Nice round of readers last time, so let's try and keep this going, I hope rule two entertains as much as rule one
Remember; these are rules of my life, not in general and only towards things that affect my life personally (and should you apply these rules to your own life, they should be only with whatever directly interacts with you, not in general).
Rule #2 is a tie for me. I know which one I usually go with, but the other one also has a more resounding worth that's stuck with me for the longest time. The current one I'm referring to is a lot younger, but a lot more core to my once pessimistic outlook on a life. I'm not some optimistic upbeat with the capacity to tolerate everything and everyone. I'm not a social creature, extending himself in every direction to make sure I touch you in some way or another (the forums might dictate otherwise by my activity, but I assure you, I like my sanity and sometimes my solidarity [especially when I'm writing these sort of dialogues]). Rule two stems from the question: "Why?" and has probably the biggest clashes of arguments and in the end: grudges. I have fumbled a few times with it and now I no longer talk to these people. Once I strike you off, I cut off all communication, I don't talk to you, read your e-mails nor do I even mention your name.
Of course, to get there, you'd have to be unbelievably malicious.
Rule 2: Is simple. You cannot hate anyone entirely and by that branches the idea that you can never know someone entirely. The issue with rule 2 is that you let people off too easily or justify their actions for them, which enables them. In most cases it works quite well for me. By agreeing that you can never hate someone's entirety, you account that they are a multifaceted human and thus you've only encountered a part of them you don't like or enjoy being around.
This is increasingly hard on the internet, especially with a lot of stupidity going around (no offense). But if you combine rule 2 with the question "Why?", you unknot the intentions, motivations and views of people into something that's sound, rational or properly emotionally-based. That's not to say that what they're doing is right nor even acceptable, but it helps you understand why they do what they do and thus perhaps help you in accepting a part of them while rejecting another. Acknowledging they're human is obvious, too obvious, but in the midst of our emotions, assessment of the person as we first get in contact with them, somehow we forget just how human they are and how human they can or would be under the right circumstances, maybe they're acting this way because they've forgotten how human you are? You ever see someone, just for a moment, you try to feel what they're feeling or you look at them as someone with a thought-process and their gestures, expressions and facial changes are all in their mind, morphing at incredible speeds. That person is thinking just like I am, etc. etc.? It's a scary feeling when I do it for too long.
I've been doing this since high-school and it's helped me a lot through the joking racism where an olive-skinned guy was the closest to an African-American they've seen in real life [(despite knowing I'm Egyptian, Ecuadorian, Italian, Swiss and American) just to clarify, they know I'm not black, but everyone else was pale-ass white. Whiter than snow!]. When I realize that they're not saying these words to hurt me, but because they don't know how to properly talk to me (given that my French was rather poor and I was a very comedic guy [since I couldn't express myself as clearly as I can in English] and because I would enable them by joking punch them and insult them back, it became an established way of "bonding". Granted they got more out of it than me, but it helped me be friends with many social circles I would typically never be a part of and it helped me get through three high-schools of varying private-levels (public school to prestigious private to sports-school semi-private schools).
I've hated the actions people have done or some of their personality that rubs me the wrong way, but I would realize that these people aren't who they are if they didn't think it worked in one way or another (and perhaps it does and creates a confident circle of friends that allows this sort of behavior or perhaps it doesn't, but it isn't my place to correct them with my own faults [Rule 3]). In this particular situation, this person is acting this way, but how would he be in another situation. Would I respect him or her if she acted differently in a similarly social occasion amongst different people, scenario, environment? If I hate them, I dismiss them and I miss out on an opportunity to meet them, their associates or their way of life and I don't get to express a diverse way of seeing the world, seeing my peers or learning something more from someone I would typically dismiss. Why waste a chance at something more? If the person turns out to be even more with what you aren't pleased with? Walking back is quicker than moving forward with the person; just turn around and walk back.
I too feel your pain as the whitest person in Florida. Truly it's harrowing to go out every day and, at best turn a slightly darker shade for a few days until I revert to paley pale.
J/k racism sucks and it takes too much effort better to just hate on stupid people.
I thought I could screw up your advertising post but I was 4 minutes too slow. I haven't slept since yesterday ish.
WOOLOLOOO! sorry i have a problem i can't stop posting that. on bf3 day of release i would constantly type AMERICA every time i capped a point and it's turned my brain to mush ._.
