(12-03-2020, 07:47 PM)Sneakers Wrote: [ -> ] (12-03-2020, 08:25 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]And then we have your accusation that I made a statement of fact when I was actually uncertain about the thing. This is an interesting accusation. It hinges on what I meant by the verb "try" and on your ability to correctly perceive my tone or mood in this wall of text.
Normal people don't try to nail down definitions that tightly, outside of a court of law, and normal people understand that they might miss someone's mood or tone in an internet forum.
All y'all are assuming I'm saying something else, when Im not. You, copycat, and FSG are all practicing a subconscious form of self-deception known as bulverism here in this thread.
I'm not asking you to stop, cuz I don't want to ruin your fun, but I am asking to recognize what you're doing.
It's not normal, and it's not necessary.
Your words...page 1, post #14 2) and that mandate didn't last very long. It was impractical. It counted more as an attempt or an experiment than a policy. Hence the verb, "try"
Normal people rely on the definitions found in commonly used resources such as Webster's. For future reference, should I assume that you do not?
I can't speak for either copycat or FSG's subconscious, but thanks for including me in such exalted company.
A Bulverist assumes the speaker is in error at the onset of the discussion, regardless of the factual accuracy of the statement. In this instance, no assumption was necessary because I knew your original statement to be false.
No, I'm within the Merriam Webster definition of "try", and I explained why. Maybe you didn't read the definition before you commented?
Also, an essential part of Bulverism is the time sequence. You assume the person is wrong before you consider their statement. Whether or not your assumption was necessary to your determination, I strongly suspect you made that assumption after reading my screen name but before reading my statement. So yes, even if I'm wrong about what the word "try" means, you're still practicing a Bulverist thought process unless you give my words the benefit of the doubt, and really chew on them before you decide they are wrong or right. The fact that we're even cracking open the dictionary on "try", and finding it has not one but five definitions as a verb, shows me that you indeed read without any intent to find truth, only with intent to find fault.
(12-03-2020, 08:00 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (12-03-2020, 07:47 PM)Sneakers Wrote: [ -> ]Your words...page 1, post #14 2) and that mandate didn't last very long. It was impractical. It counted more as an attempt or an experiment than a policy. Hence the verb, "try"
Normal people rely on the definitions found in commonly used resources such as Webster's. For future reference, should I assume that you do not?
I can't speak for either copycat or FSG's subconscious, but thanks for including me in such exalted company.
A Bulverist assumes the speaker is in error at the onset of the discussion, regardless of the factual accuracy of the statement. In this instance, no assumption was necessary because I knew your original statement to be false.
No, I'm within the Merriam Webster definition of "try", and I explained why. Maybe you didn't read the definition before you commented?
Also, an essential part of Bulverism is the time sequence. You assume the person is wrong before you consider their statement. Whether or not your assumption was necessary to your determination, I strongly suspect you made that assumption after reading my screen name but before reading my statement. So yes, even if I'm wrong about what the word "try" means, you're still practicing a Bulverist thought process unless you give my words the benefit of the doubt, and really chew on them before you decide they are wrong or right. The fact that we're even cracking open the dictionary on "try", and finding it has not one but five definitions as a verb, shows me that you indeed read without any intent to find truth, only with intent to find fault.
LOL. You really do have a selective memory. In my first post I asked for your definition of "try", which you declined to provide.
You then said "and that mandate didn't last very long.'' What would you like me to "chew on"............hillbilly stew? You however, have adopted a self-stated Bulverist position, strongly suspecting my statement was created without giving your words due consideration, a judgement impossible for you to make. I could have spent hours in silent meditation, solemnly pondering the wisdom of your words.
P.S. I didn't though. I immediately knew it was wrong without the need for further research, consultation or tarot card readings. Sorry if you're offended.
(12-03-2020, 10:02 PM)Sneakers Wrote: [ -> ] (12-03-2020, 08:00 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]No, I'm within the Merriam Webster definition of "try", and I explained why. Maybe you didn't read the definition before you commented?
Also, an essential part of Bulverism is the time sequence. You assume the person is wrong before you consider their statement. Whether or not your assumption was necessary to your determination, I strongly suspect you made that assumption after reading my screen name but before reading my statement. So yes, even if I'm wrong about what the word "try" means, you're still practicing a Bulverist thought process unless you give my words the benefit of the doubt, and really chew on them before you decide they are wrong or right. The fact that we're even cracking open the dictionary on "try", and finding it has not one but five definitions as a verb, shows me that you indeed read without any intent to find truth, only with intent to find fault.
