You are an idiot
They’re “picky little details” in the same sense that whether or not Iraq actually had WMD stockpiles was a “picky little detail”.
Crackhead? Who said he was a crackhead? Did you call the Murfeesboro police? Is there new info?
First available object? We don’t have any cinder blocks stacked outside. Maybe he had one on his key chain?
There was a big 
at the end of the story. I do see the difference. I thought it was a slightly ironic coincidence that after getting into a huge discussion about two crimes with very outrageous details I would be involved with one so mudane. I couldn’t resist a sarcastic shot at the skeptics so I took it. Just for fun.
You can’t be serious. After all my posts isn’t it clear that I do understand and that wasn’t the point at all?
You’re actually someone who helps demonstrate it. We had a perfectly reasonable and fairly lengthy conversation about how or if my story related to the thread topic even though you think the story is fiction and I don’t. I think that shows what I’ve been saying. Whether the story was truth or fiction doesn’t matter. It wasn’t a cite it was an example. Believing it or not doesn’t change the point I was attempting to make. You and Baal doubted me and expressed it in reasonable polite terms and that was fine. When a couple of posters tread on the edge of calling me a fucking liar or gullible idiot I didn’t see any reason to take their crap and brought it to the appropriate forum.
See! I knew someone would stop by to be a doubting Thomas. :mad:
Perhaps you could explain to me why this is necessarily true. Several posters have said this but I think they’re all wrong.
My story , true or not, was not offered as proof of anything or as a cite for anything. It was offered as an example to illustrate the simple and rather obvious point that a wounded criminal can still pose a threat. emcee and I had a perfectly reasonable and civil conversation about how the story may or may not relate to the thread topic. All the while we had it he thought the story was fiction and I didn’t. I think that conversation demonstrates that thpoint up for discussion was what mattered rather than the factual accuracy , or lack of it, of my story.
An example illustrating a point can be either true or hypothetical and the point remains valid. Nobody’s going to claim that a wounded criminal can’t possibly hurt someone after they’ve been wounded and have anyone take that seriously. People got hung up on the details of the story and the controversy of it’s truthfulness when that really didn’t matter.
The late night cleaning lady even volunteered for a bit of rape but he declined. She’s a very disappointed 78 year old.
I didn’t in part because the friend who told me the story didn’t feel he had anything to prove to strangers on a discussion board and offered no more details. Among other reasons.
Heh. Feel free, I won’t sue.
I don’t know that he was necessarily a crackhead. I didn’t really mean for that to be taken literally, they’re just often the people who pull this sort of thing.
By “first available object”, I mean something he found laying around nearby, rather than something like a hammer or a tire iron which he (or she, I guess) would have had to leave their home with intending on breaking into your store. Which explains the game plan no more thought out than “Grab the first thing I come to and run”.
I admit I misinterpreted the :D.
My debating the relevance of your story wasn’t to say that if it was relevant it wouldn’t matter if it was true or not. I was just saying that its believability problems were compounded by the fact that it didn’t seem applicable to the situation.
Would you be good enough to demonstrate how you might have used that story as a hypothetical in the Great Debates thread?
If we assume the story is made-up (as pretty much everyone here does), can you present your story as a fictitious, but useful anecdote.
If you could re-type that same short post, but present it as something you had just made up on the spot, that would really help me understand your POV.
Would you present it exactly the same as the original?? Would you still begin it with, “Here’s a relevant tale”?
I know. I was only playin’ when I questioned you. It’s interesting though how upon hearing a story with sparse details our minds tend to fill in the blanks. Nothing wrong with that human tendency but I think it’s important to keep it in mind and separate what was actually said and the* possible * implications from what we filled in ourselves. I honestly think that’s part of the problem in the story I related. I know the sparse details are outrageous but I was surprised at how many people drew conclusions about why it didn’t make sense based on so little and often on what they filled in.
