Jump to content


Welcome to BrainDen.com - Brain Teasers Forum

Welcome to BrainDen.com - Brain Teasers Forum. Like most online communities you must register to post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process. To be a part of BrainDen Forums you may create a new account or sign in if you already have an account.
As a member you could start new topics, reply to others, subscribe to topics/forums to get automatic updates, get your own profile and make new friends.

Of course, you can also enjoy our collection of amazing optical illusions and cool math games.

If you like our site, you may support us by simply clicking Google "+1" or Facebook "Like" buttons at the top.
If you have a website, we would appreciate a little link to BrainDen.

Thanks and enjoy the Den :-)
Guest Message by DevFuse
 

Photo
- - - - -

Purpose


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#11 Ploper

Ploper

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 579 posts

Posted 22 February 2008 - 11:45 PM

okay your first post made sense Lost In Space
but your second post has me scratching my head
it doesn't seem to match anything unreality said
unless he edited his post afterward, I didn't check
could you explain it to me as if I were a small, stupid child?
  • 0

#12 unreality

unreality

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6370 posts

Posted 23 February 2008 - 01:27 AM

I didn't edit my post.

And "Lost in space" don't talk to us like we want to go starting wars. I'm a pacifist. I'm wholeheartedly against war. I was trying to support Ploper's post about how there are other ways to fight that don't involve violence... like what MLK did with words. etc. Fighting doesn't necessarily mean bombing another country. So don't attack us repeatedly and dont say we "are fighting each other and are gamblers and would have a lot to offer to the world bla bla bla", I'm just as anti-war than you, maybe even more so

EDIT: i just reread your post and it seems even more rediculous now. Nowhere did I ever say that I advocate war or fighting. I am against such things, though sometimes I acknowledge that it has been successful (some guerrilla war campaigns have brought peace, I think, though I'm not sure), and that was part of my post, though most was about how "fighting" is a loose word, and fighting WITH peace, such as what Ghandi and Martin Luther King did, and this actually works and can bring about peace, which is what me and Ploper were saying. Are you against that? Are you against resisting a forceful government? Are you against the things that people like Ghandi and MLK did? I'm not, and neither is Ploper, and that's what we meant by our posts. You have no right to criticize and call us 'unfit for society' and other things that you implied when you know NOTHING against us! I dont know about Ploper, but I am strongly anti-war.

Lost In Space, it seems like YOU are the one who is fighting. But I'm gonna let this go and you leave you be, and I hope Ploper does the same and forgives you too, and let's hope you don't say anything else so distressing to people you don't even know
  • 0

#13 Ploper

Ploper

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 579 posts

Posted 23 February 2008 - 04:01 AM

You and Ploper can fight each other and leave the rest of us in peace. Please try to find a better way though cos I think you both have a great deal to offer the world if you allow youselves to focus on other issues which are important.


I don't get it
in what way were Unreality and I fighting? Quite the opposite really
I stated that you could fight for peace, and he backed me up
that would be the equivilent of me saying "The red Jelly beans can beat the yellow ones any day of the week" Unreality saying "true that" and you telling us to stop bickering.

as to "I think you both have a great deal to offer the world if you allow youselves to focus on other issues which are important."
where does this come from?
It's not like Unreality or I have spent and devoted our whole lives to making these few posts
I don't make post then follow it like a code either
we said things, but it's not our "focus" in life


Lost In Space, it seems like YOU are the one who is fighting. But I'm gonna let this go and you leave you be, and I hope Ploper does the same and forgives you too, and let's hope you don't say anything else so distressing to people you don't even know

Yeah, let's not make a big deal of it, man
I just hope he doesn't tick off anyone who will

I dont know about Ploper, but I am strongly anti-war.

ditto
  • 0

#14 Lost in space

Lost in space

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4009 posts

Posted 23 February 2008 - 12:54 PM

I take on board what you said but can't relate to the jelly beans though, far removed from the subject. Many friends and family have ended up on different sides fighting each other, US civil war to name one if not all.

You both jumped in ready to fight/defend and this is where you could try a different view or thinking outside the box. I have had to find other ways to deal with conflict.

I'm not ticked off by your ideas or thoughts this forum does not seem the right place for such debates - where the subject is as big as and diverse as it is, and I hope you are not by mine - let it go if you want, no one said forums are about being on the same page. Debate is healthy, input is important.

