Jump to content
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 1972 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

A very successful British comedian used to wonder why parents took their children to supermarkets just to smack them, and in the same way, I was wondering why so many people joined SL just so that they could post in the forums to demonstrate in public how stupid they were.

Go on, prove me right!

Link to post
Share on other sites


SirLeighBastard wrote:

A very successful British comedian used to wonder why parents took their children to supermarkets just to smack them, and in the same way, I was wondering why so many people joined SL just so that they could post in the forums to demonstrate in public how stupid they were.

Go on, prove me right!

You got me. ...And I thought that noone would ever guess this secret about my posts. (uhm, maybe all the others know this, too, but they don't tell....now I have to think this over. ) :)

you, and all the others: Have a beautiful weekend.

Edit: all the typonese. hahahaha ..I am showing off with my stupidity. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites


Ardvinna wrote:


SirLeighBastard wrote:

A very successful British comedian used to wonder why parents took their children to supermarkets just to smack them, and in the same way, I was wondering why so many people joined SL just so that they could post in the forums to demonstrate in public how stupid they were.

Go on, prove me right!

You got me. ...And I thought that noone would ever guess this secret about my posts.

 I thought the secret was that you delete them after a certain age like a paranoid fruitcake?

Link to post
Share on other sites


Radium Soup wrote:


Ardvinna wrote:


SirLeighBastard wrote:

A very successful British comedian used to wonder why parents took their children to supermarkets just to smack them, and in the same way, I was wondering why so many people joined SL just so that they could post in the forums to demonstrate in public how stupid they were.

Go on, prove me right!

You got me. ...And I thought that noone would ever guess this secret about my posts.

 
I thought the secret was that you delete them after a certain age like a paranoid fruitcake?

I had to look for paranoid fruitcake in the urban dictionary. And now I'm thinking about changing my name into "paranoid fruitcake".

Because:

1. A derogatory term for a homosexual man.

 

2. Someone who is completely insane.

 

3. A cake made with bits of fruit and drenched in scotch.

 
Since I'm not a man, there are two possibilities, what I could be: completely insane or a cake drenched in scotch. or the third: a completely insane cake drenched in scotch.
Link to post
Share on other sites


Ardvinna wrote:


Radium Soup wrote:


Ardvinna wrote:


SirLeighBastard wrote:

A very successful British comedian used to wonder why parents took their children to supermarkets just to smack them, and in the same way, I was wondering why so many people joined SL just so that they could post in the forums to demonstrate in public how stupid they were.

Go on, prove me right!

You got me. ...And I thought that noone would ever guess this secret about my posts.

 
I thought the secret was that you delete them after a certain age like a paranoid fruitcake?

I had to look for
paranoid fruitcake
in the urban dictionary. And now I'm thinking about changing my name into "paranoid fruitcake".

Because:
1. A derogatory term for a homosexual man.

 

2. Someone who is completely insane.

 

3. A cake made with bits of fruit and drenched in scotch.
 
Since I'm not a man, there are two possibilities, what I could be: completely insane or a cake drenched in scotch. or the third: a completely insane cake drenched in scotch.

Given these three choices and having observed your past form, if I were a betting person I'd put my money on option #2.

(I prefer the short odds).

Link to post
Share on other sites


SirLeighBastard wrote:

A very successful British comedian used to wonder why parents took their children to supermarkets just to smack them, and in the same way, I was wondering why so many people joined SL just so that they could post in the forums to demonstrate in public how stupid they were.

Go on, prove me right!

You just did.

Link to post
Share on other sites


Theresa Tennyson wrote:


SirLeighBastard wrote:

A very successful British comedian used to wonder why parents took their children to supermarkets just to smack them, and in the same way, I was wondering why so many people joined SL just so that they could post in the forums to demonstrate in public how stupid they were.

Go on, prove me right!

You just did.

Your reply makes no sense at all. Thank you for participating.

***Call me when you have learned the lyrics to The Logical Song

Link to post
Share on other sites


Radium Soup wrote:


Ardvinna wrote:


Radium Soup wrote:


Ardvinna wrote:


SirLeighBastard wrote:

A very successful British comedian used to wonder why parents took their children to supermarkets just to smack them, and in the same way, I was wondering why so many people joined SL just so that they could post in the forums to demonstrate in public how stupid they were.

Go on, prove me right!

You got me. ...And I thought that noone would ever guess this secret about my posts.

 
I thought the secret was that you delete them after a certain age like a paranoid fruitcake?

I had to look for
paranoid fruitcake
in the urban dictionary. And now I'm thinking about changing my name into "paranoid fruitcake".

Because:
1. A derogatory term for a homosexual man.

