|
|
Post by phatkat on Feb 9, 2010 14:20:02 GMT -6
Eff you. How's that for an answer? I'm through talking to you. You're using every possible opportunity to insult me, call me names, and demand that I change my stance or answer this or that question that you pulled out of your a$$. I am here for civilized discussion and it's clear that I will not get it from you. Until that changes, I can't think of one good reason to continue discourse with you.
|
|
|
|
Post by mcbox on Feb 9, 2010 15:20:11 GMT -6
Argument forfeiture noted.
|
|
|
|
Post by carolyn on Feb 9, 2010 18:00:18 GMT -6
Eff you. How's that for an answer? I'm through talking to you. You're using every possible opportunity to insult me, call me names, and demand that I change my stance or answer this or that question that you pulled out of your a$$. I am here for civilized discussion and it's clear that I will not get it from you. Until that changes, I can't think of one good reason to continue discourse with you. this does not seem like a "civilized discussion" phatkat LOL |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2010 7:26:40 GMT -6
Curiosity, I'm learning has a real impact on mental health.  The following is the question posed to phatkat: You are in need of a babysitter; you have one of two choices. Those choices are, of course:
A. The mentally competent middle-aged woman, or
B. The sitter with a history of mental disorder/illness with our without recorded psychosis.Obviously this is a trick question, as both these individuals may (or may not) be mentally competent at present. So, the only real choice is neither or either ~ it makes no difference. Since those responses aren’t available, I suggest staying at home with the kid your own self even if it means losing your job, your dream date, or going quite bonkers. |
|
|
|
Post by mcbox on Feb 10, 2010 10:24:04 GMT -6
Good guess, WonderWoman, but you're wrong. The scenario is meant to entrap, yes, but not within the boundaries you mentioned. The argument against me is that the mentally ill are not any more unpredictable than your average human being. phatkat chose option C, because neither A nor B, (or the combination of the two) adequately encapsulated the entirety of human possibility. Or so she says. Reply #176 sought to remind her and the other two professionals in this area that simply because they are known as authoritative in this field, there still remains the real possibility of fallacy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on Feb 10, 2010 10:31:34 GMT -6
Good guess, WonderWoman, but you're wrong. The scenario is meant to entrap, yes, but not within the boundaries you mentioned. The argument against me is that the mentally ill are not any more unpredictable than your average human being. phatkat chose option C, because neither A nor B, (or the combination of the two) adequately encapsulated the entirety of human possibility. Or so she says. Reply #176 sought to remind her and the other two professionals in this area that simply because they are known as authoritative in this field, there still remains the real possibility of fallacy. What professional indicated they were infallible? Your adulation of them aside, that would be uncalled for. However, a professional in the field is a whole lot more likely to be correct than you are. You're just trying to get to talk to professionals for free, are'nt you? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2010 11:30:39 GMT -6
Good guess, WonderWoman, but you're wrong. The scenario is meant to entrap, yes, but not within the boundaries you mentioned. The argument against me is that the mentally ill are not any more unpredictable than your average human being. phatkat chose option C, because neither A nor B, (or the combination of the two) adequately encapsulated the entirety of human possibility. Or so she says. Reply #176 sought to remind her and the other two professionals in this area that simply because they are known as authoritative in this field, there still remains the real possibility of fallacy. My guess is that you're making a faulty comparison anyway, since the average joe is generally quite as loony as is the one who actually sought help for their mental problems and is likely the less bonkers of the two because they've been treated. So, since I don't know either of them, I'll go with the one who has an admitted past of mental illness and has to deal with yo-yos like yourself over the middle aged never-been-diagnosed-for-her- irrational-behaviour woman. Now, why is it I'm not asking someone I know to babysit? Of course, the answer is obvious. I only know people I wouldn't trust if my life depended on it. Evidently, phatkat has the same curious problem. |
|
|
|
Post by mcbox on Feb 10, 2010 12:14:09 GMT -6
Where have I gone wrong? Is this a debate over familiarity? No. I've already addressed phatkat, and in which I did clarify that it did not matter if they knew each other or not in either regard. You don't get to answer the question, anyway, WonderWoman. It wasn't directed at you, and your knowledge of the conversation screams reply #152. Take a seat.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2010 12:43:38 GMT -6
Where have I gone wrong? Is this a debate over familiarity? No. I've already addressed phatkat, and in which I did clarify that it did not matter if they knew each other or not in either regard. You don't get to answer the question, anyway, WonderWoman. It wasn't directed at you, and your knowledge of the conversation screams reply #152. Take a seat. I do get to answer. And, you don't get to tell me to take a seat. I'm already seated, thanks. In any case, I'll decide what I respond to for myself. You don't have that privilege. So, then, if I know both people, I choose the one best suited to watch my babies, regardless of the past. |
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 10, 2010 13:56:31 GMT -6
Where have I gone wrong? Is this a debate over familiarity? No. I've already addressed phatkat, and in which I did clarify that it did not matter if they knew each other or not in either regard. You don't get to answer the question, anyway, WonderWoman. It wasn't directed at you, and your knowledge of the conversation screams reply #152. Take a seat. I do get to answer. And, you don't get to tell me to take a seat. I'm already seated, thanks. In any case, I'll decide what I respond to for myself. You don't have that privilege. So, then, if I know both people, I choose the one best suited to watch my babies, regardless of the past. He has the privilege of also hiring a babysitter, and not told to stay home and take care of his kids. lol Just as you can decide whether to take a seat,,,,lol  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2010 14:56:23 GMT -6
I do get to answer. And, you don't get to tell me to take a seat. I'm already seated, thanks. In any case, I'll decide what I respond to for myself. You don't have that privilege. So, then, if I know both people, I choose the one best suited to watch my babies, regardless of the past. He has the privilege of also hiring a babysitter, and not told to stay home and take care of his kids. lol Just as you can decide whether to take a seat,,,,lol Having read very little of what he's selling, I suspect he's actually Honky in a different skin. |
|
|
|
Post by mcbox on Feb 10, 2010 18:05:04 GMT -6
Yeah, honkybouffant argues with himself in his very last post. Sheesh, are you kidding me? No, you don't get to answer, because the argument is not for and with you. You simply believe you have some sort of entitlement to jump in where you please (at the end of the discussion, no less). This has nothing to do with the past. If you cannot give a straight answer to a fairly encapsulating scenario, then you are dodging your way out with statements like, "I can choose anyone I want".
