The new neighbors...

i'm not a man hater or anything, but they haven't anything on rocks, have they? LOLOL

Rocks don't leave piles of dirty dishes in the sink, and crumpled beer cans on the floor next to the couch.

Oh please! Don't paint us all with the Phil brush.


Sees the previous post and runs off to pick up those empties.

rocks aren't real smart. that was all i was saying.

Neigh means NAY!

Yeah I was saying rocks compare favorably on many traits.


LOL

Unecessary, About land/Media Tab/Check 'Restrict Spatialized sounds to this parcel'

I notice that you didn't accept my challenges, 3Ring. Should I take it that you found that you couldn't support your statement?

If that's all it is, yes. But would you still shrug your shoulders if your words were changed, and you were publically insulted on account of the change? That's what Colette did to Rebecca. All I did was point it out. Many people would have accepted that they'd made a mistake, when it was so clear and obvious, but not Colette - she's different.

If I hadn't put energy into showing what Colette wrote was wrong, and why it was wrong, who would have? Would you rather everyone thinks that you wrote "blatantly ridiculous" stuff when you didn't, just because someone else chose to say you did, using untruths to make the insult with? I'm sorry if that's your preference, but I don't share it.

My point is that this particular discussion in this thread was over and done with until you brought it up again.

You, 3Ring. You're the one who brought it up again - not me - see above.

Well, for one, Rebecca didn't seem to take offense, or if she had, she kept it to PMs in order to be an adult about it.

Personally, I agree with Colette's interpritation of the statement in question. While others, yourself specifically Phil, may have other optinions on your interpritations, that is an individual prespective.

You are completely free to read the statement in any way you wish. So is Colette.

My personal read on it was Rebecca was comparng the time involved to master such complex games as WoW to the time spent to gain a college degree. I happen to agree with that statement, but I agree with Colette, that this was the general idea of Rebecca's wording.

Now, unless Rebecca wants to chime in and clarify, one way or the other, what her meaning was, then each is entitled to their own judgements on said statement. If you would debate the merits of the equality of the time/effort that Colette spoke of, that would be one thing (though still not relative to this thread). To debate (argue) over what Colette should, or should not, read into the text is both childish and crass.

You do not know what Rebecca meant anymore than anyone else who read over it, and you are in no way in any authority to tell Colette, or anyone else, what they can, or can not, read into a statement.

~Jessy

Except it wasn't necessarily wrong. Either interpretation - hers or yours - is potentially valid. And, honestly, I think you're splitting hairs over it, for no reason other than to poke at Colette.

Poke At Colette is one of Judy Blume's most underrated novels.

Along with "Are You There Aki? It's Me, Oryx."

LOL.

Let me know if she ever answers the call.

This thread is finally settling down. Maybe it needs more cowbell...

Remember what you wrote there as we move down your post a little.

You can't have it both ways. Rebecca's statement *was* comparing the time taken for both things, just like I said it was, and just like you said it was, but that's not what Colette said it was, and it's not what Colette wrote when she insulted Rebecca for the statement. So you don't agree with Colette at all.

Colette altered it so that she could throw the insult. She admitted that she substituted "time" for "effort", and it's nothing to do with interpretation. You see, Colette couldn't insult somebody for comparing the time it needs to do one thing with the time it needs to do another, so she substituted the word "time" for something else.

See above. You don't agree with Colette at all. Colette wrote that the statement was about 'effort', when you and I have both correctly written that it was about 'time'.

I also wrote that it was a small change, but it was enough to allow Colette to throw the insult. Without the change, she couldn't have insulted Rebecca over the statement.

Rebecca did chime in. Remember? She thanked me for pointing it out, and mentioned that I missed the other 20 times in the thread when what she'd written had been twisted by people.

To be honest, I'm amazed that this bit went on the way it did. Any reasonable person would have looked at what I pointed out, and agreed that they'd made a mistake. It's so blatantly obvious that there's no point in hanging on through thick and thin. Colette actually said that she'd changed a word, but she just couldn't admit to having made a mistake. The truth is, if she changed a word in order to insult someone, and then insists that it wasn't a mistake, then she effectively admits to be a liar. Personally, I don't think she's a liar, though I could be mistaken. I think she's a person who cannot be seen to wrong, or even mistaken.

