The new neighbors...

I was just there and snapped this photo. It's worse than I thought...

2 + 2 = 5

OMG! Raymond, that picture RULZ! that needs to be my online av somehow. LOLOL i almost actually LOL and spit coffee even. topical and just damm funny! i can almost hear him ee-awing and neighing! LOL

Thanks. It took a lot of time and effort to find it.

Timing is everything, and yours is excellent, my friend.

Rebecca has been back into this thread since I brought up Colette's twisting of something she wrote, and she thanked me for doing it. I think that speaks for itself. There is truth in the idea that action over time implies a degree of effort, but that's nothing to do with Rebecca's original statement or Colette's changing of it. If you don't believe me, go back and read them.

It depends what you're doing. How much effort do you expend in the time you are sleeping, or laying back watching TV? 'time' and 'effort' mean completely different things. Have a look in the dictionary.

Time does not equal money

You said that what I wrote was "nonsense". I challenged you to show it. It's not word games. It's you making outlandish claims that you can't back up.

Yes, it would have been very very simple to leave it so that someone had rewritten something that someone had said, and insulted them because of it. Nobody would have noticed, and everyone would have accepted the insult as being true. It would have been simple that way - and the nasty people would have succeeded in their nastiness. It was simple when I brought it up. If it's not as simple now, it's because it's being clouded by silly things, like 'time' and 'effort' mean the same thing, or by people not actually remembering what the original statements were.

I'm not spinning anything. That's really rich, considering that this is all about me objecting to people spinning/twisting/changing things. And I don't care what light I'm seen in. I was seen is a bad light here before this thread ever started.

That doesn't work. This topic was over and done with until YOU raised it again several pages later. Since then it hasn't been brought up again at all - it's ongoing, and that's quite different. If you don't like it, don't respond, and especially don't make claims that you can't back up, because you will most certainly be asked to substantiate them.

Phil you should really leave your sales pitch speeches to increasing the sales of your furniture, I really don't understand why this is bothering you, it really doesn't matter. And I'm not trying to be negative against you.

This thread now has had 12,000 views. Congratulations, one and all!

Bring on the LOLcatz. We can hit 20,000.

This particular one doesn't bother me, Dekka. It's an ongoing discussion that I'm just one of the participants in. The untruths, twistings, flames, etc. bothered me (that's why I brought it up originally), but I've been against those things during my years in forums. I've seen the damage it can do when left unchecked. As a matter of fact, Colette's untruth was an afterthought in my first post, which was only intended to be about Swan. It just happened that Colette posted hers as I was writing mine and I thought that it's a shame that people resort to that sort of thing, so I added a bit about it. I'm amazed that it continued the way it did, because it was all so obvious, but I'm pretty sure I know the reasons why.

If people let it drop, it's fine with me (as it was before 3Ring resurrected it again), but as long as people keep trying to justify those things, I'll continue objecting to them.

Get out and look into the real world then. Effort takes time, and if there is time involved, there is effort. There quanity of effort-time ratio may change, but there is always a corlation.



See above. You seem only to be able to take posts at "word value". The exact definition. Apparently you are incapable of taking into the meaning or "spirit" of the post .



People remember, but what you seem incapable of understanding is that they don't agree with you. You see, that one word may have been changed, but the rest of us have the intellect to still understand the meaning implied. Both in how Rebecca worded her post, and in how Colette worded hers.

It's called "Thinking".



You've put a "spin" on every post you've quoted so far. It's how you troll the forums, and why you get so upset. Because the people are calling you out on it. The biggest "spin", that you don't see, is that the more you do so, the more you look like a fool. I doubt you care if anyone respects you, however, it's not into respect anymore. More to the point people are shaking their heads and laughing. So when they start to ignore you, and no longer reply to you, it's not that you've "won", it's that you've moved into the catagory of "laughing stock".



Quite frankly, people were trying to point out mistakes of inturpetation you made. Yes, you. Not Colette. They have backed up their claims and you have attempted to "spin" them off to your own gain. To be frank again, it didn't work. Neither them helping you to understand, nor your attempt to "put a spin" on what they said.

And before you say you don't put a "spin" on things, I'll say you most certainly did on your reply to my post. Esspecially when you split paragraphs to pull one idea away from another when they were obviously meant to be taken in context together. You are simply doing the same thing you accuse Colette of, you are changing my post to suit your inturpitation of it.

Now, I fully expect you will "put a spin" on this post as well, and I don't care. I'm going to sit back and laugh at you when you attempt to do so. I'll be laughing because I know the rest of the Forum will read exactly what I wrote, and understand it, then they will shake their head at your "spin" and wonder just what planet you're on.

Ta
~Jessy

They're not moving. They've been too busy with building their slave auction area on the land behind my room. I've not yet built a wall, cuz I've been working on stuff for my 2nd rezday party tonight (at Livingtree, not at home). Har showed me some nice ones yesterday, and I looked at a couple others too. Zara Linden stopped by the neighbor's place yesterday, but I have no further information on that. Burt still thinks he's invisible, and Jessica is on trial for murder.

Mari

All this Spin is making me nauseous.

Naa. Your post is emotional garbage, and I try not to involve myself in such things. That's best left to those who enjoy it - you know the kind - those who run out of sensible points and still haven't persuaded the other side, so they resort to insults and such. That's one of the things I object to. I'm only interested in discussing with posts that try to put points forward. That's what discussion/debate is about

I'm sorry that they are staying put, Mari. Are you still getting their conversations on your property?

Happy Rezday!!!!!!

Lol... every time you had a kid you would have to move. "oops... time to move again." *arrives with an empty cardboard box*

You agree there is truth in the idea that action over time implies effort, which in turn suggests that Colette's interpretation has a valid basis, yet you still insist she was deliberately twisting the statement to suit her needs. That is simply not the case.

Thanks! An ya, no real change over there so far.

I'm amazed, and a little embarrassed, dat this thread has gone on so long. :-/

Mari

QFT! All of it! I've been reading this exchange, and I have to agree with Jessy 100%.

The only reason to be embarrassed would be if you were perpetuating this thread with circular arguments or cowbell jokes, which you are certainly not.

After 2 years you're still amazed about the forums?

Happy 2nd rezday!

I have a fever...



Thankoo!

An ya, I guess I got too used to Strife. This thread woulda been gone by page 3 or so.

Mari

Now I know what your birthday wish is.

I agree that effort implies time, but not that time implies effort. There can be no effort without the time needed for the effort to occur in, but effort is not required for time to pass by.

Rebecca said that it takes as much time to do one thing as it does to do the other. Both sides of that imply that there is some effort involved. In fact Rebecca's statement said (paraphrase), what with all the effort required to complete WoW, it takes as much time as it does to do a college education. She was only comparing the time taken on both sides, and she qualified the WoW side with the word 'effort'.

What Colette did was change it to mean that Rebecca was comparing the effort on both sides. But she wasn't - she was comparing the time on both sides. It was like saying, it takes 3 years to complete WoW, and it takes 3 years to complete a college education. How much effort it takes to do each of those things didn't come into it until Coletter arbitrarily changed it. It may take twice as much effort to complete a college education as it does to complete WoW, but it takes the same time. That's what Rebecca said - it takes the same amount of time. Colette changed it, and responded as though Rebecca had said that it takes the same amount of effort. That's completely different. And Colette then judged the idea that it takes the same amount of effort as being patently ridiculous, when it was never said, and never even hinted at.

If you're engaged in an activity which requires action, then, yes, time does imply effort.

The rest of it still sounds like you're splitting hairs to me.

I was just contacted by Colette's lawyers. They wanted me to pass on this message for her.