I'll be up at like 3:30am tomorrow your time :\ I'll catch you guys the day after. I caught a cold on the first.. cold day of the fall last friday so I pretty much played bf3, watched crappy movies and slept all weekend. oh well, i get to wake up and have breakfast before GSL for once. woo :D
bonus- i've passed the point of coherency but i've been laddering all day. due to circumstances that are entirely my fault (tanking my mmr by quitting every single zvz out of spite and exhaustion during ladder lock), i requalified as platinum. i am working on a platinum and below zvz build that involves massing spine crawlers and lings to break a natural. it's like when nestea did it except with 15-30 spine crawlers and a lot more giggling
The relevance of post counts died somewhere around last year, if not earlier. However, I would like to take this opportunity to embrace my guardian icon. Thank you for pointing that out marttorn.
I think people who value the number or pay attention to it more than the content have equally nothing to say than the very person they deem saying nothing but only posting to raise their number.
On November 01 2011 04:14 Probe1 wrote: The relevance of post counts died somewhere around last year, if not earlier. However, I would like to take this opportunity to embrace my guardian icon. Thank you for pointing that out marttorn.
It died along with rock, hip-hop and everything else I don't like nowadays! Humbug!
On November 01 2011 04:20 ComaDose wrote: Can you never love someone completely because you can only know parts of them?
Yes. But you know enough of the parts you encountered to accept them as a whole and thus can be with them regardless of what imperfections arise (they only emphasize the perfections you enjoy and live for).
My favorite posters have been the pm from a lurker with one post and an account from early 2010 thanking me for a LR thread or something. That makes me smile inside.
There's a lot of nice people on TL.
That doesn't even make sense i'm so tired i'm going to go now.
On November 01 2011 04:20 ComaDose wrote: Can you never love someone completely because you can only know parts of them?
Yes. But you know enough of the parts you encountered to accept them as a whole and thus can be with them regardless of what imperfections arise (they only emphasize the perfections you enjoy and live for).
that's nice. but sad. Your rule goes along well with an attitude I often have that I guess could be summed up with a little dialog like: Someone:"I hate well known person X hes always so lame and negative stuff" me: "I don't know person X so I don't hate them."
On November 01 2011 04:20 ComaDose wrote: Can you never love someone completely because you can only know parts of them?
Yes. But you know enough of the parts you encountered to accept them as a whole and thus can be with them regardless of what imperfections arise (they only emphasize the perfections you enjoy and live for).
that's nice. but sad. Your rule goes along well with an attitude I often have that I guess could be summed up with a little dialog like: Someone:"I hate well known person X hes always so lame and negative stuff" me: "I don't know person X so I don't hate them."
Yes, it is unfortunate for me.
That's essentially what it is, but more along the lines of: "I don't hate person X, but I dislike what he's doing, done or did. I wish I could know him further to understand why he would do such things and thus, learn more about people in general and better suit myself for interactions that work in our favours rather than starting off on the wrong foot"
On November 01 2011 04:20 ComaDose wrote: Can you never love someone completely because you can only know parts of them?
Yes. But you know enough of the parts you encountered to accept them as a whole and thus can be with them regardless of what imperfections arise (they only emphasize the perfections you enjoy and live for).
that's nice. but sad. Your rule goes along well with an attitude I often have that I guess could be summed up with a little dialog like: Someone:"I hate well known person X hes always so lame and negative stuff" me: "I don't know person X so I don't hate them."
Same here.
I was looking for ways to put it but somehow I didn't find the words lol...so simple yet so hard for me *sigh*
On November 01 2011 04:20 ComaDose wrote: Can you never love someone completely because you can only know parts of them?
Yes. But you know enough of the parts you encountered to accept them as a whole and thus can be with them regardless of what imperfections arise (they only emphasize the perfections you enjoy and live for).
that's nice. but sad. Your rule goes along well with an attitude I often have that I guess could be summed up with a little dialog like: Someone:"I hate well known person X hes always so lame and negative stuff" me: "I don't know person X so I don't hate them."
Same here.
I was looking for ways to put it but somehow I didn't find the words lol...so simple yet so hard for me *sigh*
The issue with rule 2 is that you let people off too easily or justify their actions for them, which enables them.
I think this is something very dangerous. I believe there are people who are just bad people; selfish, self serving, hateful. Maybe they do not deserve to be "hated", but sometimes people do not deserve the benefit of the doubt.
The issue with rule 2 is that you let people off too easily or justify their actions for them, which enables them.
I think this is something very dangerous. I believe there are people who are just bad people; selfish, self serving, hateful. Maybe they do not deserve to be "hated", but sometimes people do not deserve the benefit of the doubt.