|
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 10, 2010 18:35:28 GMT -6
Yeah, honkybouffant argues with himself in his very last post. Sheesh, are you kidding me? No, you don't get to answer, because the argument is not for and with you. You simply believe you have some sort of entitlement to jump in where you please (at the end of the discussion, no less). This has nothing to do with the past. If you cannot give a straight answer to a fairly encapsulating scenario, then you are dodging your way out with statements like, "I can choose anyone I want". At times some will sign in with different user names and argue with themselves to stir drama, or just simply demented.  It's true can choose to reply to anyone or topic, good thing too is you can choose to not respond back, ;D I learned that lol |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2010 19:31:10 GMT -6
Yeah, honkybouffant argues with himself in his very last post. Sheesh, are you kidding me? It's been done before. So, just give it up. Yes, indeed I do. The entitlement is called being a member of this board. That gives me the privilege of jumping in wherever I damned well please. You don't like it, feel free to ignore what I respond with. Good to know. What past is it you're referring to anyway? Straight answer: I sure wouldn't choose you. |
|
|
|
Post by mcbox on Feb 10, 2010 19:51:26 GMT -6
I am not anyone except mcbox on these boards or anywhere else you know the username. I use it at almost every forum site I frequent. You said it; I don't have to respond to your posts, and that's how I'm allowing and/or disallowing you participation. I'm entertained by your defiant tone, and it's for the chuckle only that I continue. The 'past' to which I was referring is to your sentence: So, then, if I know both people, I choose the one best suited to watch my babies, regardless of the past.
Typical.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2010 20:28:35 GMT -6
I am not anyone except mcbox on these boards or anywhere else you know the username. I use it at almost every forum site I frequent. Those who switch personas say the same thing.  So, you're manipulative. It was rainy here today, and I was bored. So, I guess (for the present) I'm as easily amused as you are. Ohhhh. Well, in that case, of course, the past has everything to do with it, as it was part of your little scenerio, when one of the prospective baby sitters had a 'history'. I submit they both have some history they're not about to share. Yes, it is a typical, normal, natural response. I would not choose someone I don't know anything about other than he thinks some people are 'sub-human'. That's enough for me not to choose you. |
|
|
|
Post by Elric of Melnibone on Feb 10, 2010 20:30:23 GMT -6
i was hoping, mcbox, that you would be a decent human being and intelligent. It seems I am doubly disappointed.
|
|
|
|
Post by mcbox on Feb 10, 2010 21:40:48 GMT -6
WonderWoman.. just nevermind. You're so far out in left field I'm not even going to bother.
Elric, despite what you and many others here think, I'm actually a pretty nice guy who's not hard to get along with. Brumsongs insisted that my initial post was a sight into the mis-informed, and called out his backup squad to defend a position that he evidently could not. You all come down on me like I don't belong here, but it's a bigger fact that anyone who is against capital punishment does not belong here in the first place. I'm not going to sit back and let anyone blind enough to provide livelihood to inmates on death row try and teach me about ignorance.
|
|
mike5
Banned
Ai! Ai! Ai! Ai! Ay!
Posts: 3,662
|
Post by mike5 on Feb 10, 2010 21:47:21 GMT -6
Oh, STFU, already!
With every new person you regulars can't resist piling on because of your pathetic mob mentality. You then accuse them of being someone else you don't like with little to no proof. This b.s. gets old.
Try talking about the fking death penalty for a change.
|
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on Feb 11, 2010 5:48:19 GMT -6
Oh, STFU, already! With every new person you regulars can't resist piling on because of your pathetic mob mentality. You then accuse them of being someone else you don't like with little to no proof. This b.s. gets old. Try talking about the fking death penalty for a change. OK mike, lets kick with you for a while to give the arsewhole a much needed break? ;D |
|
|
|
Post by brumsongs on Feb 11, 2010 7:23:34 GMT -6
"Brumsongs insisted that my initial post was a sight into the mis-informed, and called out his backup squad to defend a position that he evidently could not."