Watching the video I tend to think the guy was in the store and planned it. He saw the TV sitting close to the door. I think he had the cinder block with him in his
car. When he came through the door he turned immediately to the TV without looking around. The TV could not be seen from the outside so if he knew it was sitting there it’s because he’d been in.
on a side note. It’s rather odd to watch a video of some crook breaking into a place you work at 5 or 6 days a week. The MF word came up several times.
Cool. That’s makes it all the more rewarding to me.
I see. I hope you see that I didn’t expect posters to accept it as true unquestioningly. I’m not surprised by their doubt. I still maintain the point was and should have remained the focus of the discussion. Whether the reader considered it true , somewhat true, or complete fiction as hypothetical would be, doesn’t affect the point being made. Those insisting that if it isn’t true it’s not relevant are simply wrong on that point IMO.
What I meant was the discussion of the relevant point could have continued regardless of who thought it was true, somewhat true, or a complete fabrication. If I think it’s true and everyone else thinks it’s not doesn’t change the point at all. You and emcee were perfectly reasonable and polite in expressing your doubts and I appreciate it.
I hope you can understand that when posters started inferring that I was either a liar or a gullible idiot I got a little testy. I don’t care if that’s what they think, but if someone feels compelled to express it then,…here we are. Have enough sense to say “I really find that hard to believe but of course I can’t be sure.” That’s a reasonable opinion I can understand and respect.
Here’s where I’ll admit to contributing to things breaking down because I questioned the degree of people’s doubt and what they called logic.
That was not the point of the story that was relevant to that thread. The point was , a wounded robber can still be dangerous.
“Strange stuff happens” relates to the degree of doubt when hearing an outrageous story. Skepticism is reasonable. Pissing on something you can’t be sure about is unreasonable and just being a dick.
Tao had already dismissed it in another post when he called it “badly written fiction”
I think people have too much faith in google. considering how few specifics there were in my story, no names, dates, or geography, it seems somewhat ridiculous to form an opinion it’s “bullshit fantasy” based on finding nothing. You were reasonable and smart enough to ask for more specifics.
I see your point. Since Snowboard made an attempt to verify then his dismissal wasn’t based entirely on that one paragraph. A valid point. I submit his expectations were unrealistic and since he found nothing and failed to ask for more specifics his dismissal was based on that one paragraph and sparse information. {my words in your quote}
The facebook guy is my personal friend and it was his brother. I made a judgment based on the reliability of the source as I know it. We know news media can be mistaken or slanted but we tend to give it more weight when judging believability. That’s reasonable. I based my belief on years of knowing this persons character. I could be mistaken but it’s not unreasonable for me to accept his word based on my long term knowledge of his character is it?
What difference does that make? I didn’t ask for details so that I could verify because I believed most of it was accurate. Does it matter? Could the Oklahoma incident happen in almost any major city in the US? If we read it was in Des Moines Iowa would we be more prone to doubt? I didn’t need to verify it for myself and when I went back to fulfill your understandable request for details he declined.
I’ll respond to your more recent post tomorrow.
From my perspective the story smells like low grade bullshit from the first line to the last with a liberal sprinkling of tired action movie cliches. Now, having said this, you are welcome to berate me all you want for being a cynical jackass, but at some point you really need to ask yourself if your dander is up because people will not believe YOU personally, as distinct from them not believing the details of your incredibly improbable story. I’'m sure IRL you are a fine fellow who pays his debts and word is normally solid gold, but your decision to merge your personal integrity and veracity with this tall tale was ill advised.
There are many things in life that are unusual and/or improbable, but true. If I told you Henry Kissinger signed my birth certificate would you believe me? Could I win a bar bet with that question? The problem with the HoJo story is that it adds layer after layer after layer of improbable actions and scenarios, and ends with the literally insane scenario of a wounded, bleeding man with the world’s best compartmentalization skills deciding that the best course of action is to rape two women vs fleeing the scene. At that point it’s not even good bullshit, it’s just white noise nonsense.
Why you are insistent on investing your personal reputation for honesty and integrity in this stupid story is a mystery. People make up improbable stories all the time. It’s human nature to be fabulists, it’s practically in our bones. You need to get over your feelings, the chances of the story being true as related are fantastically small.
