Updated the stat.

Addendum: Cuepee has used the word "gaslight" (no "ing") 26 times within the past twelve months.

Research is fun!

This is not a tough question despite you trying to pretend it is so you don't have to admit you were wrong.


You are approaching an elevator. You see one person already on it. You have no information as to whether or not that person wants you to say hi or not but you say 'hi' anyway.


My position is 'you can only act on your desire to say hi or not and it is not your responsibility to try and guess whether they want you to or not'.


You keep saying, but you guess or assume other things ergo 'gotcha' it is your responsibility to guess.

And you are wrong. Flat out wrong.

You are trying desperately to conflate different things. That any guess or assuming means then that you should assume and do assume for the other if they want you to say 'Hi' and that is objectively false.

I will never know and have no way to know if they want the 'hi', and it is not my responsibility to know.

Glad you have pivoted to my position.

on to our next argument where you start off telling me I am wrong on a matter of opinion and we go 10 pages and then you eventually admit you were wrong, without admitting it.

Well yes, when you purely make things up and imagine that your opponents are saying things like "factually wrong" when they simply aren't, it makes it really easy to feel like you've won something.

I should clarify that the above is my opinion and not the Pope's. One way to learn that would to look at who was posting it. But since you seem to be quite confused that when posters on a forum say things they are saying their opinion, I'll make it super explicit for you!

Start each post with IMO:, and you should be fine.

(Of course, that's just my opinion. )

N'ah just don't tell a person they are 'wrong' on a matter of opinion and instead just say 'I don't agree with that'. 'I think that is nutty' or other versions of that.

QP - I think honey glaze donuts are the best
uke - you are just wrong. Chocolate donuts are the best.
QP - Carlin Meme and 15 pages incoming because I am NOT wrong.


When I tell uke that he never accepts it at the begging and instead we go 15 pages where MY MAIN complaint is this is NOT a matter of fact.

I am sure you have seen me post the Carlin Meme, right? Do you understand why? It is me pointing out to the person they are treating there opinion as if fact, when it is not. If you cannot recognize I will always push back on that ERROR, then I don't know how to help you.



The point of the meme above is Carlin making fun of people who see their opinion as fact. They could say IMO, but that is not what Carlin is making fun of. He is making fun of the fact they cannot see that they are doing it. That is uke, each and every time.

I'm curious laggy, to know if you know what Carlin is making fun of there?

Trolly pretends it is obvious and yet over and over posters on this site make EXACTLY the error Carlin is lampooning.

When you read the above do you think Carlin is making fun of people not adding 'IMO' before those two statements or do you think he is making fun of the type of thinking that leads people to believe their opinion is fact and thus right, when it is just their opinion?

You are wrong to suggest it is wrong it to say things are wrong when they are matters of opinion. As we both agreed, it would be nonsensical to think such a a matter of opinion could be "factually wrong", so the only obvious interpretation of me saying you are being creepy isn't that this is some inate factual property of the universe, but instead that it is - obviously - my opinion.

People state opinions on the internet all the time. You do it. I do it. Nobody else gets confused that such statements are - obviously - the opinions of the people who post them.

Try and comprehend what he is truly saying here.




Why it is fine to THINK someone driving faster than you is maniac and why it is fine to THINK someone driving slower than you is an idiot but WHY it suddenly becomes mock worthy in one of the most infamous meme's of all time, as told to audiences by one of the greatest comedians of all time that WHEN INSTEAD you switch your language to ...

"...they ARE an idiot if they are driving slower..."
"... they ARE a maniac is they are driving faster..."

What Carlin is pointing out is that most people cannot separate that because something makes perfect sense to them and seems logical and correct in an area of opinion like this, that DOES NOT make them right in a way they can say it as if factual.

That is the entire joke there. The stupidity or naivety of people who do not realize that and as such always state things like that as fact.

YOu are comfortable with the speed you drive as it correlates with your skill level. You have a more or less skilled driver around you and they will adjust according. They are not WRONG, MANIACS, or IDIOTS, just because they come at this from a different vantage point than you do.

LOL, what????

Have you actually never had a normal conversation with anyone that went like this (without the meme and 15 pages)?

"Honey glaze donuts are the best!"
"You are just wrong. Chocolate donuts are the best!"
"No way, chocolate makes a big mess and is disgusting on a donut."
"What's wrong with you? Honey glaze is terrible!"

And that may go on for a bit, or it might end right there. Or I guess some people might argue about it all day and get mad at each other.

I long since gave up following what you guys are arguing about, but if that was really a good encapsulation of the disagreement...wow.

Of course an opinion on something subjective can't really be wrong, but that doesn't stop people from arguing about it, and even saying it is wrong. Sometimes arguing in jest, and sometimes seriously. For most people, that's usually not a big deal.

Coming back to this because I got a good chuckle out of it, along with a eye roll. That you don't type this and realize where you go wrong is, well, not surprising, sadly. I mean, of course it's not just you that will argue about things for 15 pages - it takes two to argue. Lots of people have gotten into debates with you. But I'm sure even you must realize that in this forum, you're almost always one of the parties involved in any long drawn-out argument. You seem to take some pride in the fact that you are willing to "agree to disagree", but it rarely seems to happen, because if anyone is perceived by you as "gaslighting", or "trolling", or "arguing in bad faith", then it simply can not be let go. In fact, you'll break out your 'OK, let's go then' routine quite proudly when someone is arguing in a way that you have deemed inappropriate. And the whole forum suffers for it.

