Poll of the Day > I don't understand you...

Topic List	Page List: 1
SKARDAVNELNATE 08/14/21 10:57:56 AM #1:	https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/3-poll-of-the-day/79609601 In this topic a group harasses an individual and you side with the individual. https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/3-poll-of-the-day/79613057 In this topic a group harasses an individual and you side with the group. Your good and your evil use the same methods; achieve the same results. --- No locked doors, no windows barred. No more things to make my brain seem SKARD. Look at Mr. Technical over here >.> -BTB <cite>SKARDAVNELNATE posted [p:957078270] in I don't un... [t:79613555]...</cite> <quote>https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/3-poll-of-the-day/79609601 In this topic a group harasses an individual and you side with the individual. https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/3-poll-of-the-day/79613057 In this topic a group harasses an individual and you side with the group. Your good and your evil use the same methods; achieve the same results. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
adjl 08/14/21 11:17:59 AM #2:	It's almost like it's not a question of how many people believe something, it's a question of what they believe and which people are being assholes. --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts. <cite>adjl posted [p:957078679] in I don't un... [t:79613555]...</cite> <quote>It's almost like it's not a question of how many people believe something, it's a question of what they believe and which people are being assholes. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Sarcasthma 08/14/21 11:19:29 AM #3:	What's a "context"? --- What's the difference between a pickpocket and a peeping tom? A pickpocket snatches your watch. <cite>Sarcasthma posted [p:957078712] in I don't un... [t:79613555]...</cite> <quote>What's a "context"? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ParanoidObsessive 08/14/21 11:29:35 AM #4:	Stop quoting Duckbear topics, I ignore them for a reason. --- "Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76 "POwned again." --- blight family <cite>ParanoidObsessive posted [p:957078931] in I don't un... [t:79613555]...</cite> <quote>Stop quoting Duckbear topics, I ignore them for a reason.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SKARDAVNELNATE 08/14/21 5:17:14 PM #5:	adjl posted... it's a question of what they believe and which people are being assholes. Both groups of people are being assholes despite believing different things. Sarcasthma posted... What's a "context"? Context - the circumstances that form the setting for an event, statement, or idea, and in terms of which it can be fully understood and assessed. The circumstances in the first story are that a person elected to the school board to represent the interest of the people is being told by those people that they are displeased with their representation. This is called an embarrassment. The circumstances in the second story are that a man who is trying to shop is being prevented from doing so my other customers of the store. This is called heroic. What's a "context", indeed? ParanoidObsessive posted... I ignore them for a reason. That's up to you but I find the subjects up for discussion thought provoking. --- No locked doors, no windows barred. No more things to make my brain seem SKARD. Look at Mr. Technical over here >.> -BTB <cite>SKARDAVNELNATE posted [p:957087447] in I don't un... [t:79613555]...</cite> <quote>adjl posted... </cite> <quote>it's a question of what they believe and which people are being assholes.</quote>Both groups of people are being assholes despite believing different things. Sarcasthma posted... </cite> <quote>What's a "context"?</quote>Context - the circumstances that form the setting for an event, statement, or idea, and in terms of which it can be fully understood and assessed. The circumstances in the first story are that a person elected to the school board to represent the interest of the people is being told by those people that they are displeased with their representation. This is called an embarrassment. The circumstances in the second story are that a man who is trying to shop is being prevented from doing so my other customers of the store. This is called heroic. What's a "context", indeed? ParanoidObsessive posted... </cite> <quote>I ignore them for a reason.</quote>That's up to you but I find the subjects up for discussion thought provoking. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
adjl 08/15/21 7:17:32 PM #6:	SKARDAVNELNATE posted... The circumstances in the second story are that a man who is trying to shop is being prevented from doing so by the other customers of the store. I know you aren't really so out of touch with reality as to not realize that the central issue is not that he's trying to shop, but that he's trying to ignore public health recommendations that are meant to ensure the safety of everyone around him. In fact, I think we all know that. Why are you trying to act as though you genuinely believe such a thing when everybody knows better? --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts. <cite>adjl posted [p:957117820] in I don't un... [t:79613555]...</cite> <quote>SKARDAVNELNATE posted... </cite> <quote>The circumstances in the second story are that a man who is trying to shop is being prevented from doing so by the other customers of the store.