Oh. I apologize for the mischaracterization.

I think that if I read what you wrote, it will make my ears hot and I will say snarky things to you, then we'll both feel bad and nothing good will happen. I also feel bad when I think about your wasted effort in writing something to me that I'm not going to read, but on the balance I think it's for the best.

 

Grandfather wrote:

...and the email address changed (though Clodfobble could have done that last one since it was her email address).

That one was me. I was testing to see whether it mattered if there was a valid email address attached or not.
 

it's his constiTUtional RIGHT to keep and bear schadenfreude

I'm overlooking it.

I'm tolerating it.

I'm relishing it, especially the "to the top" part.

So let's say Undertoad is right, and we have to sit by and watch fragrant violations of the social contract, because if we so much as say, "hey! I disagree with what you did." the aggressors will play victim and cry about being persecuted and then leave, and then the site fails because nobody wants to come to a site where there is any social responsibility whatsoever. What if what we're supposed to do is forget everything we learned in kindergarten, allow bullies and edge-lords to run hog wild and just smile and nod and say, "it's GOOD that you did sexism"

If we did that, seems like we're taking tangible steps to help create a SHITTY HELL WORLD. When did that become our goal, to aim for the bottom??

Why are people actively arguing for a reversal of vice and virtue? Explain it to me like you would explain it to a child.

Last edited by Flint (11/27/2020 6:44 pm)

Undertoad wrote:

What does your social contract say abusing 82 year old women online?

Is it still okay if you don't know their race?
 

what's the story on that?

did some old crone call the (mebbe) vp-elect a whore, er, a hoe?

did a bag of dry bones say sumthin' disapprovin' of gay-dwarf-albino-trans-embryos?

did some ancient hag say *shudder* the n-word?

must be in the other place cuz I ain't seein' evidence of such fireworks here


 

Undertoad wrote:

Because when it comes to the use of the word whore, you are offended by one word. That doesn't mean it should be banned. Or shouldn't be used at all. I really can't fathom why it makes you so angry.

It's a very common word and can be used in many parts of speech, so is also very versatile. One of its main uses is for the expression of frustration. It is very helpful for that and might almost be considered an alternative medicine. It has the right brevity and a good selection of consonants so saying it forcefully can have the same effect is punching a pillow and other things people to to redirect feelings of frustration.

And when you get down to the actual original meaning, it's about having sex. Which most peple find fun. You seem to be happy enough to use the word "shit". Which refers to excrement. A necessary bodily function which most people would not necessarily categorize as "fun".

You might find your life so much more pleasant and peaceful if you revisit your issues with this word.

 
two birds, one stone... 👍

I know, all you do is gotchas and cheap shots.

saying  "hey! I disagree with what you did." is not the thought police

Last edited by Flint (11/28/2020 4:10 am)

Undertoad wrote:

Because when it comes to the use of the word whore, you are offended by one word. That doesn't mean it should be banned. Or shouldn't be used at all. I really can't fathom why it makes you so angry.

Your complaint seems to be that all complaints are bans.  What exactly are you trying to ban with your complaint?

Ban is a deodorant.  Is there a bad smell in here?

Apparently I don't smell it.  Maybe I better get tested.

Undertoad wrote:

snip--
The professor is now had his classes cancelled, is barred from campus, and is on administrative leave
 
story here

I've found cites for this statement.  What's absent from UT's post is that these actions by the administration have not been cited as the reason for the actions of the administration.  Perhaps the administration is inept or evil or stupid or something else.  But it does seem that there's more to this story for such a dramatic actions to be taken and NOT to have the headline news, which the professor admits, regrets, and has apologized for, cited as the cause.  Why was he suspended, etc, if not for that?  What else might be happening here?