I hate it when people blame the system instead of the person abusing the system. Yeah, the system has flaws, but only an asshole would abuse those flaws. Not specifically talking about your discussion right now, it's just something that popped into my head after reading it.
forum
ITT 2: We post shit that is neither funny nor interesting
posted
Total Posts
56,232
I don't really believe German is much different from English in terms of clarity. I know it's kind of a meme at this point that Germans have a word for everything, but really all it does is make sentences shorter. The language might be more efficient in that sense but I don't think there is any German phrase that couldn't be directly translated into English while still maintaining the same level of precision.DaddyCoolVipper wrote:
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
What can I say, people misinterpret very easily. You see it online with people HARDCORE misreading even scientific journals. I don't think clarity is a strong point of the English language at all, especially in contrast with something like German.
I'm with Aurani on this one, really in 99% of the cases it comes down to how well the person can use the language. I doubt there's a lot of people that push the boundaries of the English language.
silmarilen wrote:
I hate it when people blame the system
silmarilen wrote:
the system has flaws
When people "blame the system", they're generally talking ABOUT those flaws that are openly acknowledged to exist in the first place. No need to get defensive and reject analysis into those flaws/how they can be improved, you know?
BrokenArrow wrote:
I don't really believe German is much different from English in terms of clarity. I know it's kind of a meme at this point that Germans have a word for everything, but really all it does is make sentences shorter. The language might be more efficient in that sense but I don't think there is any German phrase that couldn't be directly translated into English while still maintaining the same level of precision.
I'm with Aurani on this one, really in 99% of the cases it comes down to how well the person can use the language. I doubt there's a lot of people that push the boundaries of the English language.
I think it's a bit better than English. All languages, as far as I'm aware, still have serious clarity issues; it's just the nature of languages in general, at least the ones I've seen. I think it'd be nice to have a language someday that fixes that flaw though.
No, when people "blame the system" they are generally saying that the people abusing it shouldn't be blamed.DaddyCoolVipper wrote:
silmarilen wrote:
I hate it when people blame the systemsilmarilen wrote:
the system has flaws
When people "blame the system", they're generally talking ABOUT those flaws that are openly acknowledged to exist in the first place. No need to get defensive and reject analysis into those flaws/how they can be improved, you know?
It's one thing to point out the flaws in a system, it's another thing to pardon the people abusing those flaws because "hey, the system is flawed anyway right? can't blame the people for abusing it."
Just because you can exploit a system does not mean you are not at fault for abusing that exploit. Why do you think exploiting is a bannable offense in so many games?
Trying to fix the flaws is a whole other thing that i didn't even mention. You can try to fix the system without pardoning the abusers.
silmarilen wrote:
No, when people "blame the system" they are generally saying that the people abusing it shouldn't be blamed.
It's one thing to point out the flaws in a system, it's another thing to pardon the people abusing those flaws because "hey, the system is flawed anyway right? can't blame the people for abusing it."
Just because you can exploit a system does not mean you are not at fault for abusing that exploit. Why do you think exploiting is a bannable offense in so many games?
Oh, I see. Yeah I think it's okay to criticise people who go out of their way to exploit systems just as much as it's okay to criticise systems themselves. I'm not really sure what specific conversations you're thinking about here though
I see absolutely no reason why people should shun or be annoyed by anyone socially inept, especially if that person wants to socialize.
Doing so is just like discrimination - you don't want to learn about that person's past or personality, and to be fair, it places you on a higher level than other people, which I hate.
Doing so is just like discrimination - you don't want to learn about that person's past or personality, and to be fair, it places you on a higher level than other people, which I hate.
E m i
that's because you're coolDJ Enetro wrote:
I see absolutely no reason why people should shun or be annoyed by anyone socially inept, especially if that person wants to socialize.
Doing so is just like discrimination - you don't want to learn about that person's past or personality, and to be fair, it places you on a higher level than other people, which I hate.
cooler than me and stuff
DJ Enetro wrote:
I see absolutely no reason why people should shun or be annoyed by anyone socially inept, especially if that person wants to socialize.
Doing so is just like discrimination - you don't want to learn about that person's past or personality, and to be fair, it places you on a higher level than other people, which I hate.
Socially inept people can be annoying because you need to put a lot of energy into them just to have a normal interaction. They need to be "carried", essentially.
The only big long lasting three here
Forums are a place for discussions, but that does not mean “create only topics that the majority of people like to talk about”.
Then again, posting spam is not okay either, where the not-extremes are subjective.
Then again, posting spam is not okay either, where the not-extremes are subjective.