It seems I have offended you.
I wish you both peace and good karma.
  • 0

#15 Lost in space

Lost in space

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4009 posts

Posted 23 February 2008 - 05:26 PM

Unreality,
You did comment that I should think of it as an investment . That does not seem to ME to be a reason to march off to war, especially as you seeem to advocate mediation in your next post, and to be anti-war. These are conflicting views - perhaps the use of HAHAHA and LOL meant you were not taking the subject seriously, that's up to you on how you post your comments and it's up to me how I interpret them! I now take them to be a quick reply where more thought should have gone into it, SYMANTECS?

Also Unreality, you don't seem to be sure if you posted something about guerilla campaigns - perhaps you did on another post, I would have picked up on that one. Have you rushed in again? Guerilla tactics are an interesting theory. Do you suggested that they are pacifist tactics or fighting tactics?

I am not fighting or being contradictory for the sake of it. I simply see confict as a no-win situation. I also thought from your response that I should take on board the cost against gain as an agrument put forward by you, as supported by you, and thus I thought you were ready to go to war. Further your support of Ploper in his defence stance, meant that you were also ready to defend with arms. Did I misunderstand that? Since you both implied that fighting was a possibility, I took it to me that you could be drawn towards conflict in a given situation and therefore a battle would be inevitable in the circumstances. Thus you would both be fighting - seems true to me - How do you contradict that

Where did I say YOU were or are unfit for society? Will appologise now if I did.

Also I appologise if i have distressed you, I only want a healthy debate.

I will start a new topic as this has deviated from the original post.
  • 0

#16 Ploper

Ploper

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 579 posts

Posted 24 February 2008 - 04:52 AM

I know I should talk about this on your other thread
but I guess my quotes of things you say need to be on the thread you posted them in
so here goes

I take on board what you said but can't relate to the jelly beans though, far removed from the subject.

um... it's called a metaphor
you yourself use them

defence stance

no thank you, I am comfortably seated

defend with arms

nah, I type with my fingers, and think with my brain

you used the words stop fighting each other
and I used a metaphor to explain how we were doing quite the opposite

I have had to find other ways to deal with conflict.

like what?
Unreality, you, and I have been dealing with our conflict with words
and seeing as you are anti-war, as are Unreality and I, I'm trying to think of a third way to do it
there's the unpeacefull way, and the peaceful way, the way I see it.

this forum does not seem the right place for such debates - where the subject is as big as and diverse as it is,

you yourself have participated in "Religious debate" where the subject is about as big and diverse as can be, yet no one claimed this ws not the right place for it.

I simply see confict as a no-win situation.

why so?

Edited by Ploper, 24 February 2008 - 04:53 AM.

  • 0

#17 Lost in space

Lost in space

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4009 posts

Posted 24 February 2008 - 04:32 PM

I know I should talk about this on your other thread
but I guess my quotes of things you say need to be on the thread you posted them in
so here goes

Spoiler for reply



um... it's called a metaphor
you yourself use them
Spoiler for reply


no thank you, I am comfortably seated
nah, I type with my fingers, and think with my brain
Spoiler for reply


you used the words stop fighting each other
and I used a metaphor to explain how we were doing quite the opposite
Spoiler for reply


like what?
Spoiler for reply


Unreality, you, and I have been dealing with our conflict with words
and seeing as you are anti-war, as are Unreality and I, I'm trying to think of a third way to do it
there's the unpeacefull way, and the peaceful way, the way I see it.
Spoiler for reply


you yourself have participated in "Religious debate" where the subject is about as big and diverse as can be, yet no one claimed this ws not the right place for it.
why so?

Spoiler for reply

  • 0

#18 Ploper

Ploper

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 579 posts

Posted 24 February 2008 - 07:30 PM

Maybe we move on to WAR AND PEACE but you posted comments so here is more to think about.

I posted everything on my last post in war and peace, but Martini had me move it here because I can't quote something you said in another thread

So you agreed on jelly beans(armies) in conflict but what was your point - I was hoping for more imput, that's all Ploper.

my point WAS
(and I have said this very clearly, at least two times before)
Me and unreality were AGREEING
you told us to stop FIGHTING EACH OTHER
which we WEREN'T
so I was adressing your MISTAKE
(look at the words in capitol letters, they emphasize certain points so you won't need to ask me what I mean again.)

