Login |  Register




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 43 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: HIV in DC, other things...
PostPosted: 090326 03:27 
Interactive Blogger
Interactive Blogger
User avatar
Joined: 090226 11:31
Posts: 306
Location: Japan
The one place where I know I feel as out of place as you do in the world at large is any kind of religious setting. I just don't have that kind of belief and I feel really, really out of place around a lot of people celebrating that kind of belief. I don't think there's anything wrong with it, I just don't think I belong there.

As far as cell phones go, they're convenient. I use the internet to schedule things with the people who will do that, and it works sometimes... but when something unexpected happens, what are you going to do? Run back to the nearest computer and hope they're at theirs?

That kind of instance is when I appreciate cell phones.

For other things, like ordering food or whatever, I would gladly forego phones if I could do it online reliably.


Profile  Offline
 
 Post subject: Re: HIV in DC, other things...
PostPosted: 090326 04:01 
Legendary Overfiend
Legendary Overfiend
User avatar
Joined: 090226 11:19
Posts: 527
Location: Terminal Dogma
I'll re-adjust my opinion of cell phones the day that they stop calling them cell phones, and call them cell internets (or whatever) instead, with the whole "voice communciation" thing de-emphasized (if not completely phased out).

_________________
I see what you did there.
Image


Profile  Offline
 
 Post subject: Re: HIV in DC, other things...
PostPosted: 090326 04:02 
Interactive Blogger
Interactive Blogger
User avatar
Joined: 090226 11:31
Posts: 306
Location: Japan
Come to Japan. They're called keitai and you can just send an e-mail.

zharth wrote:
. . . and call them cell internets . . .


I've got five internets in my pocket!

:grinjump: :grinjump:


Profile  Offline
 
 Post subject: Re: HIV in DC, other things...
PostPosted: 090326 04:08 
Legendary Overfiend
Legendary Overfiend
User avatar
Joined: 090226 11:19
Posts: 527
Location: Terminal Dogma
Hooray, you win an internet!! ^^ ^^ ^^

_________________
I see what you did there.
Image


Profile  Offline
 
 Post subject: Re: HIV in DC, other things...
PostPosted: 090326 04:40 
Interactive Blogger
Interactive Blogger
User avatar
Joined: 090301 04:38
Posts: 268
Location: Cleveland, OH
zharth wrote:
This is a good example. Everyone has "web buddies", right? People they get to know at various sites, and chat with here and there? Maybe they eventually meet up in person, or maybe not, but it's still someone to talk to, to bounce ideas off of, et cetera, right? Well, not me. I visit forums. I visit blogs. I do very little in the way of contribution - being the lurker/watcher type. I don't get to know people, I don't really converse with people. The only people I've communicated with online, beyond the small handful of real world friends/acquaintances I know, are people who have sent me mail on OKCupid (a failure of a site) - and those were just brief, unfulfilling exchanges that didn't last.


Do I have to start yelling? Does Wayne Brady have to choke a bitch? STOP LURKING. YOU HAVE FULFILLED THE USUAL CRY OF "LURK MOAR" ABOVE AND BEYOND THE CALL OF LURKING. Start throwing some thoughts out there. Put in your 2 cents more. It's on the net, it's anonymous, you should be comfortable.

zharth wrote:
Cell phones - I hate telephones in general. I detest talking on the phone. Everytime you want to arrange a meetup with somebody, you have to contact them on the phone. Even in this day of email/IM convenience, it's still always the phone the people default to. Can I not function in this world without having to use a telephone?


I don't use my cell phone much, but having the connectivity is nice. People aren't going to run back to their homes like Panda said to send you an IM... and that already exists on the phones in the form of texting, as you well know. I would think you would welcome mobile IM aka texting with open arms! Plus, the reason people use phones is because it's fast. Let's say I'm trying to find your house if I've never been there before. I'm not going to buy a laptop and mount a vehicular net-access disc on my roof just so I can IM you, nor will I text. I want to be able to say "Yo Zep I'm on X street, is that close to you?" "Yeah Mike, just come down the way you're going, make a right, and then a left." Quick and easy.

Phones allow a rapid flow of information that can't be matched by even fast typers. What is is about phones that turns you off so much?

zharth wrote:
Bar hopping - I don't understand what's so appealing about drinking at bars. People get together with their friends and hang out at bars on the weekends, meet skanky chicks and shit like that. It has zero appeal to me. I don't even like drinking alcohol. Ask me to attend a social function, and people might respect my decision not to drink, but it's like roping me off - if I'm not there to drink, why the hell am I there anyway? Besides, I prefer not to interact with drunk people.


Ahh, this is where your inexperience with these things has limited your view, man. I again am the most qualified in this little group to speak on this. You are correct in your hatred of the stereotypical view of bars, but it's really not all that bad. It really depends on where you go to. I've been to some really nice bars here in Cleveland. Not talking shithole dive bars, I'm talking upscale-ish, nice atmosphere, good beer selection kind of bars. I went to this place called "Old Angle" with Ted, Abe, and Ryan. We watched the Steelers vs Chargers game a few months ago. Got some food and it was excellent! Fries were great! This was a pub-like bar with TVs, nice wooden tables, good beer selection, overall nice place.

As for approaching and meeting girls; it's only there if you want it to be there. If you're not in the mood to approach women, don't approach women! Plus, not everyone gets hammered when you go to a bar, dude. In fact I'm kind of dismayed sometimes since the people I've gone to bars with lately barely even get more than a single beer. Depending on the bar you pick, think of it just as a potentially nice public setting that you can relax in with your buddies. No one has to go to anyone's house, you don't have to clean shit up, you don't have to prep food, you don't have to host anyone, etc... I assure you completely that your views of bars are not as bad as you think they are; unfortunately, the only side you know is the stereotypical view from the outside and you've never tried out different places to confirm or deny that. And, if you have, you've really picked the wrong ones. :lol:

zharth wrote:
There's a lot of vague things in society that bug me, that has to do with morals and values and whatnot. One of those is this hypocritical, deceptive mask we're all expected to put on. We have to have a "professional" image separate from our "personal" image, and in some cases, if the two are even linked, it could be disastrous. I just want to be me, and I want my personal image to be my professional image. People are so concerned with dressing up snazzy, too - I'm more concerned with being comfortable. Why can't I just go to work naked?