I think we are overdue for an Enertro thread
I refuse to believe the accumulation of Enetro posts thus far ease the amount of unrest that has built up
I refuse to believe the accumulation of Enetro posts thus far ease the amount of unrest that has built up
As far as languages go, there needs to be a balance struck between things being clearly ordered and the need for things to be loose and flexible. An as Jordan Peterson pointed out, the personality traits of order vs flexibility seems to be something that differentiate "Liberals" and Conservatives on the political spectrum, the former generally wanting more flexibility and the latter wanting more order. This applies to language as well (and political words are particularly bad on this). Take the word "Libertarian", there's a significant amount of people who thinks this term has so broad a scope it can be used to define people with polar opposite values, and if you try to clearly define the word, they will berate you for not being "inclusive" enough. Which is obviously ridiculous, because if a word is so watered down it can be used to define anything, it defines nothing, and essentially is of no use as a word anymore. Thus you must actively fight against sloppy language use in which words are used to mean things they're not supposed to and thus their meaning expanded, as this sloppy language use is what contributes to the watering down of the language.
Because English is the most widely used language, being used all over the world in a lot of different cultures and environments, it's probably been subject to this process of having meanings and definitions watered down and expanded upon more so than languages used by small, culturally homogenous populations, which brings the benefit of having an expanded vocabulary but with the downside of added vagueness. I'd imagine German is precise and functional because that's the character of the German people, but I don't think you can just reproduce that functionality by copying their language, because that functionality essentially stems from the people, and if non-Germans were to use the language they would probably degrade in to something less precise over time.
But in example of Aurani here, it was definitely his fault for misusing the word "functionality".
Because English is the most widely used language, being used all over the world in a lot of different cultures and environments, it's probably been subject to this process of having meanings and definitions watered down and expanded upon more so than languages used by small, culturally homogenous populations, which brings the benefit of having an expanded vocabulary but with the downside of added vagueness. I'd imagine German is precise and functional because that's the character of the German people, but I don't think you can just reproduce that functionality by copying their language, because that functionality essentially stems from the people, and if non-Germans were to use the language they would probably degrade in to something less precise over time.
But in example of Aurani here, it was definitely his fault for misusing the word "functionality".
As a socially inept person myself I agree with this sentiment and don't expect anyone to expend energy to interact with me (and I wouldn't want pity like that anyway). Though I would add that sometimes I do have something important to say so it would be nice if certain loud-mouthed people could learn to shut up and let someone speak without interrupting for just a few seconds.DaddyCoolVipper wrote:
Socially inept people can be annoying because you need to put a lot of energy into them just to have a normal interaction. They need to be "carried", essentially.
Shohei Ohtani
As far as languages go, there needs to be a balance struck between things being clearly ordered and the need for things to be loose and flexible. An as Jordan Peterson pointed out, the personality traits of order vs flexibility seems to be something that differentiate "Liberals" and Conservatives on the political spectrum, the former generally wanting more flexibility and the latter wanting more order. This applies to language as well (and political words are particularly bad on this). Take the word "Libertarian", there's a significant amount of people who thinks this term has so broad a scope it can be used to define people with polar opposite values, and if you try to clearly define the word, they will berate you for not being "inclusive" enough. Which is obviously ridiculous, because if a word is so watered down it can be used to define anything, it defines nothing, and essentially is of no use as a word anymore. Thus you must actively fight against sloppy language use in which words are used to mean things they're not supposed to and thus their meaning expanded, as this sloppy language use is what contributes to the watering down of the language. Because English is the most widely used language, being used all over the world in a lot of different cultures and environments, it's probably been subject to this process of having meanings and definitions watered down and expanded upon more so than languages used by small, culturally homogenous populations, which brings the benefit of having an expanded vocabulary but with the downside of added vagueness. I'd imagine German is precise and functional because that's the character of the German people, but I don't think you can just reproduce that functionality by copying their language, because that functionality essentially stems from the people, and if non-Germans were to use the language they would probably degrade in to something less precise over time.
But in example of Aurani here, it was definitely his fault for misusing the word "functionality".
But in example of Aurani here, it was definitely his fault for misusing the word "functionality".
Don't know 'how a language should function' is such a partisan issue now. Or is it just B1rd applying political rhetoric to irrelevant topics again?
CDFA wrote:
As far as languages go, there needs to be a balance struck between things being clearly ordered and the need for things to be loose and flexible. An as Jordan Peterson pointed out, the personality traits of order vs flexibility seems to be something that differentiate "Liberals" and Conservatives on the political spectrum, the former generally wanting more flexibility and the latter wanting more order. This applies to language as well (and political words are particularly bad on this). Take the word "Libertarian", there's a significant amount of people who thinks this term has so broad a scope it can be used to define people with polar opposite values, and if you try to clearly define the word, they will berate you for not being "inclusive" enough. Which is obviously ridiculous, because if a word is so watered down it can be used to define anything, it defines nothing, and essentially is of no use as a word anymore. Thus you must actively fight against sloppy language use in which words are used to mean things they're not supposed to and thus their meaning expanded, as this sloppy language use is what contributes to the watering down of the language. Because English is the most widely used language, being used all over the world in a lot of different cultures and environments, it's probably been subject to this process of having meanings and definitions watered down and expanded upon more so than languages used by small, culturally homogenous populations, which brings the benefit of having an expanded vocabulary but with the downside of added vagueness. I'd imagine German is precise and functional because that's the character of the German people, but I don't think you can just reproduce that functionality by copying their language, because that functionality essentially stems from the people, and if non-Germans were to use the language they would probably degrade in to something less precise over time.
