Posted by noone on September 27, 1999 at 02:08:34:
In Reply to: To IMM: Nepenthe posted by Ophi on September 26, 1999 at 22:39:12:
you left out the most important part:
> >Your facts are wrong. Very wrong. Not "I called it red but it's a dark pink wrong." We're talking
>I have no problem being wrong. So I'm wrong. I'm soooooo wrong. Big way way way big wrong. heh.
i dont know about you but most arguements are based on facts. truth. reality. its important to
in the future keep your wrong guesses to yourself.
noone posted this and hes sorry it isnt related to carrion fields much
> >
> First of all, the paragraph for which you responded so kindly, was for me to admit that my facts and assumptions may be wrong, however, the process in which my reasoning thus followed was not.
> I think you're the one who's dense and never passed logics and reasoning.
> >
> Gee, I see you've got the reasoning power of a ten year old. I'm glad you can understand English.
> >
> And thus we meet someone who refuse to change their attitude and remains in the baseness of their intellectual and communication level.
> Not only are you wrong on applying the definition of "phoniess" onto politeness, your stand point on vulgarity was also wrong.
> Would you continue to keep vocabularies such as, 'cunt', 'fuck', and other vulgar language around simply because you feel it is a more honest definition comparable to, 'labia majora', 'labia minora', and 'copulation'?
> Scientific vocabulary (and thus usually un-offensive vocabulary) have made its way to everyday language for common use. We do not blame the average folk for cursing every once a while, yet, in the academic community where intellectual discussions arises so very often, the format of presenting one's argument even in today's chaotic environment, still follows a stringent format.
> The purpose of being 'polite' despite the urge to curse out, is one of the signs of intellectual acceptance in the willingness to consider, and even acknowledge a despised opponent's argument. Without it, there would be no progress, and we would all sink to a shouting match of whomever's more obnoxious wins.
> I honestly wonder, if some of the flames immortals received are not groundless and perhaps, might even be genuine. Since one of their own has demonstrated, that in the debasement of others using vulgar language, he seem to revel in the righteousness of being honest.
>
> >completely wrong. That's all I'm really saying.
(nepenthes statement)
(your statement)
be as accurate as possible. i dont care if you spout untruths in iambic pentameter. i would
rather hear the truth in the most abusive offensive manner. i don't care if you write a
5,000,000,000 page study detailing every known field of study or every aspect of carrion fields.
if its not based in reality its useless. dont post anything unless it is true. and you should
not complain to the maintainers of this wonderful free game about problems youre making up or
assuming incorrectly about. unless youre trying to only be entertaining. if youre only trying
to post jokes or a made up rant about carrion fields let us know.
> Either you're more dense than I believed possible for an educated person or (much more likely) you're deliberately misconstruing what I'm saying. Either way I see no point in belaboring this further.
> You're either mentally twelve or being sarcastic. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say sarcastic.
> Suddenly, the whole "phoniness" theme in Salinger's Catcher in the Rye seems much more real to me. I see no value in clinging to 'civil' behavior at the cost of distortion or dishonesty. The thought of putting forth a facade of pleasantness rather than speak plainly seems much more profane to me than any simple word. If I think you're being an ass, I'll tell you you're being an ass. You should feel free to do likewise.