Two things in this paragraph. One, we put on our professional gamefaces when we're at work because we're expected to act more maturely in a work setting. Come on man, this is common sense shit, you should know this. Here's an example, think of some rando that you encountered when you were out in the world lately that turned you off. Was he acting stupid? Was he some jock? What about some gangbangin fuckhead? Do you really want these people's "personal" images to be their "professional" ones? What if you're buying a house and the guy across from you is a loudmouthed jock frat boy. You're discussing terms and he's all like "Yo man so seriously, I got this rate for you, and like, it's soooo sweet. Me and my boys like totally put together this BITCHIN mortgage for you, and like, if you could totally sign it that'd be raaad, dude. I mean, totally don't worry about the fine print bro I got that shit like a motherfuck, I got your back bro, seriously." Would you really buy from this guy? Would you not want him to put aside the antics while he's at work and take the expensive contract that you're about to sign seriously?

What if you're an investing client and I'm your broker, and you come in to discuss how your portfolio's going. This is the money that YOU made off your hypothetical record that's hypothetically selling somewhat. Your money's important to you. What if I start hauling off saying "Yeah I shifted some of your shit around, man. Fuckin towelheads messin everything up for Shell, so that lowered their stock so I put your shit in some of this other stuff. Then the fuckin nigs over at XYZ corp are driving their company into the ground, and all this hit the fan yesterday, so you lost like 15 grand on that, dude. We're diversifying all of your shit way more than before, so don't worry you'll still get double-digit returns this quarter, as long as those faggots at the banks don't shove their heads even further up their asses."

You'd be cool with that? You'd be comfortable with that kind of language and behavior? Or what if you really lost a lot of money despite me having managed your stocks very well, and I'm furious because there was nothing I can do about it, so when you come in I start yelling and throwing shit around my office. You want that?

Two, and this is a very simple question. Do you want to see Panda or I naked? Do you want to see our dongs flopping about? If I bend over to get something down on the ground and you're behind me, do you TRULY want to see that? Asking why you can't go to work naked deserves a big "what the f were you thinking bro". Plus, I do NOT want to see YOU naked. AND THINK OF ALL THE FAT PEOPLE OUT THERE. YOU REALLY WANT TO ALLOW NUDITY?

zharth wrote:
Society is diurnal. I can't go shopping, I can't go to stores, because the 24-hour options are incredibly limited.

Don't give me that. You get up in the late afternoon/early evening. Stores are open until 8, 9, and in the case of Giant Eagle, midnight. Don't wanna hear store time complaints.

zharth wrote:
If the relative loved me, wouldn't they prefer I spent the day in bed, comfortably, remembering them lovingly, rather than thinking of their funeral as "a hindrance"?

I would think they would be highly pissed that you thought of their funeral as a hindrance. And attending anything in the morning is easily solvable by going to bed earlier that night. It wouldn't break your schedule to do it once, because you have plenty more free days to come to make it up. Weak cop-out.

zharth wrote:
the shadows are comfortable, I don't feel like I'm being judged as much, when there are less people around to judge me.

You have no physical deformities. You should be thankful for that. You have a (really) full head of hair. You're tall and thin. I'm fucking tall and thin. This is you being too fucking self-conscious and you're allowing yourself to wallow in pity. In fact, it's downright selfish. To assume that everyone is looking at you and thinking poorly of you is incredibly selfish. Most people probably will give you a glance and figure "hippie" then move on with their lives. No one's going to look at you and go "oh man what a loser I bet he sits around his room all day" then proceed to talk and think about you until you leave the premises. This sounds harsh but stop assuming you are the center of attention. Worried about your looks drawing people's stares? CHANGE YOUR LOOK. This is just a pure case of sack the fuck up man. Panda can back me up on this. YOU ARE FINE.

zharth wrote:
A year or so ago....druid...

Please don't hang out with pagans or wiccans. They're really fucked up in the head and simply copy Christianity, giving fancy names to shit to disguise the plagiarization. Then they make you waste money buying gay books and shit like mortars and pestles so you can summon absolutely nothing. If you're gonna do anything, stick with your damn atheism crap. At least you're able to justify that...

I would say that so far you haven't given me anything concrete to work with. Everything you're throwing at me is pity, vague excuses, and inexperience. You gotta hit me with something better than that if you expect me to believe the reasons for your self-impose exile.

_________________
Bro locks got shoots. U can shoots bro. Drop ya rofl.


Profile  Offline
 
 Post subject: Re: HIV in DC, other things...
PostPosted: 090326 05:12 
Legendary Overfiend
Legendary Overfiend
User avatar
Joined: 090226 11:19
Posts: 527
Location: Terminal Dogma
I think you've done a pretty good job of proving my point. I want to go through your argument more in depth, and I even started to, but I just can't do it right now. One thing I'll say is, going to bed a little early to get up early doesn't work when you normally go to bed at 8am, and you have a function you must attend at 9am. And trust me, short of barbiturates (or whatever), I can't force myself to go to sleep when it's convenient.

_________________
I see what you did there.
Image


Profile  Offline
 
 Post subject: Re: HIV in DC, other things...
PostPosted: 090327 01:31 
Legendary Overfiend
Legendary Overfiend
User avatar
Joined: 090226 11:19
Posts: 527
Location: Terminal Dogma
I hate to do it this way, as it seems overly pedantic, but here goes: shotgun-style!

Kashi wrote:
Do I have to start yelling?

I don't see how that would be necessary.

Kashi wrote:
Does Wayne Brady have to choke a bitch?

That's Wayne Brady's business, not mine.

Kashi wrote:
STOP LURKING.

Regardless of your following argument, I'm afraid this isn't about to happen anytime soon. Simple fact of the matter is, I'm a lurker.

Kashi wrote:
YOU HAVE FULFILLED THE USUAL CRY OF "LURK MOAR" ABOVE AND BEYOND THE CALL OF LURKING.