But in example of Aurani here, it was definitely his fault for misusing the word "functionality".
I was going off on a tangent pointing out how the personality tendencies of different political groups translate into arguments about the definition of some political words, as I gave an example of. But mainly the post was just some reflections on language use, rather than a political point. Though the post was somewhat vague itself, because I'm at a public library so I don't have unlimited time to translate vague and indefinite thoughts in to indefinite words.
Here's another example of politically driven word usage contributing to vagueness in this article, and it's something I've always spoken against: the usage of the word "they" for individuals. It makes it hard to tell whether it's a person or group being spoken about. http://nationalpost.com/opinion/christi ... university
On this subject of English, George Orwell wrote a good essay about English usage http://www.george-orwell.org/Politics_a ... age/0.html
In other news, I got a my comment published in a popular national newspaper, which is cool.
Here's another example of politically driven word usage contributing to vagueness in this article, and it's something I've always spoken against: the usage of the word "they" for individuals. It makes it hard to tell whether it's a person or group being spoken about. http://nationalpost.com/opinion/christi ... university
On this subject of English, George Orwell wrote a good essay about English usage http://www.george-orwell.org/Politics_a ... age/0.html
In other news, I got a my comment published in a popular national newspaper, which is cool.
pleonasms are a bitch
keep it simple lads
keep it simple lads
This is basically OT, but in one enourmous thread.
That's why it's good. It embodies everything bad and goodCanadian Baka wrote:
This is basically OT, but in one enourmous thread.
Dawnsday wrote:
That's why it's good. It embodies everything badCanadian Baka wrote:
This is basically OT, but in one enourmous thread.and good
Why do people name themselves Dick even though they know it's penis
Isn't Dick just a nickname for Richard?
I blame our regressive society. Dick has a nice ring to it, and people really went out of their way to ruin it.B1rd wrote:
Isn't Dick just a nickname for Richard?
Funnily enough, one of the first recorded instance of the pejorative "dick" was used by a guy named Head.
Art I commissioned from Brian has reached top results in Google when you search "Libertarian anime girl".
Let it not be said I haven't achieved anything in life.
edit: I like how you use your signature to pronounce your nihilism
Let it not be said I haven't achieved anything in life.
edit: I like how you use your signature to pronounce your nihilism
Comfy Slippers wrote:
B1rd wrote:
Isn't Dick just a nickname for Richard?
I blame our regressive society.
dont compare your third world society to ours
Too real.
mfw I could get a krstni list and domovnica and roll over to Croatia, but it wouldn't change anything. And it's not like another south slavic orgy aka Yugoslavia would fix shit.
btw
we're preventing rabies dudelmao
- based bulgarian
lol wrote:
dont compare your third world society to ours
Yeah, all third-world societies are different! Our third-world society is better than theirs, huh lol?
johnmedina999 wrote:
lol wrote:
dont compare your third world society to ours
Yeah, all third-world societies are different! Our third-world society is better than theirs, huh lol?
who said you can @me
Don't be racist, John. America is a third-world country too, you know.
Cannot post.
Ideology shall paddle forward to be applied, but ends up backpaddling everything else in the process.
(5 years later) can't believe this thread is still going
ikr
It's even pinned now, so it's not in any danger of dying, either.
It's even pinned now, so it's not in any danger of dying, either.
remember when they deleted the last thread
What is dead may never die
A moving corpse can stop movingDaddyCoolVipper wrote:
What is dead may never die
being unable to move != dead
but a corpse is already dead. For the dead to stop moving is even more dead than the dead they are in
America is third world because of a significant presence of people from the third world.
An interesting (((coincidence))):
So, the (((Left))) imports more diversity, crime and violence skyrockets, and then they blame it on the right to bear arms and use it as an excuse for more government overreach on people's rights. In Australia too, the most pozzed state Victoria is having problems with African gangs terrorizing people's homes. Quite a sad state of affairs.
An interesting (((coincidence))):
So, the (((Left))) imports more diversity, crime and violence skyrockets, and then they blame it on the right to bear arms and use it as an excuse for more government overreach on people's rights. In Australia too, the most pozzed state Victoria is having problems with African gangs terrorizing people's homes. Quite a sad state of affairs.