Reply to: More Bannings

[doomage]

Try to make a comment (or even an insult) that makes sense next time.

I meant to imply that if you were to punish people for being wrong, you would be busy punishing yourself for being wrong pretty much all of the time, thus being too busy to punish others.

Sorry I will type slower next time as I know you can't read good.

[d000hg]

Try to make a comment (or even an insult) that makes sense next time.

[doomage]

I never said we had to punish everyone who did wrong, we'd never get time to do anything else!

Too busy with the self-flagellation?

[doodab]

I never said we had to punish everyone who did wrong, we'd never get time to do anything else!

Which brings me back to WGAS as long as they aren't hurting anyone.

I think we probably agree but say it in slightly different ways

[d000hg]

No, i judge right and wrong based on my own subjective opinion. Something can be wrong (in my opinion) without affecting others but I think people should be allowed to be wrong if they aren't hurting anyone.

I never said we had to punish everyone who did wrong, we'd never get time to do anything else!

[GreenLabel]

What have the other 50% got?

The cretin sequence.

[Spacecadet]

Deep seated psychological issues?

Actually i've met quite a few people from here and some of them were quite normal.

We were upstairs at the counting house

[doodab]

What have the other 50% got?

Deep seated psychological issues?

Actually i've met quite a few people from here and some of them were quite normal.

[speling bee]

Human genome map finally isolates ‘annoying prick’ sequence

And 50% of cuk posters have it.

What have the other 50% got?

[BrilloPad]

Human genome map finally isolates ‘annoying prick’ sequence

And 50% of cuk posters have it.

[doodab]

Probably we come at this from fundamentally different and mutually exclusive world views; I believe that such a thing as absolute right/wrong exists, you (I assume) judge right/wrong based on the impact it has on [other] people.

We'd probably have to agree to disagree on this!

No, i judge right and wrong based on my own subjective opinion. Something can be wrong (in my opinion) without affecting others but I think people should be allowed to be wrong if they aren't hurting anyone.

[d000hg]

They can be taught, sure, will they learn though? I more of a judge not lest ye be judged kind of character.

Well no punishment can force someone how to think so it's perhaps a moot point. It depends what you mean by 'policing' though.

[Old Hack]

I believe that such a thing as absolute right/wrong exists

...and again, I feel sick.

[doomage]

Really, you don't think people should be taught not to be judgemental on these issues?

They can be taught, sure, will they learn though? I more of a judge not lest ye be judged kind of character.

I have to disagree.

Don't you always?

A hate-filled person who only hides it for social convention and an easy life is still a hate-filled person.

Agreed, I don't like it, but until someone acts there is no proof of the hate (fear -> hate -> anger -> destruction). In this context (posting on a fourm), where is the line, which acts do you police?

[d000hg]

But if they aren't upsetting anyone then WGAS?

Probably we come at this from fundamentally different and mutually exclusive world views; I believe that such a thing as absolute right/wrong exists, you (I assume) judge right/wrong based on the impact it has on [other] people.

We'd probably have to agree to disagree on this!