Ok, I'm not really familiar with that phrase, but I suppose I can get the gist of it. Still, I don't see how my lurking effort is in any way "complete", as it's an ongoing thing for me.

Kashi wrote:
Start throwing some thoughts out there. Put in your 2 cents more.

I'm not the kind of person who says stuff just because there's stuff that can be said. I pick and choose my moments carefully. I don't need to be out there on the front lines all day long. Lurking is part of my personality. I'm simply more interested in reading other people's opinions than stating my own. Yes, there are certainly times where I feel the desire to chime in on a topic, but most of the time, I'm content just to hear what other people have to say - especially when my opinion's already been accounted for. Notice, my superpower of choice is "ghosting". If life had an observer mode, that's where I'd be.

Kashi wrote:
It's on the net, it's anonymous, you should be comfortable.

I'm somewhat less anonymous because I've made a conscious choice to craft a consistent online persona - that of "zharth". Granted, few people know the flesh and blood person behind zharth, but any statement zharth makes is connected to every other statement zharth makes, all across the intarwebs. Plus, I often times feel closer to "zharth" than I do to my "flesh and blood persona". At any rate, I'm kind of shooting myself in the foot by choosing to have a consistent identity, and thus be less anonymous, but I made that decision consciously and for a reason. It has to do with being true to myself, owning up to my actions on the net, and things of that sort. On the other hand, even if I was completely anonymous, I am a sensitive person and I am still affected by people's reactions to my words regardless of whether or not they know or care who I am or how to track me down.

Kashi wrote:
I don't use my cell phone much, but having the connectivity is nice. People aren't going to run back to their homes like Panda said to send you an IM... and that already exists on the phones in the form of texting, as you well know. I would think you would welcome mobile IM aka texting with open arms! Plus, the reason people use phones is because it's fast. Let's say I'm trying to find your house if I've never been there before. I'm not going to buy a laptop and mount a vehicular net-access disc on my roof just so I can IM you, nor will I text. I want to be able to say "Yo Zep I'm on X street, is that close to you?" "Yeah Mike, just come down the way you're going, make a right, and then a left." Quick and easy.

I have no argument against the convenience of cell phones. However, I have to admit, there's some value for me in being "out of reach" of the ever-present social network that follows you around in modern times like a ball and chain. Emergencies aside, when I go out, I sometimes like to be separated from the people in my life who are not with me. I don't want them calling me and interrupting me for whatever reason. Even though I could always opt not to bring my cell phone or turn it off, what's the point in having one if I'm not gonna use it? Just for emergencies? Seems there's plenty of people in this world that need a scalpel just to be separated from their cell phones, why should I bother carrying one around that I'll never use?

Furthermore, I don't really even have a social network. I don't have people that I keep in contact with constantly. When I'm away from my computer, it's not like there's a dozen people wondering where I am and what I'm doing. Part of the meaning behind having a cell phone is having people to keep in touch with. Without those people, the phone becomes pointless.

Doug has another argument (and a good one) against cell phones, and all forms of texting devices, and that has to do with people's behavior - when they tend to focus so much attention on their portable devices to the exclusion of the actual people they're hanging out with. Example: you go out with a friend, and the friend spends practically the whole time on the phone or texting other people rather than paying attention to you. I know this isn't so much an argument about cell phones themselves, but it's about the cell phone culture. I don't like phones, I don't like the culture. So what's in it for me?

Kashi wrote:
Phones allow a rapid flow of information that can't be matched by even fast typers. What is is about phones that turns you off so much?

The thing about phones that turns me off so much is the anxiety they cause me. I hate the sound of ringing telephones. Most people engage in social exchanges without a second thought, constantly throughout their day. For me, it's a big deal. Just talking to somebody is a big deal. When I'm sitting around, minding my own business, and the phone rings, suddenly I'm expected to interrupt my peace and calm and enter an unplanned social exchange - and I don't even know who's on the other end! Look, this is a non-issue for most people, because it's just not a big deal. But for me, it is a big deal - and that's one of those things that makes me so much different from the norm.

I also hate making phone calls, because regardless of the fact that most people aren't bugged by it as much as me, I find it very very difficult to force myself to put other people into a situation which I know causes me much discomfort. Even when somebody *asks* me to call them, I still feel bad about it, because what if I call them at a bad time, you know? What if they were in the bathroom, or had a guest over, or were eating, or who knows what else. I know it's usually not as big a deal to them, but it's still a big deal to me.

Kashi wrote:
Ahh, this is where your inexperience with these things has limited your view, man. I again am the most qualified in this little group to speak on this. You are correct in your hatred of the stereotypical view of bars, but it's really not all that bad. It really depends on where you go to. I've been to some really nice bars here in Cleveland. Not talking shithole dive bars, I'm talking upscale-ish, nice atmosphere, good beer selection kind of bars. I went to this place called "Old Angle" with Ted, Abe, and Ryan. We watched the Steelers vs Chargers game a few months ago. Got some food and it was excellent! Fries were great! This was a pub-like bar with TVs, nice wooden tables, good beer selection, overall nice place.

Ok, so maybe I stereotyped the bar scene a bit. I don't really think that all bars are dirtholes, or that everyone that goes there does so to get shitfaced drunk and hook up with walking disease bags. But, the sort of experience you've explained, seems like the kind of experience I can get at just a regular old restaurant. Or even a "sports bar" type restaurant. But I can guarantee you I won't be sitting at the bar. Why would I bother going to a place that specializes in their beer selection when I have zero interest? Wouldn't I have a much better time at a place that puts more emphasis on their food? (Even though I'm not that ecstatic about food, either, unlike alcohol, I do eat, occasionally). If I go to a place where everybody's hanging out drinking beer, I just feel out of place. Overall, it's just another case of me not being into the culture.

Kashi wrote:
As for approaching and meeting girls; it's only there if you want it to be there. If you're not in the mood to approach women, don't approach women!

