect info in GQ at one time or another. But when called on it, the proper thing to do is to back away, not get all defensive and agro.
This is from the first post in this thread:
In this GQ thread, smiling bandit is the first responder to the OP, posting a claim which is frankly extra-ordinary, and cites “A friend who is usually right”.
When asked by me to provide better cites than that, he states he wasn’t making the claim, only reporting it.
I deplore this sort of response in GQ, by smiling bandit or by anyone else. Extra-ordinary claims offered up as fact, and a total shirking of responsibility for what one posted. To me, it runs counter to what GQ at the SDMB stands for.
Please note these key words in the OP:
Oh yes, I need professional help. A useless venemous little monster needs only professional help into the grave. You do not redeem the irredeemable. You destroy it. But as I disapprove of suicide, I can only hope for an accident to befall me before I do too much more damage to the world.
But regardless, I humbly apologize and beg forgiveness for allowing my the perverted grotesquerie of my thoughts to . Please accept my apologies. I will consider refraining from starting or replying to threads following this day, since, although atonement or repayment is impossible for my corrupted self, I should avoid making further reponses.
Hope you feel better in the morning.
Right, and . smiling bandit did the first thing and did the second thing. If he had only done the first thing, we wouldn’t be having this pit thread.
I always appreciate Qadgop the Mercotan ’s input on GQ threads, especially on topics related to medicine, physiology, et cetera.
Don’t forget the cheese :smack:
From the original post, it seems that both things are being complained about.
Bricker
October 3, 2007, 10:00pm
76
“And” means that both are necessary. I am absolutely certain that if he had said, in response to the first critiques, “Sorry about that – I don’t actually have a good source for this claim, and I shouldn’t have offered it,” there would be no Pit thread.
Bricker:
“And” means that both are necessary. I am absolutely certain that if he had said, in response to the first critiques, “Sorry about that – I don’t actually have a good source for this claim, and I shouldn’t have offered it,” there would be no Pit thread.
Actually, just acknowledging the lack of a decent source would have been sufficient, as I’ve tried to make clear several times.
Bricker:
“And” means that both are necessary. I am absolutely certain that if he had said, in response to the first critiques, “Sorry about that – I don’t actually have a good source for this claim, and I shouldn’t have offered it,” there would be no Pit thread.
That wasn’t clear to me. Anyway, look at the title of this thread.
It looks to me like that was pretty clear from the first post.
This from someone who recently caused a GQ thread to be closed because of a complete lack of interest in factual discussion.
Thread link.
Moderator note on closing the thead.