Also, I'm very impressed with the Torte, they must have made some significant software upgrades. It's even got a backstory now!
What backstory haha?
Like I said, it's easier to walk back then walking forward with someone. If you learn what kind of person he is, then walking back, you'll know what to look out for when you meet other people like him and thus be able to respond to him properly ;3
The underlining law is that you should give everyone a chance.
Pretty interesting rule (i like it more than the last lol)...although I don't like how you call them rules. I don't really know what you should call them, but rule just seems to imply something that they're not. the word rule just rubs me as something that is restrictive and is usually something that could be annoying to follow. maybe it is just me
On November 01 2011 04:06 Lexpar wrote: Whats the point for having a second post below the first just for self advertising and a cat picture?
i think it is a not-so-subtle ploy to plug his twitter account and make the plug more noticeable. the post count inflation is another good theory because there were like 4 instances of double posting in his last blog lol
On November 01 2011 05:28 Porcelain wrote: Have you never been seriously wronged by someone?
Too many times. I never speak to or about them.
It's very heavy carrying hate about someone who probably cares less about you than you care [to feel] about them.
I resent everything they did or have done, but I don't hate them. I just don't care about them and I feel better each day I am separated away from them.
On November 01 2011 05:25 Whole wrote: Pretty interesting rule (i like it more than the last lol)...although I don't like how you call them rules. I don't really know what you should call them, but rule just seems to imply something that they're not. the word rule just rubs me as something that is restrictive and is usually something that could be annoying to follow. maybe it is just me
On November 01 2011 04:06 Lexpar wrote: Whats the point for having a second post below the first just for self advertising and a cat picture?
i think it is a not-so-subtle ploy to plug his twitter account and make the plug more noticeable. the post count inflation is another good theory because there were like 4 instances of double posting in his last blog lol
I am more interested in replying, then worrying about my post count. I have 100,000 posts on another forum that I used to be active in for 4 years. That's why I never care about the post count anymore, I've already hit a number that I don't feel the need to reach ever again.
Yes, I am plugging my Twitter account with other people Twitter accounts that I equally enjoy. I'm still new to Twitter and social networks, I don't have facebook or anything else, so this is my way of trying to become more connected (I feel like I miss a lot of opportunities because I don't have a social networking account).
In regards to your dislike of the word "rule": It stems from my parents who would use these lines to stamp out any arguments or explanations that they deemed terrible. They were rules because it silenced me up and prevented me from following-through with poor thinking.
I call them rules because if I follow those rules, I avoid pitfalls in life and lead, what I believe, is a better way of life and thinking. Rules are generally viewed as restrictive, but they are also used as safety precautions.
On November 01 2011 05:28 Porcelain wrote: Have you never been seriously wronged by someone?
Too many times. I never speak to or about them.
It's very heavy carrying hate about someone who probably cares less about you than you care [to feel] about them.
I resent everything they did or have done, but I don't hate them. I just don't care about them and I feel better each day I am separated away from them.
Hate is pretty subjective then, I suppose.
Because to me, that essentially is what defines the act of hating someone.
On November 01 2011 05:28 Porcelain wrote: Have you never been seriously wronged by someone?
Too many times. I never speak to or about them.
It's very heavy carrying hate about someone who probably cares less about you than you care [to feel] about them.
I resent everything they did or have done, but I don't hate them. I just don't care about them and I feel better each day I am separated away from them.
Hate is pretty subjective then, I suppose.
Because to me, that essentially is what defines the act of hating someone.
I never hate the person as a whole, only what they done and it may stem from my own discouraged feeling that I don't understand why they did it or worse: how could they do it.
I never think of these people because they are mostly not thinking about me (rule 3). To hate them is to give them worth, to ignore them is to assume they are as meaningless as they should be. When it comes down to weighing if their good is more or equal to their bad, you must realize which you are feeling right now and if it's tolerant.
Otherwise, the answer is clear and so is the decision to forget about them.
On November 01 2011 05:28 Porcelain wrote: Have you never been seriously wronged by someone?
Too many times. I never speak to or about them.
It's very heavy carrying hate about someone who probably cares less about you than you care [to feel] about them.
I resent everything they did or have done, but I don't hate them. I just don't care about them and I feel better each day I am separated away from them.
Hate is pretty subjective then, I suppose.
Because to me, that essentially is what defines the act of hating someone.
I never hate the person as a whole, only what they done and it may stem from my own discouraged feeling that I don't understand why they did it or worse: how could they do it.