This is kind of a tangent, because I didn't really mean to make any kind of statement about "approaching and meeting girls". Although I suppose it's just as well that we touch on the "dating scene", which I also have no interest in. It's not that I'm never in the *mood* to approach women - I'm constantly thinking about the prospect of getting a "date". Most women, however, don't appear to be all that interesting to me. I'm not saying that they're not interesting people. But, after all I've said already, why would I be interested in a girl that hangs out at a bar and spends a lot of time talking on her cell phone and hanging off the arms of her guy friends? Not that I could even approach the ones that do seem interesting if I wanted to...

Kashi wrote:
Plus, not everyone gets hammered when you go to a bar, dude. In fact I'm kind of dismayed sometimes since the people I've gone to bars with lately barely even get more than a single beer. Depending on the bar you pick, think of it just as a potentially nice public setting that you can relax in with your buddies. No one has to go to anyone's house, you don't have to clean shit up, you don't have to prep food, you don't have to host anyone, etc... I assure you completely that your views of bars are not as bad as you think they are; unfortunately, the only side you know is the stereotypical view from the outside and you've never tried out different places to confirm or deny that. And, if you have, you've really picked the wrong ones. :lol:

One thing I'll grant you, is that I like the idea of having a "neutral" place for a group of friends to hang out at. I've always felt this way. Going over to somebody else's place is kind of nerve-racking, because it's like entering a foreign nation, you don't know what their customs are, you don't know the layout of the land, and even after you do get familiar with it, you're still working against another person's homefield advantage. On the other hand, having people over to my place, is also kind of unsettling, because I feel like I'm opening up my safe zone to others. My place is the place I have where I can go when I want to relax and be alone. When other people invade this space, even when I've invited them, it still feels like I've temporarily given up that haven, which I like having as a backup, something that calms me to know that I can always revert to it, if things get bad. Having a neutral place is nice, because everybody's kind of on an even field, so there's less of a "power struggle" going on.

I already know you're not gonna buy much of that. Notice how your description of the appeal of having a neutral place consists of mostly physical details (cleaning, preparing, hosting - stuff that involves work), whereas mine is largely psychological. This is another of the details that marks me different from the norm. There's a hell of a lot going on in my head, constantly, and not all of it translates to the physical world around me. What I mean is, I sense things that may not actually exist. I'm not talking about ghosts and stuff. If the mere idea of the possibility of a malicious intent exists on the psychological airwaves, my mind will pick up on that, without even wanting to, and it will affect me in a real physiological sense, and change my mood/thought patterns/even cause physical symptoms sometimes. You can't just tell me to ignore it, or that it doesn't exist, because I don't do it consciously, it's just part of the way the thing that is me interacts with the world. And the fact that you may not experience it doesn't mean that I have no excuse for experiencing it. If I had the option to perceive like everybody else, I'd do it in an instant, then I'd just be a normal guy, and we wouldn't be having this discussion. But it's not something I can simply switch off.

Kashi wrote:
Two things in this paragraph. One, we put on our professional gamefaces when we're at work because we're expected to act more maturely in a work setting. Come on man, this is common sense shit, you should know this.

I'm not saying that people can't act more or less mature in certain situations. The key thing I was arguing against is the way that sometimes "professionals" are expected to not be human. I've read articles giving tips for people trying to get jobs, that suggest not posting on blogs online or putting certain kinds of information on social networking sites, that can be linked to you, because employers tend to look at that stuff. I don't want to have to censor myself because I have unorthodox opinions, and somebody might decide not to hire me because they don't agree with some of my views that don't even affect my ability to do whatever job is in question. For example (and this is purely hypothetical ;) ), if I was into BDSM, I wouldn't want to have to be forced to hide that fact because some people don't want to hire BDSM "freaks".

Kashi wrote:
Here's an example, think of some rando that you encountered when you were out in the world lately that turned you off.

When was I out in the world lately??

Kashi wrote:
Was he acting stupid? Was he some jock? What about some gangbangin fuckhead? Do you really want these people's "personal" images to be their "professional" ones? What if you're buying a house and the guy across from you is a loudmouthed jock frat boy. You're discussing terms and he's all like "..." Would you really buy from this guy? Would you not want him to put aside the antics while he's at work and take the expensive contract that you're about to sign seriously?

So why should I be fooled by this guy's professional face? He should be allowed to act the way he wants to act, the way that makes him feel like he is being himself. If he talks in an immature manner that I don't like, then I don't deal with him. Here's a wild idea - I like people who are actually mature when they're in casual mode. I don't think there has to be this huge dichotomy between leisure and professionalism. The only excuse for it is for the people that you've described, that need to put on a professional mask because their real face isn't good enough. I'm still not for that kind of willful deception.

Kashi wrote:
What if you're an investing client and I'm your broker, and you come in to discuss how your portfolio's going. This is the money that YOU made off your hypothetical record that's hypothetically selling somewhat. Your money's important to you. What if I start hauling off saying "(assorted curses and racial slurs)" You'd be cool with that? You'd be comfortable with that kind of language and behavior? Or what if you really lost a lot of money despite me having managed your stocks very well, and I'm furious because there was nothing I can do about it, so when you come in I start yelling and throwing shit around my office. You want that?

I wouldn't have hired you in the first place, unless you employed just the kind of willful deception I'm talking about abolishing. You don't think there are perfectly reasonable people in this world that don't like to resort to shouting or using racial slurs (even in places where they're conspicuously irrelevant)? Here's a proposition you may be suggesting: everybody has unprofessional sides of their persona that don't belong in the workplace. Then where the hell are all the decent people? See, this is something I don't understand.

Kashi wrote:
Two, and this is a very simple question. Do you want to see Panda or I naked? Do you want to see our dongs flopping about? If I bend over to get something down on the ground and you're behind me, do you TRULY want to see that? Asking why you can't go to work naked deserves a big "what the f were you thinking bro". Plus, I do NOT want to see YOU naked. AND THINK OF ALL THE FAT PEOPLE OUT THERE. YOU REALLY WANT TO ALLOW NUDITY?

This is completely off-point, though not entirely off-topic. I could just as easily have replaced the word "naked" in my original statement with the words "t-shirt and jeans". The point was about being comfortable. So do you actually have an argument for dressing up for work?

