Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Comments
And Chagen, if memory serves.
That is just the way we are when we have a "pet cause". It is what comes naturally. The rest of you guys just take notice because you don't do it yourselves (though I have to keep reminding myself of that, since it looks sometimes like you [plural] do).
Having a pet cause doesn't excuse one from forming coherent tenets. If it's little more than internally inconsistent rambles about humanity being scum, the notion that people shouldn't care about what others say and the idea that it's impossible for people to understand each other, you're doing it wrong.
Which doesn't mean you have to be constantly consistent(the Sony exception, etc.), but it helps to formulate your thoughts concisely and to the point instead of shooting meandering musings in the tubes that give the impression you're in love with the sound of your own typing(sounded harsher than I mean it to sound).
In short, don't go out of your way to shove your philosophy everywhere it might conceivably (or, indeed, inconceivably) fit.
To take a stab at it, I'd guess the problem is interpretation. We don't communicate through implications so much as through literal technicalities. So if you start implying things that weren't explicitly stated, then attributing it to us... well, you'd see that as inconsistency, but it isn't ours. Within our own means of communication, we strive to be consistent as a matter of priority.
Anyway, as regards understanding each other, as I see that only comes with familiarity. And familiarity comes with time. It isn't impossible with a friend to know what will and won't push their buttons... but with strangers or those we don't interact with often, it isn't reasonable to be expected to know such things. To actually be obligated to know in advance a person's particular quirks and issues just isn't reasonable by any standard..... even if you mundies have so little regard for your individuality that you work off a standardised cultural set of triggers or something (I'm sure there are still differences here and there though).
@Iaculus.. I've got two problems with that. Quite serious problems.
#1. "Tact" never struck me as much more than an excuse for deception. I've got no problem trying to be nice, but it'd be a hot day in Niflheim before I start lying for the sake of someone else's feelings.
#2. I don't want to live under a double-standard stacked 100% against me. Not only do people not guard against my idiosyncracies when talking to me (and generally I wouldn't expect them to know, since I don't know theirs), but I get actively mocked for it. In and of itself, that wouldn't bother me... but that I'm entirely forbidden from showing the same disregard / obliviousness in return is unacceptable. All is fine. Nothing is fine. But that society takes it for granted that I should be its bitch is just absurd.
Now honestly, I don't want fall-outs with people. I don't want trouble. But when people are so casually discussing such unforgivable things as deliberate breeding, how can I be expected to stay silent? Why should I put up with their pressing their agenda without pushing back?
You mundies? Oh please, this place is riddled with autismal foreveralone shut-ins with an naïve sense of how life works and a propensity to spin off pie-in-the-sky philosophy riddled with logical inconsistencies(myself included). Don't pretend you don't fit in here.
Besides, the only others I know are Tnu and Chag. Already referenced. Are there others?
^^ Exactly what I said. Intentionally breeding is reprehensible. Disgusting. Now... you've heard me, so we can drop it. Right? Let's not get this back to that.
And if by "qualify" you mean for the spectrum... No. Just no. If you mean something else then... carry on.
But really. Between the folks who mock us for what we are and the idealistic fools who think they're among us, it can be quite a nuisance. Heck, they don't know the half of it.
Did you know one of the lesser mentioned attributes of Aut Spec folk is chronic digestive troubles. You'd probably laugh to hear that most of the butt-hurt Aspergians out there are actually literally butt-hurt. Appropriate for literalists, no?
Am I forbidden from mocking my own kind? *shrugs*
It's funny as long as you're not the one trying to keep an internet-based community running smoothly, as opposed to being bombarded with complaints from dawn 'til dusk and beyond.
Now, if you want a free-for-all forum, a la what I've heard about EVE Online being as an MMORPG, then feel free to start your own website. I'll probably not join it since I actually like to discuss particular topics and don't like drama to get in the way of my being able to talk about stuff.
> ^ They shouldn't though. It isn't good for them to get serious. Getting serious inevitably leads to getting butthurt.
You're right in that people shouldn't be butthurt about stuff, but that doesn't mean that people should mock and ridicule things anytime they want. It's quite rude to barge into other people's serious conversation and spam people with silliness and mockery.
> Poultrémon
...is this another "S*ny"-like grudge on your part?
> I'm always sincere, but never serious.
Good, then don't join the serious conversations if you can't be serious.
> My seriousness variable only sets to "true" if S*ny is involved, pretty much. Almost every other situation has it set to "false".
Time to fix it.
> ^ But that's punishment based on what's convenient/inconvenient for forum leadership, not what's actually going on.
I've been repeatedly criticized for being too lax on offenders.
> Don't squash the mouse until you see its body. seeing the tail of a mouse isn't the same as seeing the body.
But mice can't detach tails.
> #1. "Tact" never struck me as much more than an excuse for deception. I've got no problem trying to be nice, but it'd be a hot day in Niflheim before I start lying for the sake of someone else's feelings.
Protip: There are ways to express your meaning honestly and candidly without using insulting language.
> even if you mundies have so little regard for your individuality that you work off a standardised cultural set of triggers or something (I'm sure there are still differences here and there though).
> mundies
Get off your high horse, dude.
Alex... this might sound like an odd thing to say, but I'd assume you don't really give a damn what I think. Nor do I imagine anyone else does.
So I can't see how my coming across as arrogant should make any difference, irrespective of whether it is true or not. I represent no more than a tiny microcosm of insignificance... with domain no further than arm's reach. I might be full of pomp and bluster, but we all know it means nothing, right?
Anyway... GMH...
Seen it. Been there. Done that.
It has lived. It has died. I moved on.
I neither support nor oppose it. More particularly, I neither think people should go out of their way to be a nuisance, nor go out of their way to stop it. Rather that people should just be as they are, essentially. Whether that means being nice OR being a dick.