As I mentioned before, this is basically a thread of people arguing with you about your arguments. That says something about your conduct on this forum. And it's not good.

Cuepee, do you think it is wrong to drive 100km/h over the speed limit for your morning commute through the city?

I mean if you want to have an entirely different conversation, in which you move a million miles away from the statement I quoted above from the original thread, then sure, 1W to the OAFK 1 more L for the QP. QP gonna QP and OAFK gonna OAFK, it was harder with Tooth.

However your new argument is still wrong because its based on an absurd premise, to have no information about whether someone wants to talk to me that person would have to be invisible.

If the person looks totally fine, no crying or stressed face or whatever any of those conditions you admit would modulate your behaviour, that is still information.

So of course you are making an educated guess, they looked fine so I spoke to them. Them looking fine is of course a massive amount of information.

Only the most socially insensitive and obtuse dont operate under these terms.

For your example to be correct I would have to decide to say Hi with such extreme will and stubbornness that I was going to say HI regardless of any visual ques I received on walking into the lift.

Is that really what you do, I want to say HI so Im saying it end of?

Ever notice how the person driving faster than you is being pursued by agents of legitimised violence?

I very much like the Carlin meme. (Carlin is my all-time favorite stand-up comedian.)

Having said that, if I am going the speed limit (say, 55 MPH), then someone ahead of me driving 35 MPH really is an idiot, and someone driving 75 MPH really is a maniac.

Yes.


Bumpersticker: I may be driving slow, but I'm ahead of YOU!

If I had a driver's license and bought a car, this would be an appropriate bumpersticker for me:

If you don't like the way I drive, STAY OFF THE SIDEWALK!

Have you ever noticed that people who won't apply the Carlin meme to everyone else except CP are maniacs and people, like Laggy, who QP doesn't believe understands the meme, are idiots?

And the guy that bitched about talking about BFI in the thread this was excised from remains a top three poster In This thread.


Man, this thread delivers

Indeed!

The way he obtusely drills down directly at you and explains, in all seriousness, the meaning of the joke as if you couldn't possibly understand it. It's just comedy gold, Jerry!

And then repeats it to Uke on the same page, like it's a brand new thing and reposting the meme....ROFL.

Nutshell

And yet uke below proves he is unable to comprehend the meaning of the meme.


The meaning of the meme IS NOT that there is no point where you can judge someone's actions re speed limits.

The meaning of the meme is to say 'your arbitrary judgment of the correct speed is just that, arbitrary'. It is based on your skill and comfort level.

Almost no one goes exactly the speed limit at all times. Almost everyone allows themself some discretion most times.

What Carlin is speaking to is that most people cannot see beyond their discretion as a personal thing and instead they tend to project it on to others.

So "I think going 10 miles over the speed limit is okay but going 15 miles over makes one a maniac'.

Someone like uke below cannot comprehend the point and thus thinks somehow Carlin's meme is invalidated by throwing out extreme points.


Explain first what you think the meme is actually saying and the point it is trying to make and how or why you think your 100mk/hr over might invalidate the entire point of the meme?

The only person who might legit have an issue with the meme is the person who drives exactly the speed limit always.

The meme is speaking to people utilizing differing discretion based on comfort level thus why he highlights both a person going slower and a person going faster.


It could just as easily apply to him saying

- anyone willing to take on a risky behaviour like Rock climbing is a __________
- anyone who refuses all risk and won't even get on a roller coaster is a ___________


That is that person using their comfort level with certain activities and saying it is now the baseline for everyone else. No one else who differs can be correct. I hold the one True Opinion on this issue.

Almost all of us exercise some discretion in all areas such as speeding, so to hold a view that anyone going faster or slower than you is automatically wrong, just means you believe you hold the one True Opinion.

No, this whole post is just a logic fail for you.

As I approach the elevator even if the person is crying there are still 3 options

- the person wants me to say hi, is happy to have someone to talk to
- The person does not want me to say hi, would prefer to be left alone
- the person does not care either way


it is those same 3 options in any approach whether they are whistling and happy or sad.

My POINT, is to say I have NO INFORMATION in any of those situations as to whether a 'hi' will be received well or not and as such I can only offer it based on what I want to do. If I want to say I do. If not I do not.

Nothing you say above counters that and that has been my position the entire time despite you lying now it was not.

My point was then and is now, that we cannot discern that information in advance (and we cannot) and which ever you guess you can be wrong.

And that is going off into the extremes where someone is exhibiting extreme emotion to try and salvage your failed point.

What we were talking about in the other thread was just normal every day encounters where people are not showing any special outward emotions.

The type of encounter you have on the elevator in literally 99.99999% of the time.

You blame me but would never question the role of someone like O.A.F.K in the above post.

He has clearly taken a wrong position but out of internet pride or whatever will not let it go. And you do not the people like him out on it. Why?

Surely if you ride an elevator and you are the type to say 'hi' when you enter you understand that in 99.999% of times you are doing so with zero information as to if the person wants you to say hello or not. Even in the 0.001 where a person is visible distressed there is no way to know if they would be hoping for someone to talk to them and you would only be guessing and could be wrong.


My position on that topic "saying hi, instances like is something we do without knowing how it will be received' should not be even slightly controversial and yet pages and pages later O.A.F.K still argues and tries to spin it to say it is.

And so why would I be the one to back down when what I said was not only reasonable but correct?

Hey cupes you ever notice how anyone driving slower than you is a big eejit and peeps driving faster than you are total nutjob maniacs? Mad innit?