|
On October 17 2012 03:08 tMomiji wrote:
Honestly...I'm prepared to get a lot of hate for this, but, I agree here. And no it's not because I'm biased against Stephano - let me explain. Nobody *knew* if he was joking or not. Like someone said before, BlinG's expression says it all. This could have been potentially very, very serious. When someone makes a claim of child abuse, joking or not, people are *obligated* to take it seriously. It's similar to a bomb threat in that regard. -remembering three days in a row of faked bomb threats at school because kids knew it would have to be taken seriously and would get us out of class- There are some things that are simply taboo...and honestly I think EG did the right thing. I can see where people are coming from, saying that it's just a joke and that Stephano is not a bad person, and these are both true. However this is simply the way society works - there are some things that are taken seriously and *have* to be taken seriously because if you start ignoring them you run the risk of ignoring a case where it's true...that's just the way things *are*. ...Sorry.
Honestly ... that's just the american way of doing it.
Seems more like a clash of cultures than anything else ...
|
Close this god damn awful thread already.
|
On October 16 2012 21:14 Snusmumriken wrote:
Im not a native english speaker and yes I make typos sometimes. I dont know if youre generally a fan of ad hominems but I still like to think that you have more intellectual honesty than that. At any rate theres certainly a difference between making and iff-list and what I wrote as his claimed to be both sufficient and necessary whereas I only claimed mine to be sufficient. Your word to the contrary, the elipssis did not turn my material implication into a double implication. Again the context is that I said you can't actually make some kind of dummies-guide to morality using lists, so again I dont believe that you can make an exhaustive list no more than I believe the meaning of a word necessarily comes from a definition ('game'). It is at any rate what I meant, and I don't want to have to keep defending a position I don't actually hold.
I didn't employ an ad hominem fallacy anywhere. I never said "you are this, you did that, therefore your argument is wrong." It would have been impossible, because as I said before, one could barely find a claim that you were making anywhere.
I literally just demonstrated why it doesn't matter what form of list you use; the logic is the same, no matter whether you use a biconditional. As I said, you were nitpicking about nothing, because it doesn't matter whether the list is a conjunction of positive necessary conditions or a disjunction of negative sufficient conditions. They're both Morality for Dummies lists. They logically serve the same purpose. Telling me "certainly there's a difference" is a stubbornness I won't entertain any further.
|
On October 17 2012 03:35 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2012 21:14 Snusmumriken wrote:
Im not a native english speaker and yes I make typos sometimes. I dont know if youre generally a fan of ad hominems but I still like to think that you have more intellectual honesty than that. At any rate theres certainly a difference between making and iff-list and what I wrote as his claimed to be both sufficient and necessary whereas I only claimed mine to be sufficient. Your word to the contrary, the elipssis did not turn my material implication into a double implication. Again the context is that I said you can't actually make some kind of dummies-guide to morality using lists, so again I dont believe that you can make an exhaustive list no more than I believe the meaning of a word necessarily comes from a definition ('game'). It is at any rate what I meant, and I don't want to have to keep defending a position I don't actually hold.
I didn't employ an ad hominem fallacy anywhere. I never said "you are this, you did that, therefore your argument is wrong." It would have been impossible, because as I said before, one could barely find a claim that you were making anywhere. I literally just demonstrated why it doesn't matter what form of list you use; the logic is the same, no matter whether you use a biconditional. As I said, you were nitpicking about nothing, because it doesn't matter whether the list is a conjunction of positive necessary conditions or a disjunction of negative sufficient conditions. They're both Morality for Dummies lists. They logically serve the same purpose. Telling me "certainly there's a difference" is a stubbornness I won't entertain any further.
Definitely LOL'd
|
Good resolution. The community needs to remain morally strong so that esports continue growing.
|
"it doesn't matter whether the list is a conjunction of positive necessary conditions or a disjunction of negative sufficient conditions"
And now we officially know that this thread has gone down the tubes of individual battles of people trying to out-argue each other lol. For the love of God close this thread on the grounds that it has run its course.
|
146 pages later, I'm pretty sure morality is not an entertaining subject.
|
On October 17 2012 03:17 Divinicus1er wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2012 03:08 tMomiji wrote:
Honestly...I'm prepared to get a lot of hate for this, but, I agree here. And no it's not because I'm biased against Stephano - let me explain. Nobody *knew* if he was joking or not. Like someone said before, BlinG's expression says it all. This could have been potentially very, very serious. When someone makes a claim of child abuse, joking or not, people are *obligated* to take it seriously. It's similar to a bomb threat in that regard. -remembering three days in a row of faked bomb threats at school because kids knew it would have to be taken seriously and would get us out of class- There are some things that are simply taboo...and honestly I think EG did the right thing. I can see where people are coming from, saying that it's just a joke and that Stephano is not a bad person, and these are both true. However this is simply the way society works - there are some things that are taken seriously and *have* to be taken seriously because if you start ignoring them you run the risk of ignoring a case where it's true...that's just the way things *are*. ...Sorry. Honestly ... that's just the american way of doing it. Seems more like a clash of cultures than anything else ...
