Zappa.com

Dude you crack me up...if you wouldn't have turned into such a ...dare I say...asshole as dd, you wouldn't have to dodge and weave so much. Although it appears that it doesn't take much to get one over at this site...or 3 or 4 for that matter.

So...

Someone behaves like a tool, with several aliases, all of which have display varying degrees of antisocial behaviour, then puts his hand up and says 'i was only being an asshole to get a reaction' (paraphrasing), and the rest of us, not in on the 'joke', are supposed to pat him on the back and give a nice emoticon...

or am I missing the point?

_________________
Guy Cool

Depending on how you choose to perceive it, it isn't necessarily anti-social behavior. Having said that. Is anti-social behavior really so bad, as opposed to lets say absolute social conformity? I value independent thinking over social conformity, that means that by most peoples definition I am anti-social. I am not overwhelmingly concerned with fitting in, that is a form of anti-socialism. Now, that may or may not be a play on words.

I'm not really trying to determine write or wrong here, I'm just attempting to indicate that there is a different way to look at it. I chose to look at it a different way than most, but that doesn't mean that you have to agree with me, or him, or anyone for that matter.

_________________
"Whose foot is to be the measure to which ours are all to be cut or stretched? Is a priest to be our inquisitor, or shall a layman, simple as ourselves, set up his reason as the rule for what we are to read and what we must believe?" T.J.

What. So I am supposed to regard every instance, on the net, of racism/homophobia/whatever as being an ironic, juvenile attempt to make me consider things (in this case, Obama's suitablity to run a country) in a more [i]complete[i] way.
I prefer plain-talking. I don't like second-guessing what this sort of shit means.

I don't need to amend each insult with an 'I was only joking' tag.

_________________
Guy Cool

I don't see any need to amend every insult with an "I was only joking" tag. Nor is there any need to say things in any particular way to satisfy any particular individual or group of individuals. It would be just as much of an absolute social conformity to tell you how you had to say or perceive something as it is to tell you how you can not say or perceive something. And that most certainly is not the point.
Remember, language is just a symbol of an idea, written language is one way in which we try to convey ideas. Some people will convey or grasp an idea through a simple way of being written, but some would prefer to play with their language rather than being bound by it. Ultimately the choice falls to the individual.

Simple version, say whatever the fuck you want, however you want, and expect others to do the same. The result should be a free expression of ideas, then choose the ones you like, and ring true to you.

_________________
"Whose foot is to be the measure to which ours are all to be cut or stretched? Is a priest to be our inquisitor, or shall a layman, simple as ourselves, set up his reason as the rule for what we are to read and what we must believe?" T.J.

Hey, I'm all for freedom of expression, but DD's method, if not confined to an internet forum, would, if he had the stones to do it in person, lead to 'consequences'.

Those consequences could vary, depending on the country he lived in and the people he was 'expressing' himself to.

I'm not a politically-correct bleeding heart. Just a reasonable (cool) guy.

_________________
Guy Cool

The world isn't black and white. You give us the only options of "anti-social behavior" and "absolute social conformity". There is alot of grey area in between. There is also the issue of being an asshole. I think you can be "anti-social" and not be an asshole and an "absolute conformist" and be one. DD makes his own bed. Anybody who chooses to sleep in it...Oh I think I'm gonna hurl.

The argument itself was inherently designed to protect and promote shades of grey. Any expression of an absolute anti-social behavior involving a response would be a practical impossibility. To respond is to be sociable to a degree. Likewise, any need to enforce an absolute social conformity would be a practical impossibility. Who would be capable of expressing anything?

Practical application of absolute anti-social behavior results in an unwillingness to express oneself and as such the only possible outcome is isolation.
Practical application of absolute social conformity results in the inability to express oneself and as such the only possible outcome is isolation.

Hurl seconded

_________________
"Whose foot is to be the measure to which ours are all to be cut or stretched? Is a priest to be our inquisitor, or shall a layman, simple as ourselves, set up his reason as the rule for what we are to read and what we must believe?" T.J.

Personnel attacks to defend ones point are unacceptable, we all know the Queen of this strategy is Anne Coulter, I am sure we all love that cum dunt.