Pwn59049d, for those of you wondering. Well Gomidog, I hope your feelings were hurt, maybe you'll realize how other people feel next time you launch into a rant like this. I may have misunderstood you but you present yourself as the kind of person who follows whatever shock story the news is running today and puts people down for highlighting that you do. I probably vented my anger at you unduly and I apologies if I did. You just struck me as someone who won't care in a few weeks and will have moved on to the next sensation. Whether you are or not remains to be seen. What kind of person are you?
Pwn59049d, for those of you wondering. Well Gomidog, I hope your feelings were hurt, maybe you'll realize how other people feel next time you launch into a rant like this. I may have misunderstood you but you present yourself as the kind of person who follows whatever shock story the news is running today and puts people down for highlighting that you do. I probably vented my anger at you unduly and I apologies if I did. You just struck me as someone who won't care in a few weeks and will have moved on to the next sensation. Whether you are or not remains to be seen. What kind of person are you?
Well, you did start it. You attacked my character. I really do apologize for calling you names, that much I am serious about. If you want to have a civil conversation and ACTUALLY talk to me about my world view and what type of person I truly am, we should Skype, and then you can say what you need to say. I just don't know what you want from me. I'm sorry I gave you that impression, but just to let you know, I do what I can.
Pwn59049d, for those of you wondering. Well Gomidog, I hope your feelings were hurt, maybe you'll realize how other people feel next time you launch into a rant like this. I may have misunderstood you but you present yourself as the kind of person who follows whatever shock story the news is running today and puts people down for highlighting that you do. I probably vented my anger at you unduly and I apologies if I did. You just struck me as someone who won't care in a few weeks and will have moved on to the next sensation. Whether you are or not remains to be seen. What kind of person are you?
Well, you did start it. You attacked my character. I really do apologize for calling you names, that much I am serious about. If you want to have a civil conversation and ACTUALLY talk to me about my world view and what type of person I truly am, we should Skype, and then you can say what you need to say. I just don't know what you want from me. I'm sorry I gave you that impression, but just to let you know, I do what I can.
It seems like Omnutia made a few assumptions with nothing to back them up. This indicates more than a few prejudices. We all have our hot-button issues that make us see red. That being said, we are adults here. No one should want to hurt someone's feelings nor feel it necessary to "teach them a lesson". This is arrogant and vindictive. I think you are better than that, Omnutia.
hat being said, we are adults here No one should not want to hurt someone's feelings nor feel it necessary to "teach them a lesson".
So everyone should want to hurt everyones feelings? [Nvm, see below] Stop being so high and mighty, it is neither worse or better to start shouting at someone or be goaded into shouting back.
If someone wants to Skype me, could they whisper me. Whenever I start Skype in Linux it eats my CPU. Odd. As far as assumptions go, in my experience, people who sensationalize things like this don't tend to stick with it or end up being all mouth. That said, most of this experience is through mass media.
hat being said, we are adults here No one should not want to hurt someone's feelings nor feel it necessary to "teach them a lesson".
So everyone should want to hurt everyones feelings?[Nvm, see below] Stop being so high and mighty, it is neither worse or better to start shouting at someone or be goaded into shouting back.
You outright said in you "apology" that you wanted her feelings to be hurt. That is simply petty. It isn't high and mighty, it is simply a fact. Also, what is the accusation of shouting? This is a written forum. Did some of the conversation happen in the Geek Chat after I left/before I got on?
One thing about animal cruelty, is that people need to speak on the animals behalf, for they cannot say anything.I am the Lorax, I speak for the trees. I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues.
Ok then Mrs MaCross, take words out of context and quibble all you want. You going anywhere with this?
Out of context? I provided your statement word-for-word. Where else would I take my statement? I simply noted that it was petty (particularly in the guise of an apology) and that I thought you were above it. What more is there to say on the subject? I am not spoiling for a fight, but it seems that you might be. If that is the case, please look elsewhere.
I really don't understand where your extreme vitriol toward Emily's response comes from. All her original post essentially stated was that this thing with the horses was bad, and that she felt bad about it. She didn't make any activist claims, didn't try to be sensationalist and get everyone worked up, and didn't even say she would be following the story further. Why is it suddenly so reprehensible for someone to simply state "Wow, that's horrible" in a public discussion about a given topic? By your logic, no one should ever breathe a single word about anything horrible unless they plan to commit themselves in full to physically doing something to change the horrible situation and not stop until they achieve their goal (or, if I understand some of your other points correctly, they should stay entirely silent on lesser horrible situations all together and only focus on the big ones).
As far as I can see, it's just a variant of the way people hassle Scrym for shit-talking. I don't see why anyone would be offended by it. It means people are actually taking their statements seriously, and not just humoring them, which seems like a good thing, no?
A wonderful idea. There are two potential areas of concern, though.
The first is that thepetitionsite.com states that the responsibility of actually delivering the petition once closed to the target is the responsibility of the petition creator, which the petition does not seem to list. I suppose it would not be unreasonable to assume that it is "Rebecca Young, California", as she is signer #1, but I don't see any contact information for interested parties to follow up with her on the status of the petition. If she loses interest in following through, the petition becomes useless.
The second, is that when the petition was set up, it was not limited to US residence only. This means that once closed, the petition may need a bit of cleaning up, as in all honesty James Caswell has no obligation to concern himself with the opinions of people from Austria or New Zealand.
All-in-all, though. I think that should effectively challenge Omnutia's assertion of shit-talkery.
Comments
Well Gomidog, I hope your feelings were hurt, maybe you'll realize how other people feel next time you launch into a rant like this. I may have misunderstood you but you present yourself as the kind of person who follows whatever shock story the news is running today and puts people down for highlighting that you do. I probably vented my anger at you unduly and I apologies if I did. You just struck me as someone who won't care in a few weeks and will have moved on to the next sensation. Whether you are or not remains to be seen. What kind of person are you?
As far as assumptions go, in my experience, people who sensationalize things like this don't tend to stick with it or end up being all mouth. That said, most of this experience is through mass media.
The first is that thepetitionsite.com states that the responsibility of actually delivering the petition once closed to the target is the responsibility of the petition creator, which the petition does not seem to list. I suppose it would not be unreasonable to assume that it is "Rebecca Young, California", as she is signer #1, but I don't see any contact information for interested parties to follow up with her on the status of the petition. If she loses interest in following through, the petition becomes useless.
The second, is that when the petition was set up, it was not limited to US residence only. This means that once closed, the petition may need a bit of cleaning up, as in all honesty James Caswell has no obligation to concern himself with the opinions of people from Austria or New Zealand.
All-in-all, though. I think that should effectively challenge Omnutia's assertion of shit-talkery.