I did't see the pacifist stance on your original comment..
""I think so
You can fight, so that there will eventually be peace
or fight orally
like MLK Jr. ""

Did YOU mean ME. I already know my own feelings. I took your comments to mean what you would do or at least agree with (support violence/conflict). Not act as a consultant where you suggest a list of choices that you are not involed in choising - this may have been your input but I did not take it as non-personal, perhaps I should have. Sorry if I ws meant to get it that way and did not.


first of all, just from the way I talk (and MANY others do this too) when I say "you", it's just a general comment of anyone who wishes to solve a conflict

you say, in your next quote, that you can solve conflict without violence
yet when I say it
fight orally
you seem to say that there cannot be conflict without violence

Well, I have been in some bad situations, two of misplaced road rage, one of being with a girl who antagonised a serious amount of bikers, had a knife held to my throat by a "show off" who i had never met and had all his mates around to egg him on!
It would be boring to go into the stories other than to say, I posed no threat to these people and lived to tell the tale without injury. i can mediate out of tough situations. There are a few other situations similar to above where i could have run and let someone else deal with an esculating problem that they could not have survived, which included a shotgun. AND I LIVE A SIMPLE QUITE LIFE. Perhaps i was destined for ... who knows?


you solved conflict without voilence
something you seem to contradict when I mention it

I don't get it with out the full context and if you are not bothered to quote it all Ploper, nor can I. Please bring it up in more detail and debate with more input to go further on what ever your real point is - and I do want to know!

okay, here you go

You and Ploper can fight each other and leave the rest of us in peace. Please try to find a better way though cos I think you both have a great deal to offer the world if you allow youselves to focus on other issues which are important.

you told us to stop fighting when we weren't,
is that simple enough?
because it should be
my real point is exactly what I've been saying
yet you don't seem to understand the point of my metaphor (which is, again, simple)

I'll take it up in WAR AND PEACE if that's ok?

I would like to, but I also need to quote your exact words to answer questions
which I can only do on this thread

Edited by Ploper, 24 February 2008 - 07:40 PM.

  • 0

#19 Lost in space

Lost in space

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4009 posts

Posted 24 February 2008 - 08:12 PM

my point WAS
(and I have said this very clearly, at least two times before)
Me and unreality were AGREEING
you told us to stop FIGHTING EACH OTHER



My two quotes re fighting
You and Ploper can fight each other and leave the rest of us in peace.

I can't stop you fighting if that IS your choice - you won't find me retaliating.

As you both offered into the debate to fight in certain circumstances, - you may actually end up fighting over symantecs or other differences. it's not unusual for people with common interests to end up on opposing sides. I took it to the edge by saying you to go ahead and fight this unknown foe/senario where you don't have (in my opinion) enough facts. At the point where you both had more info then, you might actually find your selves as enemies - it has happened before! Good luck to you if you are true supporters of each other. May you never disagree (spoils good debate though).

My opinion.
For the record. If you are willing to fight or support someone in a fight, then you are not a pacifist simply because you gave the amunition but did'nt pull the trigger. Can you as judge pass sentance and say that the criminal hung himself the moment he broke the law. I think not. - Maybe that is a seperate debate.

Well, we can debate it further but I don't think the three or us will be "fighting" in this life or the next if there is one - lets move on please, or offer it up another way. Perhaps a scenario in WAP will work. Though I am offering to stay with it if you want.
  • 0

#20 Ploper

Ploper

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 579 posts

Posted 24 February 2008 - 09:09 PM

Good luck to you if you are true supporters of each other. May you never disagree (spoils good debate though).

we don't just blindly support each other
I don't know about unreality, but I won't agree with something he says unless I actually agree with it.
I don't see how it spoils good debate
we just simply find each other on the same side of a debate
and perhaps this won't always be
but when we do find ourselves on the same side, we just debate with others

As you both offered into the debate to fight in certain circumstances, - you may actually end up fighting over symantecs or other differences. it's not unusual for people with common interests to end up on opposing sides. I took it to the edge by saying you to go ahead and fight this unknown foe/senario where you don't have (in my opinion) enough facts.

see, it might've helped if you would've explained this
rather than addressing something that hasn't happened yet, and could very well never happen, as if it had already happened

Edited by Ploper, 24 February 2008 - 09:16 PM.

  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users