|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
 Posted - 08/12/2004 : 12:36:37 [Permalink]
|
quote:
posted by filthy: (I'm 65 -- respect me or die horribly!)
Damn... bunch of old farts running around here!
Where is the 18-34 room? |
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
 |
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
SciFi Chick
Skeptic Friend
USA
99 Posts |
Posted - 08/12/2004 : 12:48:32 [Permalink]
|
It is my habit to say I'm over 21 and leave it at that. After all, if I wait until I'm old to do that, it will be obvious what I'm doing.
My mom lost a job due to her age once, so it's made me a touch paranoid. It's not a vanity thing. |
"There is no 'I' in TEAM, but there is an 'M' and an 'E'." -Carson
"Rather fail with honor than succeed by fraud."
-Sophocles |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 08/12/2004 : 13:10:01 [Permalink]
|
Renae wrote:quote:
I have a soft spot for older people and long ago became fed up with the ageism that's rampant in our society.
Is not ageism the prejudice for or against people of a certain age? Has anybody other than you and Skyhawk expressed anything even hinting at such a prejudice?
Chuck has made a big deal of his age - at least the fact that he's over 40. The data point of what he claims his age to be is certainly not irrelevant to his arguments. But his age doesn't otherwise make a bit of difference to me.
It's not like I (or anyone else) has said, "he's old, therefore he's wrong." I don't consider him to be a fanatic because he's 70. I consider him a fanatic because he said he was. If 25-year-olds were posting the same things, I would hold the same opinion of them. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 08/12/2004 : 13:14:42 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by SciFi Chick
It is my habit to say I'm over 21 and leave it at that. After all, if I wait until I'm old to do that, it will be obvious what I'm doing.
My mom lost a job due to her age once, so it's made me a touch paranoid. It's not a vanity thing.
I've always preferred, "I'm between puberty and death". |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
SciFi Chick
Skeptic Friend
USA
99 Posts |
Posted - 08/12/2004 : 13:31:09 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
quote:
Originally posted by SciFi Chick
It is my habit to say I'm over 21 and leave it at that. After all, if I wait until I'm old to do that, it will be obvious what I'm doing.
My mom lost a job due to her age once, so it's made me a touch paranoid. It's not a vanity thing.
I've always preferred, "I'm between puberty and death".
Oh. I like that. I'm stealing it in real life - but I'll give you credit on line.  |
"There is no 'I' in TEAM, but there is an 'M' and an 'E'." -Carson
"Rather fail with honor than succeed by fraud."
-Sophocles |
|
|
|
Renae
SFN Regular
543 Posts |
Posted - 08/12/2004 : 18:05:55 [Permalink]
|
At the risk of beating a quite dead horse...
I never told anyone to "shut the fuck up." I said "it is possible to dislike someone and shut the fuck up about it." I said this in context of other ways to handle this type of situation. I'm baffled as to why someone would interpret that as me telling them personally to shut up.
SciFi Chick, you are highly unqualified to make any judgments whatsoever as to how kindly or compassionately I live my life. You've read a handful of my posts on a particular topic. You don't me.
I disagree that I was mean to Ricky by pointing out that his values may well change as he ages. You disagree that it's cruel to cyberstalk a 70-year old man and spend pages documenting what an idiot you think he is. Fine. We disagree.
Just so you know, I don't take advice from people on the Internet and am not interested in criticism, constructive or otherwise, well-intentioned or otherwise. I also rarely, if ever, change my mind about things relating to my deep values, and I'm sure not going to on this one.
PS The retch and gag refers to someone who uses "the truth" phrase. There is no "truth"...only personal truths and facts. I distrust anyone who believes they know "the truth" and am annoyed by people who insult others and then claim "the truth" as a defense. That's all.
Apologies for overreacting and being, er, less than elegant. Carry on.   |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 08/12/2004 : 18:28:45 [Permalink]
|
Renae wrote:quote:
You disagree that it's cruel to cyberstalk a 70-year old man and spend pages documenting what an idiot you think he is.
If that's really what you think happened here, then you really missed the point of the OP. And my follows-up to you. Ah, you're not interested in criticism.
But even though you're not interested, I'll say that it may be that you, Renae, are the one who doesn't "get it." |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
Posted - 08/12/2004 : 19:42:17 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I disagree that I was mean to Ricky by pointing out that his values may well change as he ages.
I don't think you were mean, I just think you were wrong. Now of course values change, everything changes as a person ages. But that doesn't refute how I feel about the situation, which is what we were talking about. Just because I may or may not feel the same later does not mean that I am wrong now.
quote:
Just so you know, I don't take advice from people on the Internet and am not interested in criticism, constructive or otherwise, well-intentioned or otherwise. I also rarely, if ever, change my mind about things relating to my deep values, and I'm sure not going to on this one.
Why not? Why do you never change your position? I do all the time, as I learn new things. Now my age may come and bite me in the ass here saying "your young, you always learn more when your young", but everyone is always learning. In fact, just a few weeks ago I changed my stance on god from atheist to agnostic athiest, I have flip flopped from pro-life to pro-choice many times as I have considered arguments for each side, finally coming at the conclusion that "I don't agree with it, but I will let others choose for themselves." (kinda pro-choice, but not really). I feel that those who rarely change will be left behind in the past. |
Why continue? Because we must. Because we have the call. Because it is nobler to fight for rationality without winning than to give up in the face of continued defeats. Because whatever true progress humanity makes is through the rationality of the occasional individual and because any one individual we may win for the cause may do more for humanity than a hundred thousand who hug their superstitions to their breast.