 

2. Someone who is completely insane.

 

3. A cake made with bits of fruit and drenched in scotch.
 
Since I'm not a man, there are two possibilities, what I could be: completely insane or a cake drenched in scotch. or the third: a completely insane cake drenched in scotch.

Given these three choices and having observed your past form, if I were a betting person I'd put my money on option #2.

(I prefer the short odds).

I am very comfy as an insane cake among all these normal people here.

Link to post
Share on other sites


SirLeighBastard wrote:


Theresa Tennyson wrote:


SirLeighBastard wrote:

A very successful British comedian used to wonder why parents took their children to supermarkets just to smack them, and in the same way, I was wondering why so many people joined SL just so that they could post in the forums to demonstrate in public how stupid they were.

Go on, prove me right!

You just did.

Your reply makes no sense at all. Thank you for participating.

***Call me when you have learned the lyrics to The Logical Song

1.) In creating this account, you joined Second Life.

2.) Strong circumstantial evidence indicates that the account that you created and which posted this is a Second Life account created primarily/only to post on the forums.

3.) Many of the posts of this avatar appear to be demonstrations of your self-impression of your intellect as compared to others.

4.) "Demonstrating how stupid one is" doesn't mean one is stupid (i.e. possessing a high level of stupidity) - it's very possible to demonstrate that one isn't very stupid at all, which would be a level of stupidity and therefore a "demonstration of how stupid they are."

Of course, if you didn't understand that...

Link to post
Share on other sites


Theresa Tennyson wrote:


SirLeighBastard wrote:


Theresa Tennyson wrote:


SirLeighBastard wrote:

A very successful British comedian used to wonder why parents took their children to supermarkets just to smack them, and in the same way, I was wondering why so many people joined SL just so that they could post in the forums to demonstrate in public how stupid they were.

Go on, prove me right!

You just did.

Your reply makes no sense at all. Thank you for participating.

***Call me when you have learned the lyrics to The Logical Song

1.) In creating this account,
you
joined Second Life.

2.) Strong circumstantial evidence indicates that the account that
you
created and which posted this is a Second Life account created primarily/only to post on the forums.

3.) Many of the posts of this avatar appear to be demonstrations of
your
self-impression of
your
intellect as compared to others.

4.) "Demonstrating how stupid one is" doesn't mean one
is
stupid (i.e. possessing a high level of stupidity) - it's very possible to demonstrate that one isn't very stupid at all, which would be a level of stupidity and therefore a "demonstration of how stupid they are."

Of course, if
you
didn't
understand
that...

Who is this "you" that is referred to in the post?

It reminds me of the Welsh Cocktail chat up line. What's a Welsh Cocktail? A pint of bitter and a piece of ewe.

***Call me when TT has worked out what identity does or does not mean here

Link to post
Share on other sites


SirLeighBastard wrote:


Theresa Tennyson wrote:


SirLeighBastard wrote:


Theresa Tennyson wrote:


SirLeighBastard wrote:

A very successful British comedian used to wonder why parents took their children to supermarkets just to smack them, and in the same way, I was wondering why so many people joined SL just so that they could post in the forums to demonstrate in public how stupid they were.

Go on, prove me right!

You just did.

Your reply makes no sense at all. Thank you for participating.

***Call me when you have learned the lyrics to The Logical Song

1.) In creating this account,
you
joined Second Life.

2.) Strong circumstantial evidence indicates that the account that
you
created and which posted this is a Second Life account created primarily/only to post on the forums.

3.) Many of the posts of this avatar appear to be demonstrations of
your
self-impression of
your
intellect as compared to others.

4.) "Demonstrating how stupid one is" doesn't mean one
is
stupid (i.e. possessing a high level of stupidity) - it's very possible to demonstrate that one isn't very stupid at all, which would be a level of stupidity and therefore a "demonstration of how stupid they are."

Of course, if
you
didn't
understand
that...

Who is this "you" that is referred to in the post?

It reminds me of the Welsh Cocktail chat up line. What's a Welsh Cocktail? A pint of bitter and a piece of ewe.

***Call me when TT has worked out what identity does or does not mean here

The person (human, partnership or corporation; singular of people) who actually typed your hypothesis. By using the phrase "people joined SL" you acknowledged the existence of humans as opposed to avatars; in fact, it can be about nothing but humans instead of avatars, based on both "people" and "joined."

SirLeighBastard couldn't have joined SL as he was created in the moment the account was registered. Joining is the act of connecting two existing things. If you disagree with Sartre (which is usually pretty sensible) and maintain that SirLeighBastard had a pre-existing essence you'll have to explain how an essence can perform an action.

