Are We Citizens or Children?

Well yes --in fact that is exactly what I did do. . It was Ulrika's forum postings which originally caused me to seek her out in world as I saw from her posts someone cut from a not disimilar cloth to my own.

So, to answer your question -- My original high regard of Ulrika was found here in the forums.

Btw, Kendra, I meant to ask about this earlier. Please clarify the basis for this statement.

Just my dry sense of humor. I meant no accusations --just saying that while I found your post to be a personal attack on Ulrika --I wasn't going to do anything like report you.

I didn't notice it being about YOU, Kendra.

But I do notice the Neuraltenberg tag team in action yet again.

coco

Tee hee. Your logic reminds me of Jeff Goldblum's logic on the episode of South Park called "Cancelled".


~Ulrika~

I dont' know if you are less intelligent than I am, more intelligent than I am, or exactly as intelligent as I am.

I do know this is what happened:

1. Ulrika states her free speech theory.

2. Jonquille asks how I fit into that.

3. No answer.

4. Well, what's the answer, I ask.

5. You accuse me of trying to "derail" the thread and have it be "about" me.

6. I point out that I didn't bring up the example of me; someone else did.

I also know that if you want to look at someone for being almost comically arrogant, condescending, and barely patronizing to someone she DOES consider her intellectual equal in this thread, you are looking at the wrong one when you look at me.

coco

So rather than saying that you chose to say "Thankfully, I'm not you." If said that to you, would you consider it to be an attack, an insult,or funny?

Well, we don't consult to do this.
Ulrika and I operate more like the Borg.

BTW Resistance is futile.

I need to recharge. I've spent way too much time on the forum today and have to spend time with my new family.

I'll resurrect this discussion in the polisci forum shortly, where I'll take this further by discussing censorship, the censoring of discussions on censorship, and how forum policies could be modified to provide virtual citizens with inalienable rights (without losing control of their game). I think beyond discussing basic philosophy as it applies to forum censorship, it is worthwhile to provide LL with some practical solutions for integrating free speech into their forums.

~Ulrika~

You will be assimilated.

~Ulrika~

Yeah --one could .But you got my dander up by slamming a friend, so I took the route of subtle dig while simultaneously assuring you that I wasn't wired up so tight as to report you for something that was in fact reportable.

Next time, I'll simply choose the path of no response to you and just take the junior high move of pushing the "wed button"



NOOOOO! DON'T PUSH THE WED BUTTON! NOT THE WED ONE!!!!!!!

Why bother? According to what you said earlier -


"And that's the problem with the forums for me. Anyone who is skilled enough to debate me logically won't, because they usually agree with me. It's as if the skill set required to communicate logically also provides one with a similar viewpoint of the problem. Thus instead of debating an issue in General, I'm typically reduced to handling personal attacks, attempts to take threads off topic, logical fallacies, all the while hoping that I'll get through to one or two quiet lurkers who might be listening in the background despite the noise."

- anyone with any intelligence, logic, or skill set at all most likely already agrees with you, right? And those who don't agree with you - well, they just make it harder for any lurkers who are smart enough to realize they agree with you to realize it.

coco

Children.

Would you have asked Picasso not to paint?
Would you have asked Shakespeare not to write?
Would you have asked Mozart not to compose operas?

The forums are Ulrika's artform.

Speaking of junior high.

If you go into "appearance" and adjust your irony slider to over 25, I think you'll understand me better.

I beg to differ.

coco

Interesting that all your chosen examples are dead ... and in at least one case, not exactly universally acclaimed.

I found I was also reminded of the old saw .... "I dont know anything about art, but I know what I like." Or, dont like, as the case may be.

1. Right
2. Right
3. Right
4. Right
5. Wrong
6. Right

So.. you were right in all your statements except the one about what I did. You may need to re-read my post. I did re-post it even. And don't forget the part where you then told me to get a clue. At least I don't put words in your mouth like you try to do to me.

curious --which one do you think is not universally acclaimed? At least among people who's opinions would matter.

That's the difference between you and I. I don't beg.

Rawr

Correct.

You said: "I think it means she is not going to let you take this thread off-topic and make it about you. As there is a real issue that this thread is trying to address. Whether you agree with the OP or not, there is still an actual topic here being discussed."

You didn't precisely accuse me of trying to derail the thread and make it be all about me.

To be more precise, you stated you thought Ulrika was trying to prevent me from taking this thread off-topic and trying to make it about me. And further adding that somehow I had missed the "actual topic" entirely. (As did, I suppose, Jonquille.)

Which strongly suggests you thought that was reasonable, that there was some attempt by me to take the thread off-topic and make it all about me.

When it was Jonquille who brought it up in the first place. How could you ignore that?

And the question still hasn't been answered.

I do like that photo posted above.

coco

I would disagree with this and declare her precision to be nearly scientific in its execution, yet there is something that issues from the soul that only Ulrika possesses that allows her breathtaking forum feats. Even given a procedure, no one else could duplicate it. And doubly impressive beyond that are her many displays of technical prowess. It's a Renaissance Lady we have here, to be quite certain.




This was nicely executed.

Wasn't even grammatical.

coco