This is basically what i have finally deduced from 130+ pages, obviously i don't want to stereotype to much. But Europeans (Or mostly French) are ok with this humor. Yea it was a bad joke but the punishment is unnecessary
Americans are mostly against ANY type of child/minor molestation or abuse even in a joking content.
|
This is ridiculous. What one person says to another is nobodys business, people need to stop jarring their noses into others jokes... this is one thing I hate about living in America, everyone overreacts to what other people say. Its not a big deal, everyone needs to stop being babies and grow up... this is part of what i call, "the pussification of America".
|
On October 17 2012 05:49 AdofTheKirk wrote:
This is ridiculous. What one person says to another is nobodys business, people need to stop jarring their noses into others jokes... this is one thing I hate about living in America, everyone overreacts to what other people say. Its not a big deal, everyone needs to stop being babies and grow up... this is part of what i call, "the pussification of America".
Could you possibly be more a prick, followed by saying people should grow up.
How about you learn some manners first?
|
On October 17 2012 05:49 AdofTheKirk wrote:
This is ridiculous. What one person says to another is nobodys business, people need to stop jarring their noses into others jokes... this is one thing I hate about living in America, everyone overreacts to what other people say. Its not a big deal, everyone needs to stop being babies and grow up... this is part of what i call, "the pussification of America".
Wow, teenage girls must have hated you.
They overreact to everything.
|
>_< EG makes it so hard to be a fan sometimes.
|
Jesus, it's sad that mods lets threads like this thrive this long. It is pretty clear that the thread has gone full retard and it should be closed.. I don't understand TL mods!
|
On October 17 2012 06:05 eXePensai wrote:
Jesus, it's sad that mods lets threads like this thrive this long. It is pretty clear that the thread has gone full retard and it should be closed.. I don't understand TL mods!
No, you want to know what's sad? You've posted in this thread four times, and have contributed nothing.
Every single post was you complaining about specific people in this thread or this thread in general.
You don't like this thread? Stop showing up.
|
So I haven't followed this thread at all and I'm genuinely curious, do most people agree with EG's decision or not?
Poll: Do you agree with EG's decision to suspend Stephano?Yes (31) 46% No, it was too harsh (31) 46% No, it wasn't harsh enough. (6) 9% 68 total votes Your vote: Do you agree with EG's decision to suspend Stephano? (Vote): Yes
(Vote): No, it was too harsh
(Vote): No, it wasn't harsh enough.
|
On October 17 2012 03:18 ReachTheSky wrote:
Close this god damn awful thread already.
Signed. This thread is done with.
|
On October 17 2012 06:21 TheDougler wrote:
So I haven't followed this thread at all and I'm genuinely curious, do most people agree with EG's decision or not?
They said the matter isn't settled yet so we don't know if it was too harsh (unless of course you believe it already is)
Anyway, I don't know about the severity of the punishment but a punishment was in order IMO.
On October 17 2012 06:21 SilSol wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2012 03:18 ReachTheSky wrote:
Close this god damn awful thread already. Signed. This thread is done with.
You.... people like you..... I just....
Your last 50 posts have all been 1 liners.
Why do you complain about what people are talking about in a thread if you don't discuss anything and just post blank statements.
|
No new information. Rampant apologism and a shitstorm of incoherent arguing.
I pray the powers that be take this thread out behind the barn soon.
|
On October 17 2012 03:17 Divinicus1er wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2012 03:08 tMomiji wrote:
Honestly...I'm prepared to get a lot of hate for this, but, I agree here. And no it's not because I'm biased against Stephano - let me explain. Nobody *knew* if he was joking or not. Like someone said before, BlinG's expression says it all. This could have been potentially very, very serious. When someone makes a claim of child abuse, joking or not, people are *obligated* to take it seriously. It's similar to a bomb threat in that regard. -remembering three days in a row of faked bomb threats at school because kids knew it would have to be taken seriously and would get us out of class- There are some things that are simply taboo...and honestly I think EG did the right thing. I can see where people are coming from, saying that it's just a joke and that Stephano is not a bad person, and these are both true. However this is simply the way society works - there are some things that are taken seriously and *have* to be taken seriously because if you start ignoring them you run the risk of ignoring a case where it's true...that's just the way things *are*. ...Sorry. Honestly ... that's just the american way of doing it. Seems more like a clash of cultures than anything else ...
Your statement isn't true. Even resorting to the country bashing in regards to his statement is a sign of your ignorance. Certain things should always be taken seriously, whether one means it or not, so that actual occurrences don't continue when they could've been stopped.
Edit: Agree with closing of thread. Sorry for even posting here but his comment ticked me off.
|
Quite unfortunate  . Now who will stop those koreans from going stargate PvZ opener all day?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