Yes I think I could present it exactly the same. I might start it with “just imagine this scenario”.
I think the point is so simple the easiest thing would have been to just say, it’s fairly obvious that a wounded criminal can still be a threat and it’s hard to say when a civilian scared and angry and running on adrenaline, feels completely safe. If you fail to defend yourself or others and an innocent gets hurt you might have to live with the fact that you had your chance to finish it and didn’t.
Nevertheless, even though I almost bailed, I am intrigued by the thought process of skepticism and dismissal. It’s interesting how people read that little blurb and assume things not mentioned and fill in the blanks and then declare. “That’s just too far fetched” They also seem to assume I’m defending the truthfulness of the story when I haven’t, or that I expect people to accept it as offered which I don’t. Odd. I’ll elaborate on that aspect in my response to **astro **
But let’s say I was smart enough to hear this story from my friend and anticipate that if I posted it as true it would be a big distraction from the thread as people questioned and ridiculed it. {I wasn’t that smart} I might edit it a bit and and keep only the relevant parts that made my point.
Just imagine this scenario as a hypothetical.
Two armed robbers break into a place after hours not knowing some employees are there late. They find two female employees in one room and tie them up. The manager, looking for the girls, catches a glimpse of the robbers and retrieves the the pistol he has in the office. When the robbers see the manager approaching they open fire and he runs. They are looking for him not realizing he is armed and when they come into the room where he is hiding he sees an opportunity and opens fire. One robber is wounded and the 2nd realizing they are facing an victim able to shoot back, flees. The wounded robber, hurt and disoriented, goes back the way he came and ends up in the room where the two girls are and is cornered there. The manager calls the police and waits not daring to take action for fear of the girls being hurt. Sadly, the robber does harm the girls before he is captured and the manager has to deal with the regret that he didn’t finish off the robber when he had the chance which resulted in someone he was trying to protect being hurt.
Lacking the details that people seemed to find so outrageous does it seem more believable? Do you think it applies? I certainly think it does. The major difference being one manager knew he was dealing with a conscious and dangerous person and it seems likely the other was dealing with a downed man.
I’m not sure how much you’ve read but you clearly missed the several times when I said I didn’t expect anyone to accept it as true unquestioningly.
What annoyed me and now intrigues me is people making assumptions about a short tale with very few details and thinking their assumptions and lousy reasoning was somehow logical and reasonable.
I know on a message board and in real life people tell tall tales. If I read or hear something outrageous my reflex is to acknowledge that it may or may not be true. Outrageous things do happen and sometimes truth is stranger than fiction so while I retain a healthy skepticism with outrageous stories. I acknowledge that “it’s possible” I find an “unlikely but possible” stance much more reasonable than a knee jerk dismissal based on very few details.
Personal integrity and veracity? Someone else said that and it demonstrates another intriguing form of flawed thinking. How exactly have I merged my personal veracity and integrity with it? I said a trusted friend told me this story as true? That’s a fact. That’s exactly how I presented it. A story I was told. I acknowledged people’s skepticism as completely understandable. I acknowledged that it might be embellished and I couldn’t be exactly sure how or if it happened. I only claimed I tended to believe it’s based in fact because I trust my source. That’s also true and completely reasonable. So please tell me exactly how I have harmed my integrity and veracity with it? Please explain in reasonable terms or have the integrity and veracity to admit your thinking is flawed and you’re wrong.
Ive already dealt with this.
Another poster sarcastically said
Maybe he/she thought this was clever ridicule. It merely displays more flawed thinking.
My response
We’re beginning a discussion in a category {civilians exchanging fire with criminals} where one would expect to find more outrageous stories than normal right? I understand people saying the source is not established as reliable and the information is unconfirmed. That’s true. What baffles me is that while discussing a true story that is bizarre and outrageous people insist mine is to bizarre and to outrageous. layer upon layer? It was pretty dam short.
What exactly were the layers that are so incredibly unbelievable?