As for the nudity thing... I have absolutely no desire to see you, or Panda, or anyone else - except attractive members of the female race - naked. On the other hand, I support people who want to be naked when it's reasonable, provided they're not using it as an excuse to engage in lewd behavior. I won't argue for nudity right here, because it's a rather complex issue, and I can't really think of an argument that you won't most likely turn upside-down and proceed to use against me. :?

Kashi wrote:
Don't give me that. You get up in the late afternoon/early evening. Stores are open until 8, 9, and in the case of Giant Eagle, midnight. Don't wanna hear store time complaints.

"Don't wanna hear store time complaints"? What is this? Ok, I usually get up at 5, take a shower, get dressed, eat dinner at 6:30, so I'm not ready to leave the house and go shopping until 7, at the earliest. And that's if I head straight out. I went to the mall the other day with Doug. By the time we got there, it was only open for another hour. Ok fine, that's enough time to do some shopping. But then I planned on spending some time at Best Buy. We got there, thinking it would be open an hour later than it was, only to find that it was only open for ten more minutes. Not only that, but they had rearranged their stock yet again, making it even harder to find anything of interest in the time limit. And I certainly didn't have enough time to look at headphones, which I was hoping to do.

So, with Best Buy closed, we figured we'd stop at Borders, since it's one of the few sane stores that stays open as late as 11 on weekdays. Believe it or not, on the door was an announcement that they were cutting back their hours, starting soon. So no longer will Borders be the one haven store that stays open later than all the others. And yes, Giant Eagle is open till midnight, it's actually open 24 hours at that location - as is Wal-Mart. But that's not the point. I didn't say that I can't do any shopping at night. But my options are extremely limited. Giant Eagle does not have everything, and contrary to popular belief, Wal-Mart does not have everything either (though they do have a lot). I can't go to specialty stores, and if I want to shop in the evening, I can't go to more than a few stores, because it takes time shopping in each one, and by the time you get to the third or fourth store, your time has run out.

So how in the world can you tell me that this isn't a legitimate complaint?

Kashi wrote:
I would think they would be highly pissed that you thought of their funeral as a hindrance. And attending anything in the morning is easily solvable by going to bed earlier that night. It wouldn't break your schedule to do it once, because you have plenty more free days to come to make it up. Weak cop-out.

I already explained about getting to bed early. I hope you read that. It doesn't work under my kind of extreme circumstances. Sure, I could just not sleep and go to the funeral - it's true that I have plenty of days to make up that sleep. But did you not read the rest of my argument? Going to a daytime funeral on no sleep would be misery for me. And a disrespect to the other people attending the funeral. It's not that I'm blaming the deceased for being such a pain in the neck. You understand that, rite? It's just that the fact is, the funeral is scheduled in such a manner as to make it hell for me to attend. I know funerals aren't supposed to be fun, happy, events, but look, if the relative loved me and at least partially understood me (which is something that I would hope would come easier with the infinite wisdom of death - of course, this is a moot point since I don't believe in the afterlife), do you honestly think they would want me to put myself through such misery? If they loved me? And if they wanted to put me through misery, then I don't think that's the kind of relative I want to be honoring the wishes of, anyway. Is any of this making sense to you?

Kashi wrote:
You have no physical deformities. You should be thankful for that.

True.

Kashi wrote:
You have a (really) full head of hair.

Indeed I do.

Kashi wrote:
You're tall and thin.

Yes, I suppose I am. Though not as thin as I used to be.

Kashi wrote:
I'm fucking tall and thin.

Hm, yes, I suppose you are.

Kashi wrote:
This is you being too fucking self-conscious and you're allowing yourself to wallow in pity.

This statement may be true to an extent.

Kashi wrote:
In fact, it's downright selfish.

Not so sure about this one, though. I don't think my problem is "selfish". The feelings and thoughts I have are self-destructive, not self-serving.

Kashi wrote:
To assume that everyone is looking at you and thinking poorly of you is incredibly selfish.

Here's the ever-important distinction: I don't think that everyone is looking at me and thinking poorly of me. I don't think that most people are looking at me and thinking poorly of me. I don't think very many people are looking at me and thinking poorly of me. In fact, I have reason to believe that most people, even those who are somewhat close to me, do a whole lot of not looking at me, and probably do a fair share of thinking too highly of me. They don't have to look at me or think about me. I don't see what difference it makes whether they do or not. It's the idea of it that affects me.

Kashi wrote:
Most people probably will give you a glance and figure "hippie" then move on with their lives. No one's going to look at you and go "oh man what a loser I bet he sits around his room all day" then proceed to talk and think about you until you leave the premises. This sounds harsh but stop assuming you are the center of attention.

This has nothing to do with looks, nor me thinking that I am the center of attention.

Kashi wrote:
Worried about your looks drawing people's stares? CHANGE YOUR LOOK. This is just a pure case of sack the fuck up man. Panda can back me up on this. YOU ARE FINE.

Again, this has nothing to do with looks, or people staring. I'm proud of my style, and frankly, I think I'm pretty fine, too. (Cue Gai-sensei smile and thumbs up). :D :thumbsup:

Kashi wrote:
Please don't hang out with pagans or wiccans. They're really fucked up in the head and simply copy Christianity, giving fancy names to shit to disguise the plagiarization.

Putting your religious intolerance aside, which doesn't warrant much discussion... I know you're not gonna believe this, but all the minor gods in your pantheon (you call them either angels or demons), are actually bastardizations of pagan deities - which existed long before the concept of your God was ever formed in the perverted mind of some barbaric schizoid. I'll take pagans, wiccans, and old hippies over bible thumpers anyday.

Kashi wrote:
Then they make you waste money buying gay books and shit like mortars and pestles so you can summon absolutely nothing. If you're gonna do anything, stick with your damn atheism crap. At least you're able to justify that...

Do I look like an idiot? I'm not gonna buy a chalice and athame (mortars and pestles?) expecting to conjure up demons and cast love spells. I'm not interested in becoming a teenage witch, or an emo vampire (but if it makes me more popular among teenage witches, I'll take that as a benefit). What I am interested in is the deep-rooted tradition of reverence for the forces of nature, as well as the allure of the occult. If people think I worship Satan, which I don't, that's a step above them thinking that I worship God. Paganism is fascinating to me. Besides, even Christianity has some pretty neat stories to tell, and I've been known to have attended a few services in my past, but do you see me running around praying for miracles?

