What's new
By:

No more circumcision in SF?

Millsapa said:
Judging from your answer I think you misunderstood what I was asking in this context.
Click to expand...

Thak you r for claifying.

Millsapa said:
I was asking whether you thought physical means where the only way to control someone,
Click to expand...

No.

Millsapa said:
and I was asking if you thought it was still noble to control someone if it was done in order to protect someone else?
Click to expand...

It could be.

Millsapa said:
If you felt one word was more or less venomous than another, it's because of your own predisposition, not my words.
Click to expand...

Words have their own history of usage, the cultural connotations that come with them. They don't belong to me, but to the culture as a whole. I know there can be a variety of reasons for a person to be ignorant of such connotations, but most of them are relatively rare.
 
Millsapa said:
You don't expect me to buy this ridiculous story do you?
Click to expand...

I have very few expectations regarding you.

Millsapa said:
There was absolutely no reason for you to bring up trolls unless you were using it to describe me, especially after you tacitly agreed with Spout's use of it.
Click to expand...

A tacit agreement requires that I take some action to approve of the use of the word, not that I merely refuse to dispute it. Tacit means "active, unspoken agreement", not "agreement from silence".

Trolls (to me) are the ultimate example of people who don't say what they really mean, typically, but post anything they can think of to get an emotional response. What you post is consistent enough that it doesn't qualify as "anything they can think of", and not quite outlandish enough for me to claim Poe's law. When I say that even trolls reveals clues to their beliefs by their choice of words, I was using the ultimate example of people who were deliberately ignoring what they believed, and saying that even then you can often glean insights into their beliefs from their word choices. If that applies to them, how can it help but apply to posters who post to express themsleves?
 
It is actually kind of fun watching a troll fight.
 
One Brow said:
...I said "Even trolls reveal core beliefs by the words they choose and posts they respond to when trolling." That meant since it is true of trolls, it would also be true of those not trolling...

moevillini said:
OK, now this is where I start to get confused. How can this be true of non-trolls? If they're non-trolls, they're not trolling, are they? So how can you characterize how "they respond when trolling" if they're not trolling? I just don't get it.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

I'm still waiting for an explanation...



LogGrad98 said:
It is actually kind of fun watching a troll fight.
Click to expand...

apparently there's a whole collection of these, though I'm not sure anyone around here is old enough...

egg317.JPG


by the way, trolls appear to be without any sort of gender identifying organs, so why are they generally referred to as male?

at any rate, since they're lacking the organ, I guess at least they don't have to worry about the circumcision question.
 
Maybe they don't lack the organ, maybe it is just in a different place.
 
Millsapa said:
If you felt one word was more or less venomous than another, it's because of your own predisposition, not my words.
Click to expand...
One Brow said:
Words have their own history of usage, the cultural connotations that come with them. They don't belong to me, but to the culture as a whole. I know there can be a variety of reasons for a person to be ignorant of such connotations, but most of them are relatively rare.
Click to expand...

I'm glad you came to this conclusion on your own after I used your own words against you. Our culture rarely sees the control of women as noble.

One Brow said:
If you felt one motive was more or less noble than another, it's because of your own predisposition, not my words.
Click to expand...
 
One Brow said:
A tacit agreement requires that I take some action to approve of the use of the word, not that I merely refuse to dispute it. Tacit means "active, unspoken agreement", not "agreement from silence".
Click to expand...

You weren't silent. Your reply to his post was the action.
 
Millsapa said:
I'm glad you came to this conclusion on your own after I used your own words against you. Our culture rarely sees the control of women as noble.
Click to expand...

It's a good thing for your point that the choice of words can make an ignoble motive into a noble one, just as the choice of words can mean using one steeped in judgement instead of one not steeped in jusdgement.

Wait, that made no sense at all. I guess your effort was completely pointless. Using different words to describe an ignoble motive is still ignoble. People can disagree over whether a motive is noble or not, but that doesn't change the motive.
 
One Brow said:
I was silent on the notion of you being a troll. There was no unspoken action. There wasn't even an emoticon. Thus, no tacit agreement.
Click to expand...

Do you ever hate yourself for being so smart that people want to punch you in the face? Maybe you should just dumb it down a little bit so the rest of us can enjoy your posts?
 
tac·it   
[tas-it] Show IPA
–adjective
1.understood without being openly expressed; implied: tacit approval.
2.silent; saying nothing: a tacit partner.
3.unvoiced or unspoken: a tacit prayer.
Click to expand...

https://dictionary.reference.com/browse/tacit

tac·it adj \ˈta-sət\
Definition of TACIT

1: expressed or carried on without words or speech <the blush was a tacit answer — Bram Stoker>
2: implied or indicated (as by an act or by silence) but not actually expressed <tacit consent> <tacit admission of guilt>
Click to expand...

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tacit

I see no requirement of any kind for any word or action at all to be necessary to show tacit approval for something. In fact the common thread is silence. Most often tacit approval is indicated by a failure to deny or disapprove when the opportunity to do so is presented.
 
LogGrad98 said:
I see no requirement of any kind for any word or action at all to be necessary to show tacit approval for something. In fact the common thread is silence. Most often tacit approval is indicated by a failure to deny or disapprove when the opportunity to do so is presented.
Click to expand...

Argument from definition, what fun!

1.understood without being openly expressed; implied: tacit approval -- you think you can glean understanding from silence?
2.silent; saying nothing: a tacit partner -- You think a tacit partner takes no actions to become a partner?
3.unvoiced or unspoken: a tacit prayer -- you think every instance of silence is a prayer in this example?
1: expressed or carried on without words or speech <the blush was a tacit answer — Bram Stoker> -- a blush is a visible indication, but not a verbal one
2: implied or indicated (as by an act or by silence) but not actually expressed <tacit consent> <tacit admission of guilt> -- again, you think mere silence can imply something?

Now, if I were in teh regular habit of saying posters A, B, and C were not trolls, and declined to make such a comment for Millsapa, that I would agree that silence has an implication by its contrast to other statements. However, I don't regularly make such statements.

Here's a good comparison:
Millsapa: Yes, the anti-abortion crowd is just out to ruin your ability to have irresponsible casual sex with teenagers and young women.
One Brow: Yup.

Note I am silent on any personal desire to have irresponsible casual sex with teenagers and young women. Can you imply anytihing about my desire from that silence?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top