- Isaac Asimov |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 08/12/2004 : 20:20:19 [Permalink]
|
Ricky wrote:quote:
Now my age may come and bite me in the ass here saying "your young, you always learn more when your young"...
That would be an example of ageism. "You can't teach an old dog new tricks" is simply a lie - and a nasty one at that, since it's the stereotypical "curmudgeon" image.quote:
...but everyone is always learning.
Well, coberst seems to think that most people choose to stop learning after a certain age, which is another example of "the ageism that's rampant in our society." |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 08/12/2004 : 21:00:23 [Permalink]
|
And as far as this "stalking" business goes (which I'm getting both here and on the BABB), it seems to be a good example of people who are way too sensitive.
Were I to compile a complete list of all of President Bush's speeches and public writings, or to make a complete bibliography of Uri Geller, in order to make some point (or even not), I think many people would describe me as a "diligent researcher" (as coberst nearly did on page one of this thread). And coberst certainly seems to be angling for as much public exposure as either Bush or Geller, so it's quite fair to treat him as the "public figure" he appears to want to be.
"Stalker" implies that I'm out to do the man some sort of personal harm, when what I'd really set out to do from day one is get the guy to see that he could do his self-appointed job in a better way. Even this massive list didn't do the trick, however, so I think he's a lost cause now, and not worth my time. (Defending myself is worth my time, though.)
So... get a grip, people. Save the accusations of stalking for someone truly deserving of that descriptor. "coberst" is still an anonymous Internet entity, as far as I can tell. And, most importantly, I'm not looking to change that. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Renae
SFN Regular
543 Posts |
Posted - 08/12/2004 : 21:11:50 [Permalink]
|
Then enlighten me, Dave. I care most about the intent of someone's communication. So please: what was your intent in your original post? I'm asking here, not telling.
1. To discredit coberst?
2. To get coberst to stop posting?
3. To make us not like coberst?
4. To protect us from coberst?
5. To help us understand coberst better?
Just asking.
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 08/12/2004 : 21:33:41 [Permalink]
|
Renae wrote:quote:
So please: what was your intent in your original post?
Yes, my "ultimate intent" paragraph is among the things I forgot. It's pretty much right in the post above yours: "...what I'd really set out to do from day one is get the guy to see that he could do his self-appointed job in a better way."
Other people's "agree with him, but point out a slight problem" method hadn't worked. The "ask questions" method hadn't worked. Humor had no effect. Even the "be somewhat hostile" method didn't make a dent.
And now it is clear that the all-out "two-by-four to the head" method (the OP) failed, also.
The only method left appears to be the "suck up to him and sneak in a criticism or two" ploy, but he wouldn't fall for it, coming from me.quote:
I care most about the intent of someone's communication.
Turn-about being fair play, you should have no problems telling me why you felt it necessary to accuse me of "stalking" an "idiot." You should also not hesitate to tell me why it is you felt it best to withhold comment on my defense against your implied accusations of ageism, when it seems to me that both you and coberst are guilty of that charge. And also: why is my explanation of why I feel that I'm the victim here unworthy of your response?
I'm not "just asking." I feel a need to know the answers to the above questions. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 08/12/2004 : 21:54:27 [Permalink]
|
One of the things skeptics can do, if they choose, is to point out flawed reasoning and bad logic when they see it.
coberst has ignored every subtle and not-so-subtle attempt (obviously across several forums) to get him to actually put his elleged critical thinking skills to use with regard to his own activity.
Dave W is just pointing out the extensive and somewhat scary extent that coberst goes to in his attempt to be the "Johny Appleseed" of critical thinking. Scary because the guy clearly doesn't use any critical thinking skills.
I, and many others, have attempted to engage coberst in a civil discussion in some of his posts, and he gets miffed when he gets criticized or somebody points out even obvious factual errors in what he posts.
When he's starting to be referenced by others, as Dave W pointed out, it's time to try and let other people know that the guy is not what he's claiming to be. |
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Renae
SFN Regular
543 Posts |
Posted - 08/13/2004 : 05:23:19 [Permalink]
|
Dave, of course.
Why did I use the word stalking? Because to track someone that closely and document them that way is a little, well, weird to me. If you'd done it to me, I would have been a little nervous. (I knew your intent wasn't to harm coberst or create a cyber love affair.) I understand your intent was to get him to change. Perhaps he is uninterested in changing for the young whippersnappers of the world. If so, I understand. 
Why did I use the word "idiot"? Because my impression, after reading the OP, was that you believed coberst to be an idiot. ("Idiot" being shorthand (imprecise) for foolish nutcase.)
Your defense of the charge of ageism? I don't recall reading it (this is a rather long thread), but if you don't believe yourself to be, then fine. You know that people's cognitive skills sometimes change (and decline) as they age, sometimes through "natural" processes (lack of use) and sometimes through disease (ie dementia, Alzheimer's, etc.) You know this, of course. To hold a 70-year old, whose health (mental or otherwise) you know nothing about to a standard befitting a 30-year old feels wrong to me. It doesn't to you, which is fine.
I strongly disagree that I was being ageist. I was simply commenting on my experience of the different ways of looking at the world and how they change as we get older. My experience, not my pronouncement of well-researched age limitations or weaknesses.
I've never understood why people here often become indignant when someone doesn't respond specifically to everything they say. I sometimes don't catch all questions directed to me, Dave. Sometimes I'm too busy. Sometimes I don't know what to say. Sometimes I see their point as valid but don't acknowledge it to avoid wasting bandwith. Sometimes I'm just not reading closely.
I'm the only person on this thread who has apologized or admitted any bad behavior, yet I'm the bad guy? You post a demeaning thread to another poster, and you're the victim? Sorry, but I'm confused. And I need to get some breakfast. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