I never think of these people because they are mostly not thinking about me (rule 3). To hate them is to give them worth, to ignore them is to assume they are as meaningless as they should be. When it comes down to weighing if their good is more or equal to their bad, you must realize which you are feeling right now and if it's tolerant.
Otherwise, the answer is clear and so is the decision to forget about them.
Hm, well said. I expect a new "rule" daily. Mkay?
Don't disappoint me.
I guess I've let hate (and the emotions associated with it) really drag me down during certain points in my life. It's a lot of negativity to carry such strong feelings.
No, no new rule tomorrow. I actually don't like writing daily blogs because I feel forced and it doesn't come out the way I want. I don't like this blog either because it lacks something I can't identify.
Yes, I'm going to say it's okay to dislike someone. Not hate because it's so strong, but to dislike someone for all that they've done and not because of who they are as an entirety (because you don't know them as well as you would have liked [if you did, maybe you would have known in time to avoid the issues that arose, maybe, I don't know]).
Hate, regret, etc. They all tie us down and just have us thinking of the past. If I look back on my road, I can see its unpaved, full of potholes and large rocks.
i can never get torte's respect. i think it's just one of those things, maybe i have a inferiority complex. Perhaps i could break the ice with a little of that great Brazilian jazz crooner, Antonio Carlos Jobim
On November 01 2011 06:01 Roe wrote: i can never get torte's respect. i think it's just one of those things, maybe i have a inferiority complex. Perhaps i could break the ice with a little of that great Brazilian jazz crooner, Antonio Carlos Jobim http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3d8y4HxW8Eg
My respect is similar to everyone else's. By default, I respect you because we are in a common area that we enjoy and agree upon (and since you aren't banned, you hold the same ideals of civility that allows you to post freely here).
What makes you say I don't respect you as a person?
The issue with rule 2 is that you let people off too easily or justify their actions for them, which enables them.
I think this is something very dangerous. I believe there are people who are just bad people; selfish, self serving, hateful. Maybe they do not deserve to be "hated", but sometimes people do not deserve the benefit of the doubt.
I know people like this. They will drag you down with them eventually. You want to help them or, err, give them a chance, but all they really want is to fuel their self-deception. The litmus test here is to stop playing along.
I also don't hate people but for slightly different reasons. As the cliche` goes "life is short" and I really don't have the time nor energy to cultivate any animosity or ill feelings for an extended period of time.
Grudges only hurt those around you and bring you nothing except bitterness. If someone lets you down, well don't emotionally invest in them. There is a difference between actively ignoring someone and simply not valuing them.
Example: One of my best friends from school recently got married, as did another close friend. Their respective wives had a tiff a couple of years ago and now refuse to be in the same building. They actively maintain the rage. Whether they hate each other is debatable but they certainly don't want to sort things out. All this does it ruin any gathering we try and organise because we have to choose between friends. I personally don't get along with one of them but I value my friendship with her husband more than any ill feeling I have towards her.
I personally believe that in the strive for individual freedom that exemplifies the 21st century people have lost the ability to be truly tolerant. They equate tolerating someone with simply letting them do whatever they want. To me tolerance is the ability to see past people's faults and see how their behaviour actually affects your life. Simply ignoring there shortfalls does nothing unless you are gaining something in return. Tolerance is not only actively seeking to understand but also seeking to justify your relationship.
I know this is a wall of text and may not make much sense. I just feel like your definition is far more negative than it needs to be. Hate, ill-feeling, animosity, such feelings require action to be sustained. I prefer to focus on the positives in people if only to make the effort in maintaining necessary relationships easier.
I feel like we are saying the same thing but with slightly different emphasis. I can't quite put my finger on it but your approach seems to be very negative. By defining people as inherently flawed you are looking for excuses for those flaws. By doing so you choose a defeatist position. To me the flaws are generally irrelevant unless they affect you more negatively than what you gain from the relationship. Flaws are what make us human (you hint at this), to me they are the spice of life. The challenge and reward in embracing life. This is not a bad thing, it is sign that you can yet grow. Disagreements are an opportunity to test your humanity, what do their actions say about you. What does your response say about you? To me these are far more important than the actions of others. Relationships are deliciously contradictory. They are the source of most pain but also most joy; frustration and awe; ungratefullness and respect. I revel in the difficulty of relating.
Again I reply to your blogs with a wall of text As mentioned we seem to be saying the same thing. I just can't help but feel that your point is unnecessarily pessimistic.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/KGxpV.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/7SVSb.gif)