LOL. You really do have a selective memory. In my first post I asked for your definition of "try", which you declined to provide.
You then said "and that mandate didn't last very long.'' What would you like me to "chew on"............hillbilly stew? You however, have adopted a self-stated Bulverist position, strongly suspecting my statement was created without giving your words due consideration, a judgement impossible for you to make. I could have spent hours in silent meditation, solemnly pondering the wisdom of your words.
P.S. I didn't though. I immediately knew it was wrong without the need for further research, consultation or tarot card readings. Sorry if you're offended.
"Not very long" isn't definite. It's subjective. Covid's been here for 8 months now. 5 or 6 weeks of a certain mandate isn't very long in terms of the whole battle against the disease.
(12-04-2020, 12:01 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (12-03-2020, 10:02 PM)Sneakers Wrote: [ -> ]LOL. You really do have a selective memory. In my first post I asked for your definition of "try", which you declined to provide.
You then said "and that mandate didn't last very long.'' What would you like me to "chew on"............hillbilly stew? You however, have adopted a self-stated Bulverist position, strongly suspecting my statement was created without giving your words due consideration, a judgement impossible for you to make. I could have spent hours in silent meditation, solemnly pondering the wisdom of your words.
P.S. I didn't though. I immediately knew it was wrong without the need for further research, consultation or tarot card readings. Sorry if you're offended.
"Not very long" isn't definite. It's subjective. Covid's been here for 8 months now. 5 or 6 weeks of a certain mandate isn't very long in terms of the whole battle against the disease.
LOL. Are you really so unable to recall your own words? The statement was in reference to the government-ordered closure of non-essential businesses, which also required businesses selling groceries (Walmart, etc.) to close off areas carrying non-essential items. These closures lasted approximately 1-2 months, which is the time context in which your "5 or 6 weeks of a certain mandate" comment was made. The total length of time Covid has been in the US is irrelevant and was never a consideration in the discussion.
And any of your bickering has what to do with the economic impact of Covid 19? Not a thing. Maybe y'all need to start a thread where you go to bicker about semantics instead of hijacking one.
(12-04-2020, 02:20 AM)americus 2.0 Wrote: [ -> ]And any of your bickering has what to do with the economic impact of Covid 19? Not a thing. Maybe y'all need to start a thread where you go to bicker about semantics instead of hijacking one.
Just killing time waiting for fresh input. What's going on in NC with schools and in-restaurant dining?
(12-04-2020, 08:41 AM)Sneakers Wrote: [ -> ] (12-04-2020, 02:20 AM)americus 2.0 Wrote: [ -> ]And any of your bickering has what to do with the economic impact of Covid 19? Not a thing. Maybe y'all need to start a thread where you go to bicker about semantics instead of hijacking one.
Just killing time waiting for fresh input. What's going on in NC with schools and in-restaurant dining?
She can’t respond. NC has prohibited all internet traffic to prevent the spread of computer viruses.
(12-04-2020, 02:20 AM)americus 2.0 Wrote: [ -> ]And any of your bickering has what to do with the economic impact of Covid 19? Not a thing. Maybe y'all need to start a thread where you go to bicker about semantics instead of hijacking one.
Yeah, I don't like it either, but he started it.
Work has definitely slowed down over here.
Used to be our biggest clients were cruiselines and hotel developers.
Now the sales team is chasing high end subdivision developers.
The virus has dramatically changed what I work on, but at least I still have my same job in the same place for the same money.
(12-04-2020, 10:06 AM)Bchbunnie4 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-04-2020, 09:54 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Bwaaaahahahahahaaaaa!!!!
Well of course...lol
I guess Mikesez needs to take his rhetoric down a few more grades so your limited intellect can comprehend his brilliance.
(12-04-2020, 12:00 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (12-04-2020, 10:06 AM)Bchbunnie4 Wrote: [ -> ]Well of course...lol
I guess Mikesez needs to take his rhetoric down a few more grades so your limited intellect can comprehend his brilliance.
I don't care if anyone thinks I'm brilliant or pedestrian. I'm just trying to get people of all intellect levels to broaden their perspective and tone down the hate towards people who disagree - whether those people are other forum users or our representatives in Tallahassee and Washington.
If I can get you to hate disagreeing politicians less, but I have to make you hate me in the process, so be it.
(12-04-2020, 12:40 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (12-04-2020, 12:00 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]I guess Mikesez needs to take his rhetoric down a few more grades so your limited intellect can comprehend his brilliance.
