Philosophy Now Forum

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: When he doesn't have an answer he reverts to that weird whacko-speak he's so fond of.

Ah yes, that thing where he writes down words at random and hopes it looks like it means something.

Harbal wrote:

Walker wrote:Creepy is a word used by groupie women.

Does that mean no one else is allowed to use it?

Duh!

Not at all, Harbal. Just kidding around. Aren't you?

Creepy is probably one of those words that girls use, that now and slip out into the general public and for some reason or another guys glom onto them.

Like, guy words that guys usually don’t use in mixed company that slip out and you hear women-folk using them, but who the hell knows what’s mixed company these days, you know?

If balking at poetry,then wonder, whence lies the profit here?

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:

Harbal wrote:

Walker wrote:

Please don't wink at me, Walker, you are creepy enough without that.

When he doesn't have an answer he reverts to that weird whacko-speak he's so fond of. When he does that it means he's admitting defeat.

So, is he a specimen for your label collection?

That's pretty clear.

Walker wrote:
If balking at poetry,then wonder, whence lies the profit here?

I rest my case.

Harbal wrote:

Walker wrote:
If balking at poetry,then wonder, whence lies the profit here?

I rest my case.

Guess you’re not kidding. Wouldn’t you know I’d get the one time out of a hundred. I can sympathize, and I do. Rest assured, soon everything will be back to the new normal, if you want to get technical.

Walker wrote: Guess you’re not kidding.

Actually, I was looking for trouble and I'm a little disappointed by your reluctance to fully cooperate.

Walker wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:I feel sorry for you.

That's no secret.

No need to worry. 'Tis but a manifestation of the essence of your world that you have 'oft demonstrated.

verily and forsooth thou art a poor fool.

Walker wrote:

Harbal wrote:

Walker wrote:Creepy is a word used by groupie women.

Does that mean no one else is allowed to use it?

Duh!

Not at all, Harbal. Just kidding around. Aren't you?

Creepy is probably one of those words that girls use, that now and slip out into the general public and for some reason or another guys glom onto them.

Like, guy words that guys usually don’t use in mixed company that slip out and you hear women-folk using them, but who the hell knows what’s mixed company these days, you know?

If balking at poetry,then wonder, whence lies the profit here?

It has far more in common with corporate bullshit-speak than it does poetry. Americans do love their faux-language. After all, they did invent it.
Just running that past you, with the five year plan to take it on board and address the issues. Are we on the same page? Bring your response to the table and we can touch base and get proactive working through those issues.

Walker wrote:What do you think a man’s man is?

What do you think a patronising git is? Especially one who, when he is shown to be wrong, habitually switches his point?

It's interesting to see how people respond when they realise they were wrong. Some common licks, some variety.

Greta wrote:

Walker wrote:What do you think a man’s man is?

What do you think a patronising git is? Especially one who, when he is shown to be wrong, habitually switches his point?

It's interesting to see how people respond when they realise they were wrong. Some common licks, some variety.

Good grief.

That's not much of an answer.

Sounds more like snot.

What is it with woman, anyway.

If you have some question about something I’ve written, then out with it like an adult, instead of whiny, passive-aggressive innuendo.

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:

Walker wrote:

Harbal wrote: Does that mean no one else is allowed to use it?

Duh!

Not at all, Harbal. Just kidding around. Aren't you?

Creepy is probably one of those words that girls use, that now and slip out into the general public and for some reason or another guys glom onto them.

Like, guy words that guys usually don’t use in mixed company that slip out and you hear women-folk using them, but who the hell knows what’s mixed company these days, you know?

If balking at poetry,then wonder, whence lies the profit here?

It has far more in common with corporate bullshit-speak than it does poetry. Americans do love their faux-language. After all, they did invent it.
Just running that past you, with the five year plan to take it on board and address the issues. Are we on the same page? Bring your response to the table and we can touch base and get proactive working through those issues.

You're blowing smoke.

It's a girl's word.

Walker wrote:

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:

Walker wrote: Not at all, Harbal. Just kidding around. Aren't you?

Creepy is probably one of those words that girls use, that now and slip out into the general public and for some reason or another guys glom onto them.

Like, guy words that guys usually don’t use in mixed company that slip out and you hear women-folk using them, but who the hell knows what’s mixed company these days, you know?

If balking at poetry,then wonder, whence lies the profit here?

It has far more in common with corporate bullshit-speak than it does poetry. Americans do love their faux-language. After all, they did invent it.
Just running that past you, with the five year plan to take it on board and address the issues. Are we on the same page? Bring your response to the table and we can touch base and get proactive working through those issues.

You're blowing smoke.

It's a girl's word.

It's a word.

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:It's a word.

Triple laughing heads, one for each word? You know what I'm talking about.

It’s a man's world but it's girl’s word all right, however when either sex uses it, it becomes self-referential. But hey, sound like an adolescent girl if it floats your boat, trips your trigger or shakes your tree. It fits right in with that coy passive-aggressive affliction that was once clichéd as female.

Walker wrote:

Greta wrote:

Walker wrote:What do you think a man’s man is?

What do you think a patronising git is? Especially one who, when he is shown to be wrong, habitually switches his point?

It's interesting to see how people respond when they realise they were wrong. Some common licks, some variety.

Good grief.

That's not much of an answer.

Sounds more like snot.

What is it with woman, anyway.

If you have some question about something I’ve written, then out with it like an adult, instead of whiny, passive-aggressive innuendo.

Sorry to be churlish but, when it comes to politics you are infuriatingly unreasonable. It was a mistake to engage here, just that I wanted to point out that Trump's behaviour is just as odious when portrayed by a woman as it is by him. I didn't think you'd play such brazen bait-and-switch with my post.

I don't think anything productive can come from us conversing about politics.

Greta wrote:

Walker wrote:

Greta wrote: What do you think a patronising git is? Especially one who, when he is shown to be wrong, habitually switches his point?

It's interesting to see how people respond when they realise they were wrong. Some common licks, some variety.

Good grief.

That's not much of an answer.

Sounds more like snot.

What is it with woman, anyway.

If you have some question about something I’ve written, then out with it like an adult, instead of whiny, passive-aggressive innuendo.

Sorry to be churlish but, when it comes to politics you are infuriatingly unreasonable. It was a mistake to engage here, just that I wanted to point out that Trump's behaviour is just as odious when portrayed by a woman as it is by him. I didn't think you'd play such brazen bait-and-switch with my post.

I don't think anything productive can come from us conversing about politics.

Ah. Hi dudgeon.

Just kidding. The solution to your dilemma is quite simple. Here’s the progression.

A: Makes a statement, or assertion, premise, hypothesis, belief, reasoning, and perhaps some implications.
B: Offers feedback by restating A’s statement, to confirm understanding, so that both are on the same page.
A: Confirms the restatement, or further clarifies until both are satisfied that both are discussing the same topic.
B: Voices any specific disagreement.
A: Offers feedback by restating B’s disagreement, honestly, to confirm understanding, so that both are on the same page.
B: Confirms.
A: Rubutal of the disagreement.

And so on. Civilized.

That’s the principle that exists out there, somewhere, over the rainbow. Must the world conform to such expectations? Seems rather rigid.

Your opinion is acknowledged. So, what’s the beef?