You don't pay attention. Fine. You don't have to, but under the circumstances I don't think the way I choose to mock my own mother's profession is something I have to justify.
I'm not going to take that suggestion seriously. You know that. It just doesn't work that way.
It is fixed. Non-serious is the fixed state. Serious is the broken state. I ain't the one who needs fixing.
I certainly wouldn't criticise you for being so. Rather I'd criticise those who criticise you for being so. I LIKE you being lax. It is nice. Y'know?
Sometimes. Sometimes not. Like I said, I don't communicate in implications, but in technicalities. Given that what I'm trying to express is usually rather precise, there aren't many different ways to express it. And what is considered "insulting" differs from one person to the next. I'd imagine you just consider this an excuse, but that as well is just another communicative difference. I simply seek to impart understanding.
You can take it as given that I mean no harm, irrespective of what I say. You CAN take it as given, but whether you do or not is your choice to make. Some people go out of their way to be offended by things, and I won't bear responsibility for that.
High horse? Get off your inference obsession. There is no "high" nor "low", "better" nor "worse" in this. There never was, and the way people keep reading unrelated stuff into what I'm saying is unnecessarily harmful to all involved.
In my mind at least.
Saw you'd responded and thought "Forz is getting his troll on". Heh
I like being right. Doesn't happen enough. ^_^
Oh, and I ain't. =p
You have a small penis, and you can't prove to me otherwise. Deal with it, internet-addicted betamale. Vorpy:1 SotiBadger:0 Looks like I'm riding the win train now, how's it like walking? Totally buttfrustrated you looks like you'll need some LIQUID SILK to erase butthurt of that magnitude radical zippity doo da FUNDAMENTALS
Your mother doesn't work that way.
Except you are boring, you don't prove a point and you aren't clever by doing so. You are like a Wag Platy in a tank filled with Marble Mollies. Nobody gives a fuck about the ideals you are trying to convey or point you are trying to prove because all you are doing is annoying the females with your drive-by rape tendencies and bugging the Plecostomus. This is the part where you either try to get along with the other fish, or hide away.
The responsibility of how you take it and react to it is yours.
Quit trying to twist my words around to suit your purposes.
Chagen. My mouther is a poultry farmer. More specifically she breeds chickens, ducks, geese and who knows what other crazy feathered fiends for shows and competitions. She collects them.
WHY would you expect my personal nickname for my mother's profession (conveniently self-explanatory) would appear on Google? HOW could you expect that? And you feel justified in claiming it doesn't exist because it isn't documented on Google? The world just isn't like that Chaggy... some things are too personal to be on Google.
Not sure what you mean by "it", but I'll let you know that I could simply have ignored my admin position here at IJBM and let it die a silly, flamey death. I chose not to.
If you're running your own place set your own rules and enjoy them. And I'll enjoy my freedom to choose whether to join. You'll also enjoy your freedom to choose whether I should be allowed on your site, should I join it.
> More particularly, I neither think people should go out of their way to be a nuisance, nor go out of their way to stop it.
That doesn't mean that it isn't annoying to see a new post, expect something relevant to the discussion, and be thrown for a loop by the fact that it contains nothing but useless mockery or somesuch. So some people like certain rules because it makes it easier to get to the damn point and stick with it.
> You don't pay attention. Fine. You don't have to, but under the circumstances I don't think the way I choose to mock my own mother's profession is something I have to justify.
...wait, what does your mother have to do with this, and is your mother a professional Pokémon trainer or a professional poultry farmer?
> I'm not going to take that suggestion seriously. You know that. It just doesn't work that way.
Well, then I guess we'll just have to ban you if you ignore the rules and cause problems because of it.
> It is fixed. Non-serious is the fixed state. Serious is the broken state. I ain't the one who needs fixing.
As I said, get off your high horse.
> High horse? Get off your inference obsession. There is no "high" nor "low", "better" nor "worse" in this. There never was, and the way people keep reading unrelated stuff into what I'm saying is unnecessarily harmful to all involved.
No, your "high horse" has to do with how you feel that you're so much smarter and more skilled than everyone else at dealing with wordly affairs, how you've got a vastly better method for understanding people, how your approach to people is so much wiser than those of others, how the advice you offer to others on how to deal with people and opinions and drama is much better than anything else anyone else does,...oh, and what was that about "mundies"? and talking down to Chagen in just the post above this one?
Edit: Holy shit, ninja'd. I see, your mother is a poultry farmer. Perhaps the confusion of several of us at your phrasing has indicated that you need to communicate your point better.
"You have a small penis, and you can't prove to me otherwise. Deal with it, internet-addicted betamale. Vorpy:1 SotiBadger:0 Looks like I'm riding the win train now, how's it like walking? Totally buttfrustrated you looks like you'll need some LIQUID SILK to erase butthurt of that magnitude radical zippity doo da FUNDAMENTALS"
So proving you wrong is as easy as showing you my genitals?
I'm not really sure you want to go there.
And for the record, betamale would imply I was second in the hierarchy. As far as I'm concerned I'm not even in the hierarchy... way out somewhere perpendicular to omega in a snowdrift somewhere. But sure. Overhype me if you like.
I do that too, and so does Hatter. It's just that we convey our points better than he's doing so it's not so bad! ♥
We just need to teach him the ways of friendship!I don't see why he'd get banned for his views on this if there are FAR FAR WORSE PEOPLE about this than he is.
....-points to self-
Either way, maybe he just needs to calm down a bit? Feeding him only makes him more angrier.
This is the part where:
a. Don't give him arguments to take apart
b. Don't give him material to backlash against
c. Don't give him points to refute