No idea what the first part of this means but as to the second I asked Felix to chime in as he is a professional in the field and is likely to do better correcting your childish nonsense about mental health than a "wannabe Euroweenie hillbilly singer" (copyright Californian 2007) .
"You all come down on me like I don't belong here, but it's a bigger fact that anyone who is against capital punishment does not belong here in the first place. "
Some how I think Charlene might have twigged that some of us, despite our evasive and subtle ways, are actually (whisper it) not as keen on the DP as others. Read back your posts, you started in with the personal stuff and you've got it back in turn. Play nicely and it won't happen.
|
|
|
|
Post by brumsongs on Feb 11, 2010 7:25:10 GMT -6
Oh, STFU, already! With every new person you regulars can't resist piling on because of your pathetic mob mentality. You then accuse them of being someone else you don't like with little to no proof. This b.s. gets old. Try talking about the fking death penalty for a change. It's nice that you've found a friend, dear. You must bring him round for supper one evening. |
|
|
|
Post by mcbox on Feb 11, 2010 8:01:31 GMT -6
What I said was directed at phatkat, not anyone other than her. I do not disrespect people who have not earned it somehow. It is fairly chickensh!t of you to attack people who cannot defend themselves. Stay in your hole and mind your own business, Quasimodo.
|
|
|
|
Post by brumsongs on Feb 11, 2010 8:04:30 GMT -6
What I said was directed at phatkat, not anyone other than her. I do not disrespect people who have not earned it somehow. It is fairly chickensh!t of you to attack people who cannot defend themselves. Stay in your hole and mind your own business, Quasimodo. Who can't defend themselves? |
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 11, 2010 8:44:42 GMT -6
You said it; I don't have to respond to your posts, and that's how I'm allowing and/or disallowing you participation. |
|
mike5
Banned
Ai! Ai! Ai! Ai! Ay!
Posts: 3,662
|
Post by mike5 on Feb 11, 2010 9:50:15 GMT -6
Oh, STFU, already! With every new person you regulars can't resist piling on because of your pathetic mob mentality. You then accuse them of being someone else you don't like with little to no proof. This b.s. gets old. Try talking about the fking death penalty for a change. It's nice that you've found a friend, dear. You must bring him round for supper one evening. Thank you for confirming once again, that you have nothing intelligent to say about the death penalty. |
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on Feb 12, 2010 5:15:56 GMT -6
"Brumsongs insisted that my initial post was a sight into the mis-informed, and called out his backup squad to defend a position that he evidently could not." No idea what the first part of this means but as to the second I asked Felix to chime in as he is a professional in the field and is likely to do better correcting your childish nonsense about mental health than a "wannabe Euroweenie hillbilly singer" (copyright Californian 2007) . "You all come down on me like I don't belong here, but it's a bigger fact that anyone who is against capital punishment does not belong here in the first place. " Some how I think Charlene might have twigged that some of us, despite our evasive and subtle ways, are actually (whisper it) not as keen on the DP as others. Read back your posts, you started in with the personal stuff and you've got it back in turn. Play nicely and it won't happen. Exactly, and his logic is way out west also. He argues that those with mental illness are dangerous and unpredictable, whilst wholly ignoring his own role in making them so. I can guarantee that if you treat any person as less than human and isolate them, it can lead to mental ill health, resentment and eventually that very violence you then condemn them for. Your thinking is a large contribution to bringing about precisely the situation you fear and complain about. As Ben points out and others, it is not a sustainable arguement and is illogical. |
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on Feb 12, 2010 5:17:43 GMT -6
Oh, STFU, already! With every new person you regulars can't resist piling on because of your pathetic mob mentality. You then accuse them of being someone else you don't like with little to no proof. This b.s. gets old. Try talking about the fking death penalty for a change. LOL  It's nice that you've found a friend, dear. You must bring him round for supper one evening. |
|
Lady
Old Hand
Member of the Month - 9/08
I may live in Ohio but my heart belongs to the blue and the gold !
Posts: 659
|
Post by Lady on Feb 12, 2010 16:47:45 GMT -6
but it's a bigger fact that anyone who is against capital punishment does not belong here in the first place. I'm not going to sit back and let anyone blind enough to provide livelihood to inmates on death row try and teach me about ignorance. I think Char runs a great message board , and she has opened the site to those who are against the DP as well. There is many different types of antis, just like there is different types of pros . The antis, who are members here, is not the murderer lover, {except me } pen pal, love struck , excuse making , tofu eating, tree hugger variety of anti like on other message boards, such as CCADP or PTO. In general ,most of the antis who post here are respectful to the pros on the board . Just wish I could say the same about a few of the pros on this board . |
|
|
|
Post by Californian on Feb 12, 2010 20:13:25 GMT -6
"wannabe Euroweenie hillbilly singer" (copyright Californian 2007) . Gawd, I crack me up! ;D Admit that was hilarious or I'll have your a$$ deported.  |
|