</quote> I know you aren't really so out of touch with reality as to not realize that the central issue is not that he's trying to shop, but that he's trying to ignore public health recommendations that are meant to ensure the safety of everyone around him. In fact, I think we all know that. Why are you trying to act as though you genuinely believe such a thing when everybody knows better? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SKARDAVNELNATE 08/16/21 12:18:25 AM #7:	adjl posted... Why are you trying to act as though you genuinely believe such a thing when everybody knows better? I believe I already explained the answer to you before. It's about principles and how they are prioritized. I give higher priority to personal freedom and self determination. As for this specific example, if the masked are right then they are protected and the unmasked person isn't doing them any harm. If they aren't that confident in being right then they should leave the store for their own safety. Instead they interfered with someone who wasn't interfering with them. --- No locked doors, no windows barred. No more things to make my brain seem SKARD. Look at Mr. Technical over here >.> -BTB <cite>SKARDAVNELNATE posted [p:957125363] in I don't un... [t:79613555]...</cite> <quote>adjl posted... </cite> <quote>Why are you trying to act as though you genuinely believe such a thing when everybody knows better?</quote>I believe I already explained the answer to you before. It's about principles and how they are prioritized. I give higher priority to personal freedom and self determination. As for this specific example, if the masked are right then they are protected and the unmasked person isn't doing them any harm. If they aren't that confident in being right then they should leave the store for their own safety. Instead they interfered with someone who wasn't interfering with them. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
adjl 08/17/21 10:31:09 AM #8:	SKARDAVNELNATE posted... As for this specific example, if the masked are right then they are protected and the unmasked person isn't doing them any harm. I also know that you aren't really so out of touch with reality as to have missed the endless reminders that masks are substantially more effective for keeping diseases like Covid in than they are for keeping them out, meaning wearing a mask is more a matter of protecting people around you (and, by extension, not wearing one is endangering those people) than of protecting yourself. Do you genuinely not understand that, or are you ignoring it because you don't like it? --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts. <cite>adjl posted [p:957166231] in I don't un... [t:79613555]...</cite> <quote>SKARDAVNELNATE posted... </cite> <quote>As for this specific example, if the masked are right then they are protected and the unmasked person isn't doing them any harm.</quote> I also know that you aren't really so out of touch with reality as to have missed the endless reminders that masks are substantially more effective for keeping diseases like Covid in than they are for keeping them out, meaning wearing a mask is more a matter of protecting people around you (and, by extension, not wearing one is endangering those people) than of protecting yourself. Do you genuinely not understand that, or are you ignoring it because you don't like it? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SKARDAVNELNATE 08/17/21 7:13:47 PM #9:	adjl posted... Do you genuinely not understand that, or are you ignoring it because you don't like it? Did I not just explain this? That is a lower concern than the threat to personal freedom. --- No locked doors, no windows barred. No more things to make my brain seem SKARD. Look at Mr. Technical over here >.> -BTB <cite>SKARDAVNELNATE posted [p:957181376] in I don't un... [t:79613555]...</cite> <quote>adjl posted... </cite> <quote>Do you genuinely not understand that, or are you ignoring it because you don't like it?</quote>Did I not just explain this? That is a lower concern than the threat to personal freedom. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
adjl 08/17/21 8:24:42 PM #10:	SKARDAVNELNATE posted... Did I not just explain this? That is a lower concern than the threat to personal freedom. You're more concerned about personal freedom than that freedom endangering the lives of everyone around them? --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts. <cite>adjl posted [p:957183575] in I don't un... [t:79613555]...</cite> <quote>SKARDAVNELNATE posted... </cite> <quote>Did I not just explain this? That is a lower concern than the threat to personal freedom.</quote> You're more concerned about personal freedom than that freedom endangering the lives of everyone around them? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SKARDAVNELNATE 08/17/21 8:52:24 PM #11:	adjl posted... You're more concerned about personal freedom than that freedom endangering the lives of everyone around them? Yes. --- No locked doors, no windows barred. No more things to make my brain seem SKARD. Look at Mr. Technical over here >.> -BTB <cite>SKARDAVNELNATE posted [p:957184306] in I don't un... [t:79613555]...</cite> <quote>adjl posted... </cite> <quote>You're more concerned about personal freedom than that freedom endangering the lives of everyone around them?</quote>Yes. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