See above.

This is how it went (paraphrased and potted)...

Rebecca: It takes as much time to do this as it does to do that.

Colette: You make blatantly ridiculous statements, such as "it takes as much effort to do this as it does to do that".

As I said, the change was small, but it completely changed to subject of the original statement, and was sufficient for Colette to throw the stupid insult. Without the change, she couldn't use the statement for insulting purposes.

Phil, to many of us, effort and time are the same damn thing. I totally supported Colette's read on the matter.

Your constant harping on the issue does point to a problem you have with Colette.

Phil, you're the online equivalent of that truck in "Duel".

"Thinking, or more precisely identification with thinking, gives rise to and maintains the ego, which, in our Western society in particular, is out of control. It believes it is real and tries hard to maintain its supremacy. Negative states of mind, such as anger, resentment, fear, envy, and jealousy, are products of the ego.

These negative states arise through identification with form, whether it be a material possession, a physical body, a social role, a self-image, a thought, or an emotion. It arises through unawareness of the formless inner dimension of consciousness or spirit, which is the essence of who you are. You are trapped in object consciousness, unaware of the dimension of inner space which alone is true freedom."

--Eckhart Tolle

"More cowbell."

--Christopher Walken

You got it.

I don't think it's splitting hairs, Ann, and it's not a matter of interpretaion. Rebecca's original wording was perfectly clear, and meant only one thing.

I didn't bring it up to have a go at Colette - I've no reason to. I only remember one thing in my previous discussions with Colette - she said that she wants me to admit that something I am doing is not the original intention for it - or words to that effect. Other than that, I don't remember anything she said when discussing with me.

I brought it up as an example (read my original post and you'll see it was merely an example) of the way that some people in this thread were twisting and changing what someone else wrote, and I said that it's a shame that people do it, and it *is* a shame - it's shameful for sensible people to do that.

My bringing it up doesn't have anything to do with Rebecca either. The last time that I had a dialogue with her, she was having a go at me, to the extent that someone PMed me to say, don't let her get to you - she's a PITA. I brought it up because it's a shameful thing for sensible people to do, and it makes it impossible to have a sensible discussion/debate. Unfortunately, some people resort to that sort of thing all too readily, and I object to it.

Then you need to learn english, Chris, because they mean completely different things.

I don't constantly harp on about it. It was over and done with until 3Ring brought it up again and, in the process, said that I'd written "nonsense", which I replied to. I didn't have an issue with Colette - I promise you. Now I see her in a different light - as someone who has a strong aversion to being seen to have made a mistake, or done something wrong - but I didn't have any particular views about her before this thread.

does that drown out the avatar moans and converstaions travelling over into Mari's land?

For anything which requires action, time implies effort. I don't know what Rebbecca actually intended, but I understand why Colette interpreted it the way she did.

And if you aren't just trying to irritate Colette, then drop it already. You're only making yourself look bad.

Sorry, Phil, if I am putting time into something, I am putting effort into it. If I am putting effort into something, you can bet it is taking my time.

Do you dispute the saying that "time equals money" as well?

no. you should take that as me not being interested in a word games.

as mentioned earlier, i don't really care. been done a thousand times to me, and i just don't give a damm. i know my intentions. it is your responsibilty to decode them, not mine to explain them in laymens terms.

i disagree that any of this happened. it's more complicated now because you made it that way. you are spinning everything, and it doesn't highlight you favorably.

my opinion is mine, yours is youres, and Colette's is hers. they differ, clearly. so wut? i don't think Colette was wrong, i think you interprested it wrong. you're so deep into this now that you refuse to reread it with the intent it was written. you need to step outside the bubble and try to realize that more than 'just words' dictate meaning.

i repeat.... every time you reply, you are bringing it up again.

see above.

=======================================
I wonder what is happening on Mari's land today... did they move their build? did Mari build a wall? will the sock puppet ever find true love? this all revealed on the next episode of Soap.