Study does not show lung damage from marijuana

[rah]

Kid deserves whatever he gets based on how he treats everyone around here.

[Elok]

He was taking it seriously to the extent that he was not simply blowing it off like any rational human being would. However, I remain convinced that the bulk of his outrage is feigned to give him an excuse to posture as The Upright Christian. When he becomes actually, genuinely upset, he responds once, briefly, aggressively, and without sanctimony. Here's a brief, paraphrased example:

Posturing Kid: Elok, I urge you to repent before it is too late and your heart becomes hardened. What you are doing is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit and it will send you to Hell. You know this in your heart, but are denying it. The wages of sin is death, remember that. [variations on this theme will be repeated over the course of several posts, becoming increasingly ludicrous and melodramatic, as he works himself up into a frenzy of self-righteousness]

Actually Angry Kid: Why should I believe what you say, you lying peice of ****. You are a terrible person and a hypocrate.

See the difference?

[ZEE]

wow there sure are some hurt feelings going on around here!

[Aeson]

He was taking it seriously to the extent that he was not simply blowing it off like any rational human being would.

I'd point out that you didn't just blow off his "utterly idiotic accusations", but felt the need to "show him what it feels like".

However, I remain convinced that the bulk of his outrage is feigned to give him an excuse to posture as The Upright Christian. When he becomes actually, genuinely upset, he responds once, briefly, aggressively, and without sanctimony. Here's a brief, paraphrased example:

See the difference?

I see a lot of differences in those two statements.

What I don't see, and what a reasonable person would admit they can't see, is how Kid "really" feels at the time based on those statements. For all we know you got it exactly backwards, or he felt the same way in both cases, or that his responses aren't indicative of his feelings at all.

I also don't see how it even matters. If Kid wasn't angry, but was just posturing, then he obviously wasn't taking the attack seriously. He was just using it to his (from his perspective) advantage. You can't have it both ways.

[giblets]

I'm pretty sure arguing with the mentally ill is a sign of mental illness. (I am admittedly mentally ill.)

If this is true (not going to bother arguing with it) then it kind of implies that the opinions of the mentally ill lack merit which would undermine your own credibility as a mentally ill person.

[Aeson]

If this is true (not going to bother arguing with it) then it kind of implies that the opinions of the mentally ill lack merit which would undermine your own credibility as a mentally ill person.

and... this matters?

[Elok]

I'd point out that you didn't just blow off his "utterly idiotic accusations", but felt the need to "show him what it feels like".

True, but there was honestly nothing vengeful about it. Just saying, "dude, please substantiate your claims or shut up" over and over again wasn't working, so I tried for a different tactic to see if he would understand where I was coming from. It turned out he didn't, but it was a slim hope at best. I should have put the objectives in the other order up there; getting him to Ignore me was the primary objective. After the umpteenth non sequitur response I said, "oh, **** it, this is a waste of time, let's see if I can get him to ignore me."

Now, I suppose that was an irritable response. I'm not saying my behavior was ideal. But I was not in any sense bullying him, as you seem to be implying.

I see a lot of differences in those two statements.

What I don't see, and what a reasonable person would admit they can't see, is how Kid "really" feels at the time based on those statements. For all we know you got it exactly backwards, or he felt the same way in both cases, or that his responses aren't indicative of his feelings at all.

You've been on this site for more than ten years (and, presumptively, on the internet in general for longer), and you haven't learned yet that people are far more articulate when calm than they are when angry? And if we're not allowed to measure his temper from his responses, how can you say he was upset while I can't say he wasn't?

I also don't see how it even matters. If Kid wasn't angry, but was just posturing, then he obviously wasn't taking the attack seriously. He was just using it to his (from his perspective) advantage. You can't have it both ways.

Would you like your semantic quibbling merit badge now, or later? By "taking it seriously" I mean "treating it as a serious accusation in some sense instead of showing awareness that the 'attack' was deliberately nonsensical." If that is not the phrase you would use to convey that meaning, I hereby plead guilty of malapropism, so let's move on.

[giblets]

and... this matters?

I suppose credibility does matter.

[Aeson]

You've been on this site for more than ten years (and, presumptively, on the internet in general for longer), and you haven't learned yet that people are far more articulate when calm than they are when angry?

I understand the internet quite well. It's you who seems to be unaware of it's nature. There are many different types of responses different people can have to the same input or emotional state, and many people wear masks of their choosing.

I wouldn't say there was a difference in articulation in the statements in any case. A short and abrupt insult can be perfectly articulate, or not at all. The difference in the statements was one was a direct attack, and one was a self-aggrandizement/patronizing one. Neither of those is necessarily a result of anger, or mutually exclusive with it.

And if we're not allowed to measure his temper from his responses, how can you say he was upset while I can't say he wasn't?

You were the one claiming he was taking it serious so that you could mock him for doing so. I am simply discussing your hypothetical and it's implications with you.

Would you like your semantic quibbling merit badge now, or later? By "taking it seriously" I mean "treating it as a serious accusation in some sense instead of showing awareness that the 'attack' was deliberately nonsensical." If that is not the phrase you would use to convey that meaning, I hereby plead guilty of malapropism, so let's move on.

If you really wanted to move on you should have done so, rather than addressed it and made a derogatory comment. See, again you are saying one thing, but contradicting it with your actions. The extended version of your statement is better and eliminates the confusion with "serious", though I don't think the later acts actually fit the "deliberately nonsensical" in the same regard as perhaps your first post did. It became (if it wasn't already) mocking his response, which even tied to the bestiality to make those statements deliberate attacks that weren't actually nonsense.

[Aeson]

I suppose credibility does matter.

1+1=2

Hope you can figure it out

[Aeson]

(and no, credibility on this site matters not one iota to me)

[Elok]

What do you do on staff?

[Aeson]

My "Deity" rests there. Both of them unwanted relics of ages gone by.

[Aeson]

I think it was because I was the backup moderator for the Civ4 democracy game. I didn't even know that made me staff until years later when they started showing the thing. I have no mod powers that I'm aware of, other than the hilarious one that people can't ignore me.

[giblets]

It looks like support for legalization has finally surpassed opposition, according to Gallup:

By the end of the decade you might be able to walk around the street smoking pot without getting arrested if a cop sees you...