Criminals breaking into a place coming through a skylight? Why? Crooks have gotten in through air vents. how much imagination does it take to find entering through a skylight plausible.
There were employees there after hours that the crooks weren’t aware of until they broke in? How hard is that to imagine?
The manager has a gun? One poster found this highly unlikely? Why? When you work in a neighborhood that has a disturbing crime rate that’s the choice you make. What will I do to protect myself, my property and my employees? Implausible? Hardly.
The robbers had fully automatic weapons. I already admitted I found that hard to believe myself and accepted it could be embellishment. Let’s say it felt like it to a scared shitless manager being fired upon or the story was embellished by the family.
The crooks, not realizing he is armed, look for him?
He sees an opening and fires wounding one? One flees? Where are these layers you’re talking about?
What’s been interesting is seeing how people tend to assume things not mentioned and fill in details not present in the story rather than notice they don’t know and ask. They just seem to assume what their mind filled in is true. Interesting phenomenon.
In the other thread emcee assumed the wounded criminal kept his gun even though I hadn’t said one way or the other. Then he said he couldn’t think of any logical reason why he would drop it. really? How about being shot. Isn’t that a plausible reason?
I mention this because you’ve done this same thing that several others have done. In explaining the part you find the most unbelievable you assume the wounded perp chose to stay when he had a clear choice to leave. Who said that? Where is that information about his choices in the story? Is it plausible that wounded and disoriented he wound up back where the girls were and then had no opportunity to flee without being worried about the guy who just shot him?
Why would a wounded man rape someone and compound his crime? I don’t know. Maybe that’s exaggeration too. Maybe he tried to use them as hostages and they wouldn’t stop crying and screaming and he lost it. Maybe he was high? Maybe he was a multiple offender and knew he was going away for a long time anyway? I don’t know. I know it’s bizarre and hard to understand. I also understand that you can’t always expect reasonable and logical behavior from criminals , especially wounded ones. It’s hard to understand but given the category I’d maintain it’s unlikely but possible and more information is required.
So I reject your assessment as a personal opinion not grounded in sound reasoning.
I’ve already dealt with the issue of my reputation for honesty and integrity. I’ve done nothing to impugn either one since I never insisted the story was true or demanded anyone accept it without proof. I’ve never even claimed I accepted it whole heartedly without question. Now I’d like you to demonstrate your honesty and integrity by admitting you were mistaken on this point.
I’ve stayed in the thread not to insist the story is true but to point out the bad reasoning faulty thinking used in it’s dismissal. Maybe that’s to subtle a point for folks so they keep reading it as “He still insists it’s true and can’t understand our doubt” I’m not responsible for that type of misreading.
I’d like to invite and challenge any one of several posters who claimed that if the story isn’t true the point isn’t made , exactly how and why that is true.
Of course I know an anecdotal story is not evidence for anything. I did not offer it as a factual cite but only an example. My claim is that a story can be either true or a hypothetical and the point it attempts to make is perfectly valid. Several people can discuss the story and the relevant point with varying degrees of belief or doubt from complete acceptance to complete dismissal and the point remains valid.
We have fables that make a moral point. Is the moral point invalid because it’s accepted as a fable rather than a true story? We have lots of religious myths that some accept in varying degrees, literally true, based in fact, while others dismiss them completely. Is the moral point of those stories less relevant? People who believe literally, in part, or not at all, understand the point and can discuss it’s usefulness and relevance.
So, I’m curious. Those of you who made those claims, {you know who you are} please explain why your point is true.
Made up bullshit provides no fruitful basis for debate.
False/unproven/hypothetical scenarios can be useful as a talking point, sure, but they need to be plausible. The problem with YOUR story is that it was improbable, as astro carefully explained above.
Real stories of course, need not be “plausible,” as truth is stranger than fiction at times. Your story isn’t verifiably real, and yes Veronica, that matters.
Can we make shit up to prove our point too?
The voices in my head say yes.
If you think it illustrates a point have at it. Sarcasm without content won’t cut it though.