Kashi wrote:
I would say that so far you haven't given me anything concrete to work with. Everything you're throwing at me is pity, vague excuses, and inexperience. You gotta hit me with something better than that if you expect me to believe the reasons for your self-impose exile.

I don't expect you to believe the reasons, nor understand them. And the fact that you don't think any of my points are concrete is pretty good proof of the difference between us. And the difference between myself and the norm. The things you call excuses are the plagues of my life. And the fact that your simplistic "sack the fuck up" argument doesn't help me, *should* be reason enough for you to believe that that approach isn't going to do much good for me. And yet, I suspect you'll continue using that approach, which is just another thing that I don't understand. :grey:

_________________
I see what you did there.
Image


Profile  Offline
 
 Post subject: Re: HIV in DC, other things...
PostPosted: 090327 01:51 
Interactive Blogger
Interactive Blogger
User avatar
Joined: 090226 11:31
Posts: 306
Location: Japan
zharth wrote:
I don't want them calling me and interrupting me for whatever reason. Even though I could always opt not to bring my cell phone or turn it off, what's the point in having one if I'm not gonna use it? Just for emergencies? Seems there's plenty of people in this world that need a scalpel just to be separated from their cell phones, why should I bother carrying one around that I'll never use?


Your phone doesn't control you; you control it. Turn it off and carry it around. If you want to use it, turn it on. Carry it for the convenience of being able to get in touch and find other people. Granted, if you don't go out or meet people much, it's pointless -- but for the majority of the people out there, it's a useful tool. Some people go too far, yeah, but that doesn't make it any less useful.

zharth wrote:
I know this isn't so much an argument about cell phones themselves, but it's about the cell phone culture. I don't like phones, I don't like the culture. So what's in it for me?


There are lots of people out there who use computers as an avoidance mechanism, to attack other people, or to write loads of trash, or any other thing that someone else may find distasteful. You might dislike the culture that some people have chosen to subsume themselves in, but that doesn't mean that the cell phone isn't a useful device that you can bend to your own will.

zharth wrote:
Putting your religious intolerance aside, which doesn't warrant much discussion... I know you're not gonna believe this, but all the minor gods in your pantheon (you call them either angels or demons), are actually bastardizations of pagan deities - which existed long before the concept of your God was ever formed in the perverted mind of some barbaric schizoid. I'll take pagans, wiccans, and old hippies over bible thumpers anyday.


A lot of aspects of Christianity were taken from older, Pagan religions to encourage acceptance, but modern-day Paganism doesn't really have much to do with old, traditional Paganism. Most Pagans I've met are just going through the motions and espousing a fanatical belief in "Nature Gods" with random folksy names. They're just making up a religion as they go, putting names on a "Deity" (which I've often noticed is female), and ascribing things to fate, or the Deity. In a lot of the cases I've seen, it just looks like Christianity with changed names and a hippie bent.

Honestly, I dislike Pagans who get in my face about how their "religion" is better because it's older and traditional, or whatever reason they have, just as much as I disliked Christians who got in my face about not being Christian and how I was going to go to hell. It's all the same in the end.

zharth wrote:
And the fact that your simplistic "sack the fuck up" argument doesn't help me, *should* be reason enough for you to believe that that approach isn't going to do much good for me.


Sometimes a hammer is a hammer and a nail is a nail. There comes a time when you need to stop thinking about something and analyzing it from all angles... and just do it. You have to admit that that's one of your weaknesses -- I think you HAVE admitted it, in the past. As nice as the human brain is, sometimes you need to stop rationalizing and start doing.

If you're lucky, you'll make mistakes and learn from them.


Profile  Offline
 
 Post subject: Re: HIV in DC, other things...
PostPosted: 090327 02:47 
Legendary Overfiend
Legendary Overfiend
User avatar
Joined: 090226 11:19
Posts: 527
Location: Terminal Dogma
Scott wrote:
There comes a time when you need to stop thinking about something and analyzing it from all angles... and just do it. You have to admit that that's one of your weaknesses -- I think you HAVE admitted it, in the past. As nice as the human brain is, sometimes you need to stop rationalizing and start doing.

This is one of my weaknesses. This is my primary weakness. This is also a fundamental asepct of how I do and have always defined myself. To act otherwise is as natural to me as it is natural for a blind man to see.

Scott wrote:
As nice as the human brain is,

P.S. The human mind is a terrible place to live.

_________________
I see what you did there.
Image


Profile  Offline
 
 Post subject: Re: HIV in DC, other things...
PostPosted: 090327 07:09 
Interactive Blogger
Interactive Blogger
User avatar
Joined: 090301 04:38
Posts: 268
Location: Cleveland, OH
This is getting rough with the shotgunning. :lol:

I'm going to skip over some of your responses, not because I haven't read them at least once or twice, but because 1) I may have exhausted what I was going to say on the topic 2) It is apparent any more I write won't convince you 3) I actually have no response 4) Panda already replied to your reply 5) We may very well hit the post length limit. :shock:

zharth wrote:
Kashi wrote:
Does Wayne Brady have to choke a bitch?

That's Wayne Brady's business, not mine.

But it will rapidly become your business when he's choking you. :lol:

zharth wrote:
I'm not the kind of person who says stuff just because there's stuff that can be said. I pick and choose my moments carefully...If life had an observer mode, that's where I'd be.

I did not mean to imply that you should transform overnight into a posting machine. I merely said you should chime in now and then. Baby steps, man. A well thought out post here, a well thought out post there...

zharth wrote:
Just talking to somebody is a big deal.