Link to post
Share on other sites


Theresa Tennyson wrote:


SirLeighBastard wrote:


Theresa Tennyson wrote:


SirLeighBastard wrote:


Theresa Tennyson wrote:


SirLeighBastard wrote:

A very successful British comedian used to wonder why parents took their children to supermarkets just to smack them, and in the same way, I was wondering why so many people joined SL just so that they could post in the forums to demonstrate in public how stupid they were.

Go on, prove me right!

You just did.

Your reply makes no sense at all. Thank you for participating.

***Call me when you have learned the lyrics to The Logical Song

1.) In creating this account,
you
joined Second Life.

2.) Strong circumstantial evidence indicates that the account that
you
created and which posted this is a Second Life account created primarily/only to post on the forums.

3.) Many of the posts of this avatar appear to be demonstrations of
your
self-impression of
your
intellect as compared to others.

4.) "Demonstrating how stupid one is" doesn't mean one
is
stupid (i.e. possessing a high level of stupidity) - it's very possible to demonstrate that one isn't very stupid at all, which would be a level of stupidity and therefore a "demonstration of how stupid they are."

Of course, if
you
didn't
understand
that...

Who is this "you" that is referred to in the post?

It reminds me of the Welsh Cocktail chat up line. What's a Welsh Cocktail? A pint of bitter and a piece of ewe.

***Call me when TT has worked out what identity does or does not mean here

The
person
(human, partnership or corporation; singular of
people
) who actually typed your hypothesis. By using the phrase "
people joined
SL" you acknowledged the existence of humans as opposed to avatars; in fact, it can be about nothing
but
humans instead of avatars, based on both "people" and "joined."

SirLeighBastard couldn't have
joined
SL as he was created in the moment the account was registered. Joining is the act of connecting two existing things. If you disagree with Sartre (which is usually pretty sensible) and maintain that SirLeighBastard had a pre-existing essence you'll have to explain how an essence can perform an action.

Make up your mind! The human who joined SL was not the same as the human who typed the original post in this thread, and a different human is now typing this response. In addition, SirLeighBastard does not exist, except as a label to attach to what you seem to perceive, incorrectly, as a coherent single individual. The Many Worlds Implementation applies, of course, although this is only tangentially of relevance in refuting your misconceptions.

If you seriously want to get into a philosophical or psychological discussion about "essence", then feel free to do so, but be prepared to defend your beliefs regarding the existence, or otherwise, of a soul, and to explain how it can come into existence and where it might go when its corporeal instantiation is terminated.

***Call me when you can demonstrate a degree of self-consistency

Link to post
Share on other sites


SirLeighBastard wrote:



Make up your mind! The human who joined SL was not the same as the human who typed the original post in this thread, and a different human is now typing this response. In addition, SirLeighBastard does not exist, except as a label to attach to
what you seem to perceive, incorrectly, as a coherent single individual.
The Many Worlds Implementation applies, of course, although this is only tangentially of relevance in refuting your misconceptions.


No, I picked up on the incoherence quite a while ago.

Your reply died aborning, as I had already stated that I was addressing a person, which I specifically said could also be a partnership or corporation -- i.e. multiple humans acting collectively --  and in English "you" is both the second-person singular and second person plural pronoun.

SirLeighBastard most certainly does exist -- as a Second LIfe account. How could I reply to it otherwise?

Link to post
Share on other sites


Theresa Tennyson wrote:


SirLeighBastard wrote:



Make up your mind! The human who joined SL was not the same as the human who typed the original post in this thread, and a different human is now typing this response. In addition, SirLeighBastard does not exist, except as a label to attach to
what you seem to perceive, incorrectly, as a coherent single individual.
The Many Worlds Implementation applies, of course, although this is only tangentially of relevance in refuting your misconceptions.


No, I picked up on the incoherence quite a while ago.

Your reply died aborning, as I had already stated that I was addressing a
person
, which I specifically said could also be a partnership or corporation -- i.e. multiple humans acting collectively --  and in English "you" is both the second-person singular and second person plural pronoun.

SirLeighBastard most certainly
does
exist -- as a Second LIfe account.
How could I reply to it otherwise?

As a solipsist, I made you do so.

***Call me when you have discovered that, in law (in civilised countries at least)  a corporation is NOT multiple humans acting collectively, but a legal entity in its own right.

Link to post
Share on other sites


Theresa Tennyson wrote:


SirLeighBastard wrote:



As a solipsist, I made you do so.

 

So, the only thing capable of proving yourself right is you?

(Psst! Look at my first post in this thread.)

Truth is universal, but the ignorant are unable to recognise it.

***Call me when you realise it is Friday again

Link to post
Share on other sites
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 1972 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...