I don't care if anyone thinks I'm brilliant or pedestrian. I'm just trying to get people of all intellect levels to broaden their perspective and tone down the hate towards people who disagree - whether those people are other forum users or our representatives in Tallahassee and Washington.
If I can get you to hate disagreeing politicians less, but I have to make you hate me in the process, so be it.
Not hate, mockery. When you make the clear assertion that you believe you are smarter than anyone else, expect ridicule. Especially given that your assertion is obviously not true.
(12-04-2020, 12:40 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (12-04-2020, 12:00 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]I guess Mikesez needs to take his rhetoric down a few more grades so your limited intellect can comprehend his brilliance.
I don't care if anyone thinks I'm brilliant or pedestrian. I'm just trying to get people of all intellect levels to broaden their perspective and tone down the hate towards people who disagree - whether those people are other forum users or our representatives in Tallahassee and Washington.
If I can get you to hate disagreeing politicians less, but I have to make you hate me in the process, so be it.
If only we were all as intelligent and noble as you...if only...
(12-04-2020, 01:07 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (12-04-2020, 12:40 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I don't care if anyone thinks I'm brilliant or pedestrian. I'm just trying to get people of all intellect levels to broaden their perspective and tone down the hate towards people who disagree - whether those people are other forum users or our representatives in Tallahassee and Washington.
If I can get you to hate disagreeing politicians less, but I have to make you hate me in the process, so be it.
Not hate, mockery. When you make the clear assertion that you believe you are smarter than anyone else, expect ridicule. Especially given that your assertion is obviously not true.
You can hate me or you can mock me. All the same to me. I've already seen progress with you, and that makes me happy.
(12-04-2020, 01:32 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (12-04-2020, 12:40 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I don't care if anyone thinks I'm brilliant or pedestrian. I'm just trying to get people of all intellect levels to broaden their perspective and tone down the hate towards people who disagree - whether those people are other forum users or our representatives in Tallahassee and Washington.
If I can get you to hate disagreeing politicians less, but I have to make you hate me in the process, so be it.
If only we were all as intelligent and noble as you...if only...
If all y'all already knew how to discuss things with the goal of understanding as opposed to venting, I would have no ulterior motive here at all. I might become a lurker. But you keep me coming back for more.
(12-03-2020, 10:02 PM)Sneakers Wrote: [ -> ] (12-03-2020, 08:00 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]No, I'm within the Merriam Webster definition of "try", and I explained why. Maybe you didn't read the definition before you commented?
LOL. You really do have a selective memory. In my first post I asked for your definition of "try", which you declined to provide.
Anybody out there remember when Happy Days was the best show on TV. Then, after ~ 8 season or so, they ran out of ideas and started bringing on additional characters culminating when Fonzie attempted a water ski jump over a shark? The show went downhill from there and the term Jump the Shark was derived for things that hit its peak and was on the downward slide.
Me thinks we've jumped the shark here .....
(12-04-2020, 02:47 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (12-04-2020, 01:07 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Not hate, mockery. When you make the clear assertion that you believe you are smarter than anyone else, expect ridicule. Especially given that your assertion is obviously not true.
You can hate me or you can mock me. All the same to me. I've already seen progress with you, and that makes me happy.
(12-04-2020, 01:32 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]If only we were all as intelligent and noble as you...if only...
If all y'all already knew how to discuss things with the goal of understanding as opposed to venting, I would have no ulterior motive here at all. I might become a lurker. But you keep me coming back for more.
Oh teach us great master!
(12-04-2020, 02:55 PM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ] (12-03-2020, 10:02 PM)Sneakers Wrote: [ -> ]LOL. You really do have a selective memory. In my first post I asked for your definition of "try", which you declined to provide.
Anybody out there remember when Happy Days was the best show on TV. Then, after ~ 8 season or so, they ran out of ideas and started bringing on additional characters culminating when Fonzie attempted a water ski jump over a shark? The show went downhill from there and the term Jump the Shark was derived for things that hit its peak and was on the downward slide.
Me thinks we've jumped the shark here .....
I think Mikesez is kinda like the DiCaprio addition on Growing Pains.
(12-04-2020, 03:15 PM)Bchbunnie4 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-04-2020, 03:09 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Oh teach us great master!
I think Mikesez is kinda like the DiCaprio addition on Growing Pains.
Cousin Oliver
Yep.
I'm only here because y'all were going down the tubes anyhow!
I'm an effect, not a cause.
Let's run a plot where you and FSG get married, just like Robin and Barney. It can be pointless and overly long just like the last season of HIMYM
.gif "Laughing")