I probably have implied this before, or maybe even explicitly said it, but this is something that's just going to take time. If you never start and never get any practice, you'll never improve. Remember in the emoticons thread when I was like "omg photoshop confusing omg!" and you chimed in? Remember how you sympathized with the level of complexity that PS is capable of but encouraged small steps? This is the same way!

zharth wrote:
I also hate making phone calls, because regardless of the fact that most people aren't bugged by it as much as me, I find it very very difficult to force myself to put other people into a situation which I know causes me much discomfort. Even when somebody *asks* me to call them, I still feel bad about it, because what if I call them at a bad time, you know? What if they were in the bathroom, or had a guest over, or were eating, or who knows what else. I know it's usually not as big a deal to them, but it's still a big deal to me.

Here's something to think about: If/when people ask you to call them (let's say Panda and myself), it's more than just "not a big deal" to us. It's actually enjoyable to receive a call. When a friend asks you to call, it's generally because they enjoy hearing from you. So you're not bugging them, it is not a big deal to them, and it would probably give them a moment's happiness knowing that they're hearing from someone they care for. I don't know if that alleviates it being a big deal to you, knowing that you (!) have actually brightened someone's minute/hour/day. As for bugging someone, or they're not available, that's easily acceptable by those of us who use these phones regularly. If I miss a call from Scur, and I was in the bathroom droppin a D, I just hit him back up when I get out and say "Hey man, sorry about missing the call, I was droppin a D." Usually the other person is perfectly fine with it. If you're busy for a few minutes, then hey, you're busy.

zharth wrote:
But, after all I've said already, why would I be interested in a girl that hangs out at a bar and spends a lot of time talking on her cell phone and hanging off the arms of her guy friends?

First off, you shouldn't be looking for stable girlfriends in bars. Not the place. I only brought up the girls in bars thing because you initially mentioned it. Second, if you are going to approach girls, you get girls that are either alone or in small groups. You don't approach girls with a crowd of guys unless you're an AMOG (alpha male of the group) or an AMOG-destroyer. It's also less efficient; too much work.

zharth wrote:
On the other hand, having people over to my place, is also kind of unsettling, because I feel like I'm opening up my safe zone to others. My place is the place I have where I can go when I want to relax and be alone. When other people invade this space, even when I've invited them, it still feels like I've temporarily given up that haven, which I like having as a backup, something that calms me to know that I can always revert to it, if things get bad.

Maybe it's because it's Panda and I and you know us, but you seemed pretty comfortable when we were over. You seemed pretty comfortable that time I visited and you, Doug, and I caught a movie. If you say "Yeah well of course I'm going to be comfortable having friends over!" then I could easily retort "Well then, duh, don't invite anyone over except for your friends!"

zharth wrote:
Having a neutral place is nice, because everybody's kind of on an even field, so there's less of a "power struggle" going on.

Analyze less. Do more.

zharth wrote:
I already know you're not gonna buy much of that....But it's not something I can simply switch off.

You are indeed a deep thinker, and I don't deny that your mind is always probably going. You're also the kind of person looking for ways to master your thoughts and consciousness as well as understand these things (look at your "stream of consciousness" page). You claim that you can't simply switch it off, but wouldn't it be amazing if you tried and found that you actually could? I would think of all people in this group you would be eager to step up to the challenge.

zharth wrote:
I'm not saying that people can't act more or less mature in certain situations. The key thing I was arguing against is the way that sometimes "professionals" are expected to not be human.

I would think, if anything, the opposite: professionals are expected to be superhuman. To be courteous and polite, to know everything, to present products and ideas flawlessly, to look the part, etc... I have yet to find an employer that wants a machine. If anything, people today are expected to be not just good at what they do, but also be able to master things much more broadly besides "Can you solve X or Y, this or that."

zharth wrote:
I've read articles giving tips for people trying to get jobs, that suggest not posting on blogs online or putting certain kinds of information on social networking sites, that can be linked to you, because employers tend to look at that stuff.

You know this is because a loud minority (even a single person) can easily topple a larger entity. An extreme (and somewhat stupid) example: A murder at Bucknell would be disastrous to Bucknell's image. Thusly, Bucknell would want to make sure they don't enroll a murderer! If they were to check some kid's facebook, say, and there were all these pictures of him having killed other people, they're sure as hell not going to accept him! and probably report him to the police for that area...

Let's try a more realistic example. Let's say your band blows up. You hire some PR people. Let's say you don't check up on them and they're extremely (and more importantly explicitly) bigoted. Let's say they're out drinking and bragging about how they work for your band. Then the conversation shifts and suddenly they're spewing all their bigoted crap. Anyone nearby is going to associate their bigotry with your band. You don't approve of it, of course, but the damage is already done. I can't possibly fathom that you did not understand what I'm getting at when you wrote what I quoted above.

Perhaps I suppose I should close this section with saying that I don't really endorse checking up on people. Perhaps it's been coming off that way. I don't like it any more than you do but I at least can fathom why it's done by those that do it.

zharth wrote:
When was I out in the world lately??

orz You gave me an example of you and Doug out shopping. That counts as "out in the world"...

zharth wrote:
So why should I be fooled by this guy's professional face? He should be allowed to act the way he wants to act, the way that makes him feel like he is being himself. If he talks in an immature manner that I don't like, then I don't deal with him. Here's a wild idea - I like people who are actually mature when they're in casual mode. I don't think there has to be this huge dichotomy between leisure and professionalism.

You state that there shouldn't be a dichotomy, but you state that people should be themselves. You also state that you don't like people who are naturally jokers, or kidders, or like to act immaturely at times (I think it's reasonable to state that all three of those fall under "immature"). These statements conflict. If you wish for there to be no dichotomy but X or Y working in a position leans naturally towards immature, they don't get your business, so of course they're going to shelve the immaturity. Furthermore, and I know you would counter-argue this, to simply say "Well don't hire immature people" assumes that there are enough "mature" people to put into every position. This is naivete at its extreme. Again, when given a choice of being themselves or getting your business, just about any sane business-person is going to take your business any day. You have just forced someone to not be themselves!