adjl 08/17/21 10:28:45 PM #12:	SKARDAVNELNATE posted... Yes. That's stupid. --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts. <cite>adjl posted [p:957186829] in I don't un... [t:79613555]...</cite> <quote>SKARDAVNELNATE posted... </cite> <quote>Yes.</quote> That's stupid. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Sarcasthma 08/17/21 11:21:51 PM #13:	adjl posted... That's stupid. Sure, but its also really stupid. --- What's the difference between a pickpocket and a peeping tom? A pickpocket snatches your watch. <cite>Sarcasthma posted [p:957188120] in I don't un... [t:79613555]...</cite> <quote>adjl posted... </cite> <quote>That's stupid.</quote>Sure, but its also really stupid. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SKARDAVNELNATE 08/18/21 10:45:53 AM #14:	"Give me liberty, or give me death!" -Patrick Henry "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -Ben Franklin "the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself" -Franklin D. Roosevelt Historically concern for public safety is abandoned when personal freedom is denied. In order to protect public safety it is necessary to safe guard personal freedom before people feel that it has gotten to that point. --- No locked doors, no windows barred. No more things to make my brain seem SKARD. Look at Mr. Technical over here >.> -BTB <cite>SKARDAVNELNATE posted [p:957198306] in I don't un... [t:79613555]...</cite> <quote>"Give me liberty, or give me death!" -Patrick Henry "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -Ben Franklin "the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself" -Franklin D. Roosevelt Historically concern for public safety is abandoned when personal freedom is denied. In order to protect public safety it is necessary to safe guard personal freedom before people feel that it has gotten to that point. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
adjl 08/18/21 2:49:35 PM #15:	SKARDAVNELNATE posted... "Give me liberty, or give me death!" -Patrick Henry "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -Ben Franklin "the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself" -Franklin D. Roosevelt Historically concern for public safety is abandoned when personal freedom is denied. In order to protect public safety it is necessary to safe guard personal freedom before people feel that it has gotten to that point. Personal freedom has literally never been taken to that extreme, nor can it without causing a complete collapse of society. Do you get uppity about your freedoms being infringed whenever you see a stop sign? Of course not, because that would be stupid. Do you complain when people get arrested for shooting at people? Of course not, because that would be stupid. This is also stupid. Stop being stupid. There will always be room to argue about whether the public safety benefit in any given instance outweighs the harm of the associated infringements on personal liberty, but categorically saying that personal freedom should never be limited for the sake of public safety is so insanely idiotic that no self-respecting person should ever even consider saying that. If you want to take that position here without being stupid about it, you're going to have to argue that requiring people to wear masks to shop is worse - in a practical sense - than risking death for the people around them. Good luck, because that's very obviously not something that can be justified objectively. --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts. <cite>adjl posted [p:957205182] in I don't un... [t:79613555]...</cite> <quote>SKARDAVNELNATE posted... </cite> <quote>"Give me liberty, or give me death!" -Patrick Henry "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -Ben Franklin "the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself" -Franklin D. Roosevelt Historically concern for public safety is abandoned when personal freedom is denied. In order to protect public safety it is necessary to safe guard personal freedom before people feel that it has gotten to that point.</quote> Personal freedom has literally never been taken to that extreme, nor can it without causing a complete collapse of society. Do you get uppity about your freedoms being infringed whenever you see a stop sign? Of course not, because that would be stupid. Do you complain when people get arrested for shooting at people? Of course not, because that would be stupid. This is also stupid. Stop being stupid. There will always be room to argue about whether the public safety benefit in any given instance outweighs the harm of the associated infringements on personal liberty, but categorically saying that personal freedom should never be limited for the sake of public safety is so insanely idiotic that no self-respecting person should ever even consider saying that. If you want to take that position here without being stupid about it, you're going to have to argue that requiring people to wear masks to shop is worse - in a practical sense - than risking death for the people around them. Good luck, because that's very obviously not something that can be justified objectively. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SKARDAVNELNATE 08/18/21 7:06:56 PM #16:	adjl posted... Do you get uppity about your freedoms being infringed whenever you see a stop sign? It's in the individuals own interest to stop. They are in as much risk if they don't. I don't see the equivalency given your earlier argument. adjl posted... Do you complain when people get arrested for shooting at people? That would be imposing their will on others. The thing that I'm against. adjl posted... If you want to take that position here without being stupid about it, you're going to have to argue that requiring people to wear masks to shop is worse - in a practical sense - than risking death for the people around them. No, my original argument will suffice. The harassment by the other customers was worse than any harm he posed to them. --- No locked doors, no windows barred. No more things to make my brain seem SKARD. Look at Mr. Technical over here >.> -BTB <cite>SKARDAVNELNATE posted [p:957213630] in I don't un... [t:79613555]...</cite> <quote>adjl posted... </cite> <quote>Do you get uppity about your freedoms being infringed whenever you see a stop sign?</quote>It's in the individuals own interest to stop. They are in as much risk if they don't. I don't see the equivalency given your earlier argument. adjl posted... </cite> <quote>Do you complain when people get arrested for shooting at people?</quote>That would be imposing their will on others. The thing that I'm against. adjl posted... </cite> <quote>If you want to take that position here without being stupid about it, you're going to have to argue that requiring people to wear masks to shop is worse - in a practical sense - than risking death for the people around them.</quote>No, my original argument will suffice. The harassment by the other customers was worse than any harm he posed to them. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
sveksii 08/18/21 8:11:20 PM #17:	First story, the group is threatening the person's life, which is potentially illegal. On the other hand, in the second story, in not following the mask mandate the individual is committing an illegal action. If you believe rape should be legal, fine. Then pursue actions to legalize it in government. However just because you believe it should be legal doesn't give you the excuse to break the law and commit rape. SKARDAVNELNATE posted... "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -Ben Franklin That doesn't mean what you think it does. <cite>sveksii posted [p:957215637] in I don't un... [t:79613555]...</cite> <quote>First story, the group is threatening the person's life, which is potentially illegal. On the other hand, in the second story, in not following the mask mandate the individual is committing an illegal action. If you believe rape should be legal, fine. Then pursue actions to legalize it in government. However just because you believe it should be legal doesn't give you the excuse to break the law and commit rape. SKARDAVNELNATE posted... </cite> <quote>"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -Ben Franklin</quote>That doesn't mean what you think it does. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
adjl 08/18/21 9:07:13 PM #18:	SKARDAVNELNATE posted... It's in the individuals own interest to stop. Doesn't matter. It's still the government imposing restrictions on their personal freedom (complete with penalties if they fail to comply). That there's a considerable benefit to personal safety is completely irrelevant to that. SKARDAVNELNATE posted... That would be imposing their will on others. So we're okay with restricting personal freedoms if doing so prevents the restricted person from imposing their will on others. Got it. Why, then, are you arguing that this man should be freely allowed to impose his will on others by placing them at risk of infection? SKARDAVNELNATE posted... No, my original argument will suffice. No, your original argument is stupid. In order to not make a stupid argument, you need to do what I've asked of you. SKARDAVNELNATE posted... The harassment by the other customers was worse than any harm he posed to them. Oh no! Not mean words! That's so much worse than literally endangering their lives! Right. --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts. <cite>adjl posted [p:957217287] in I don't un... [t:79613555]...</cite> <quote>SKARDAVNELNATE posted... </cite> <quote>It's in the individuals own interest to stop.</quote> Doesn't matter. It's still the government imposing restrictions on their personal freedom (complete with penalties if they fail to comply). That there's a considerable benefit to personal safety is completely irrelevant to that. SKARDAVNELNATE posted... </cite> <quote>That would be imposing their will on others.</quote> So we're okay with restricting personal freedoms if doing so prevents the restricted person from imposing their will on others. Got it. Why, then, are you arguing that this man should be freely allowed to impose his will on others by placing them at risk of infection? SKARDAVNELNATE posted... </cite> <quote>No, my original argument will suffice.</quote> No, your original argument is stupid. In order to not make a stupid argument, you need to do what I've asked of you. SKARDAVNELNATE posted... </cite> <quote>The harassment by the other customers was worse than any harm he posed to them.</quote> Oh no! Not mean words! That's so much worse than literally endangering their lives! Right. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SKARDAVNELNATE 08/18/21 11:18:09 PM #19:	adjl posted... It's still the government imposing restrictions on their personal freedom (complete with penalties if they fail to comply). That there's a considerable benefit to personal safety is completely irrelevant to that. Good point. If a driver gets struck by another vehicle because of their own actions the direct result should be enough punishment. I still don't mind the Stop sign recommending that people stop there. But imposing fines for not heeding that recommendation is a step too far. adjl posted... So we're okay with restricting personal freedoms if doing so prevents the restricted person from imposing their will on others. Got it. I prefer no one impose their will on anyone. If someone does impose their will on another I suggest resisting them. If the instigator doesn't stop at resistance then it is the duty of another will to oppose them. adjl posted... this man should be freely allowed to impose his will on others by placing them at risk of infection? A risk is not an expression of will. In your example there was a gun and it can be proven that a bullet came from that gun. You can't shoot someone if you don't have bullets. Can you prove this man was infected? adjl posted... No, your original argument is stupid. Then it should be easy for you to refute it. adjl posted... you need to do what I've asked of you. Why should I make things easier for by doing what you want? adjl posted... literally endangering their lives! First you said it was a risk, now you treat it like a certainty. You say he did. I say demonstrate that it's true. --- No locked doors, no windows barred. No more things to make my brain seem SKARD. Look at Mr. Technical over here >.> -BTB <cite>SKARDAVNELNATE posted [p:957220945] in I don't un... [t:79613555]...</cite> <quote>adjl posted... </cite> <quote>It's still the government imposing restrictions on their personal freedom (complete with penalties if they fail to comply). That there's a considerable benefit to personal safety is completely irrelevant to that.</quote>Good point. If a driver gets struck by another vehicle because of their own actions the direct result should be enough punishment. I still don't mind the Stop sign recommending that people stop there. But imposing fines for not heeding that recommendation is a step too far. adjl posted... </cite> <quote>So we're okay with restricting personal freedoms if doing so prevents the restricted person from imposing their will on others. Got it.</quote>I prefer no one impose their will on anyone. If someone does impose their will on another I suggest resisting them. If the instigator doesn't stop at resistance then it is the duty of another will to oppose them. adjl posted... </cite> <quote>this man should be freely allowed to impose his will on others by placing them at risk of infection?</quote>A risk is not an expression of will. In your example there was a gun and it can be proven that a bullet came from that gun. You can't shoot someone if you don't have bullets. Can you prove this man was infected? adjl posted... </cite> <quote>No, your original argument is stupid.</quote>Then it should be easy for you to refute it. adjl posted... </cite> <quote>you need to do what I've asked of you.</quote>Why should I make things easier for by doing what you want? adjl posted... </cite> <quote>literally endangering their lives!</quote>First you said it was a risk, now you treat it like a certainty. You say he did. I say demonstrate that it's true. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Metalsonic66 08/19/21 12:11:35 AM #20:	--- PSN/Steam ID: Metalsonic_69 Big bombs go kabang. <cite>Metalsonic66 posted [p:957222209] in I don't un... [t:79613555]...</cite> <quote> </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
adjl 08/19/21 7:55:27 AM #21:	SKARDAVNELNATE posted... Good point. If a driver gets struck by another vehicle because of their own actions the direct result should be enough punishment. I still don't mind the Stop sign recommending that people stop there. But imposing fines for not heeding that recommendation is a step too far. So you're actually going so far as to say that traffic laws are morally wrong. I applaud your logical consistency, but I really don't know how to help you if you genuinely think that's a useful way to approach reality. --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts. <cite>adjl posted [p:957228083] in I don't un... [t:79613555]...</cite> <quote>SKARDAVNELNATE posted... </cite> <quote>Good point. If a driver gets struck by another vehicle because of their own actions the direct result should be enough punishment. I still don't mind the Stop sign recommending that people stop there. But imposing fines for not heeding that recommendation is a step too far.</quote> So you're actually going so far as to say that traffic laws are morally wrong. I applaud your logical consistency, but I really don't know how to help you if you genuinely think that's a useful way to approach reality. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Metalsonic66 08/19/21 1:44:15 PM #22:	lol this guy --- PSN/Steam ID: Metalsonic_69 Big bombs go kabang. <cite>Metalsonic66 posted [p:957236540] in I don't un... [t:79613555]...</cite> <quote>lol this guy </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1

Poll of the Day > I don't understand you... (+) Yeah! (+)

Poll of the Day > I don't understand you...