I suppose I would close out this section by asking what just popped into my head: Why do you consider someone that has set aside their immaturity to provide high-quality service to be deceptive, and why do you then tag that deception with (for lack of a better phrase) a large negative value? Is there not something to be said for the person that can relax, have fun, and act immature around their buddies yet realize there's a time for seriousness (and then apply that maturity when the time calls for it)? Because what I'm reading that you're writing tells me that you want the world to be uptight assholes who can't loosen up...

zharth wrote:
Here's a proposition you may be suggesting: everybody has unprofessional sides of their persona that don't belong in the workplace. Then where the hell are all the decent people? See, this is something I don't understand.

Everyone has something about them that could be considered "unprofessional" by someone else. Thusly, no one is perfect and everyone has something that does not belong in the workplace. This thing, this issue, that we're saying does not belong in the workplace... it does not automatically make them an "indecent" person. If the "issue" for X person is that they swear (this is unprofessional and you want to shelve that when you go to work) but otherwise they're a good person, who are you to say they're indecent? If the "issue" for you is that you preach on atheism at work (this is also unprofessional and you want to shelve this when you go into work), you're not automatically "indecent", you just have an opinion on religion.

Given the first two lines of my response for this section, you can't just haul off and tag anyone that shelves a vice when they go to work as "indecent", because I would argue that you tagging people this way conflicts with what you said earlier: People should be allowed to be who they are.

zharth wrote:
This is completely off-point, though not entirely off-topic. I could just as easily have replaced the word "naked" in my original statement with the words "t-shirt and jeans". The point was about being comfortable. So do you actually have an argument for dressing up for work?

Yes, I have an argument for dressing for work. It's pretty simple. You make the assumption that dressing and looking nice implies uncomfortability, and frankly, that's incorrect. Just because you view a suit and tie or slacks and a polo as uncomfortable certainly does not mean that others view it that way. When I get jazzed up, I not only look good but feel like a million bucks, and I feel just fine wearing those clothes. I impress those I'm with and I'm comfortable. Pretty win-win to me.

You would probably have a valid counter in: "Well why does it have to be suit+tie or slacks+polo"
To which I would proffer: "Some professions have an image to go along with their profession. Rockers look like rockers. Bankers look stuffy and expensive. Construction guys look like they've been building all day. Scientists look clean and sterile. And, office jobs look well-groomed and neat. Why is this a problem?"

Plus I would probably add that in corporate culture today, fashion is changing so that indeed, you do not have to suit it up for work. A lot of places now are allowing folks to get more casual.

zharth wrote:
I can't really think of an argument that you won't most likely turn upside-down and proceed to use against me. :?

So I autowin? :lol:

zharth wrote:
Ok, I usually get up at 5...was hoping to do. So how in the world can you tell me that this isn't a legitimate complaint?

Pretty simple, really. Get up an hour earlier and/or don't take as much time eating dinner or getting ready. Kind of like how Panda was giving tips on how to gain more free time in the other thread about sleep/hours in the day. Your complaint is as legitimate as my suggestion to get up earlier or shave off your prep time. If you refuse to slightly alter your schedule the (very few, I would assume) times that you need to shop, you cannot possibly expect the stores to alter their schedules around your whims.

zharth wrote:
I already explained about getting to bed early. I hope you read that.

I did indeed read it.

zharth wrote:
Is any of this making sense to you?

It somewhat makes sense. I guess it makes as much sense to me as you radically altering your schedule for one or two events makes to you. I mean, I get it, but I don't see how you can't make a small sacrifice now and then. I mean being tired sucks, but you make it seem earth-shattering and world-ending. As much as you might want to make it seem, it truly will not kill you...

zharth wrote:
Here's the ever-important distinction: I don't think that everyone is looking at me and thinking poorly of me. It's the idea of it that affects me.

Perhaps we will never agree on it, but the mere fact that you say that you enjoy the night because you don't have to be seen so that people will not judge you implies that people are judging you based on them seeing you. I know this is overly simplistic, but you have to be seen or heard by a person before they notice you. Most people are not blind and most people primarily utilize visual input. Now, we know that strangers meeting each other for the first time make first impressions on appearances, until dialogue is exchanged. Next, to be judged, a person must make a judgment based on that information gleaned (via visual input + dialogue). Since you're certainly not talking to anyone, the only information input into these people who are judging is... your appearance. Furthermore, in the context of what we're talking about, you think everyone's judgments against you are negative. This is exactly "thinking poorly of you". So, with all that said, for you to possibly feel the way you do, you inherently must be basing it on "everyone looking at me and thinking poorly of me". This is further supported by the fact that you feel comfortable and calm when you are by yourself. This is exactly the opposite of the situation that makes you uncomfortable: No one is looking at you and no one is thinking about you. So yes, you do think everyone is looking at you, thinking about you, and then judging you.

I hope I laid out my logic clearly enough. Do you see what I'm getting at?

zharth wrote:
Putting your religious...over bible thumpers anyday.

Panda addressed this the best. Just like you and Panda feel there are too many fake Christians today (which may well be true), there are way too many fake Pagans. You can't deny that there are hordes of scrubby Pagans and Wiccans making shit up to attract members of the other sex, make money, or just try to fit into a group any more than I can deny the mega-churches, money-leeching fake pastors in some of those congregations, and extremely intolerant, fake people that follow them. I think you get what I mean, and again, I'd defer to Panda's comment on Paganism.

zharth wrote:
And the fact that your simplistic "sack the fuck up" argument doesn't help me...And yet, I suspect you'll continue using that approach, which is just another thing that I don't understand.

Panda also said this the best, but I would like to add more. There really are things in life that are just "shut up and do it". You can analyze till you're blue in the face, but unless you actually try (and succeed or fail) you're never going to know. I don't know how else to make that message any more clear and why you refuse to consider that boggles me as much as me saying "sack up" boggles you. :? I mean, cajoling and coaxing aren't working, and being blunt isn't working, so what's it going to take? I'm pretty sure that if Panda and I could temporarily turn ourselves into anime heroes, pop into your room, and give you the exact same talk (which in all likelihood would then probably work on you), we would. But, we cannot, so this is the best you're going to get.

_________________
Bro locks got shoots. U can shoots bro. Drop ya rofl.


Profile  Offline
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 43 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Panel

Top You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
Search for:
Jump to:  
 cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Dizayn Ercan Koc