Apology

[Word]

...........................................

[þsy]

Responding to my post with some spiel about Aristotle, I can't even begin to try and comprehend how that is relevant to what I said (unless it was in response to some other comment which I totally missed)

You're talking about ethics there - well, I am not. I'm talking about projected identities on the internet in relation to gender... The internet and concepts of gender only emerged in the late 20th Century, but I'm sure Aristotle has something to say about that right? Further, even if we were talking about ethics, why does that make Aristotle's ideas absolute? Wittgenstein didn't even bother studying the Ancient Greek philosophers... Allow people to think what they want, rather than condemning them and their opinions

More to the point though - and if you're going to comment on my post again, this is the part to which I would like you to respond - when any ideas are suggested in this place, lots of people (a few individuals more so than others) come forward and say why that idea is wrong and stupid and you're so dumb etc. I think some discussion would be really interesting - where else have you seen someone in a close internet community come out as having pretended they were a different sex? This context was interesting at least as it wasn't like Elmo was trying to seduce any male players, she/he enjoyed having a feminine avatar for other reasons - let's discuss this?

There is a real tendency to pick out another person's post, tell them why they're wrong wrong wrong, whilst trying to make yourself look good in the process. I'm not suggesting Word is guilty of this, I'm suggesting loads of people are guilty of this

Feel the love

[delinquent]

It appears to me that everyone is assuming Elmo intended to deceive everybody on the forum. What if it was simply easier to appear as a woman? And not even directly do so, simply speak like so? He did mention that, primarily, he was explaining how to play to his female partner. It seems to me that everybody is assuming his motives were much darker than that.

[Word]

@Psy: nobody here cared about the content of the lie (pretending that you have a different gender), but the lie itself. That's why talking about ethics is apt.

Further, even if we were talking about ethics, why does that make Aristotle's ideas absolute?

Because he's talking about a general concept of ethics. He knows that everyone tends to think his opinion is the right one.

This context was interesting at least as it wasn't like Elmo was trying to seduce any male players [...] - let's discuss this?

How would that help anyone? We've already established that most people here think what Elmo did is OK. Are you saying the lie could have been part of some bigger scheme, with the greater good in mind?

tell them why they're wrong wrong wrong, whilst trying to make yourself look good in the process.

Wrong wrong wrong.

(I tell you you're wrong because I think you are, that's all)

[þsy]

This context was interesting at least as it wasn't like Elmo was trying to seduce any male players [...] - let's discuss this?

How would that help anyone? We've already established that most people here think what Elmo did is OK. Are you saying the lie could have been part of some bigger scheme, with the greater good in mind?

No not at all, I'm not talking about good or bad/right or wrong, and I'm certainly not suggesting that Elmo's activities somehow fed into some greater purpose (wtf?), I think you've just misunderstood what I was saying

tell them why they're wrong wrong wrong, whilst trying to make yourself look good in the process.

Wrong wrong wrong.

(I tell you you're wrong because I think you are, that's all)

Again, you don't understand what I'm saying. I'm not making some point about Elmo - if it helps, remove Elmo from the equation entirely. I cannot be 'wrong', because I haven't made any points, I've simply asked 'how can we conceptualise this interesting instance?' and put forward two different ideas. If you think those ideas are wrong - or perhaps a better way of putting it would be 'you disagree with those ideas', as I can't really be 'wrong' if there is no 'right' answer - then the idea is that you then put your own thoughts or conceptualisations down. And thus you have a discussion

But as you're ignoring anything I'm actually saying, and all we're doing is talking about talking, rather than actually just talking, I'm going to stop responding now. It's really difficult to get some good talk happening on this forum. People are a little too eager to belittle other's opinions which has crushed any creative discussion

[Word]

No not at all, I'm not talking about good or bad/right or wrong, and I'm certainly not suggesting that Elmo's activities somehow fed into some greater purpose (wtf?), I think you've just misunderstood what I was saying

Well then, maybe you could just clarify what you meant when you said that Elmo didn't try to seduce anyone. In what way does that matter?

But as you're ignoring anything I'm actually saying

Obviously I'm not, but as you said I don't really understand what the point of that discussion would be. If the question you're posing is "why do/should/can we see XY as a mistake?" the 'answer' is what I tried to describe above.

And finally, both your approaches are based on the premise that the internet is something like a dark town square where everyone can do what he wants and morality isn't valid anymore. That's not the case and the main reason I think you're wrong. Yeah, you acknowledged that you can meet someone personally but then you sort of relativized that yourself ("it's the internet after all" - one wants to shout the non-internet isn't any different at all). Having to deal with someone who pretends to have a different gender isn't any better than having to review a book you haven't read. Even if this happened in a larger community where one would get away with it easily, that little variation says nothing about the person's character.

[Pr3]

Hm.. ok, I wasn't going to post on this thread, but I have free time. I personally didn't know about this "Apology" thread until 2+ months after it was made. I personally think Elmo should've at least posted an apology on uNk forums since we were "his" teammates for nearly a year. Over that time Elmo posted pictures of a random girl, and female perspective instant messages/posts were made throughout this whole year of lying (Noobsaibot hit on "her" a lot). I really don't hold any resentment towards Elmo, but if this was truly an earnest apology.. then he in my perspective should've apologized to uNk at some point. That is my 2 cents, and I'm leaving this in the past.

Pr3

[Phytotron]

Word did not revive this topic. Psy did, and I really don't know why, other than to ostentatiously muse over what he thinks he's learned from his gender studies class(es) at university, or whatever he's babbling about. Certainly nothing interesting has come of it.


As I pointed out in the other thread, all of this jibber-jabber since the subject has been revived is nothing but idiotic internet clan/clique/gang/tribal bullshit. None of you (Liz, Gaz, et al) give one rat's ass about any universal principles, especially regarding the proper treatment of people. Liz never has. S/he (I'm increasingly skeptical of its gender; henceforth to be referred to as "it") has been on both sides of just about everyone in this game—whatever's convenient for its mean-spirited shit-spewing. And yet weak-minded teens continue to associate with it. Get a clue, kids. If you think you're on its good side, in its clique, for now; just wait, you're about to get stabbed in the back.

And here Liz is telling other people they have no life? That others thrive on idiotic, contrived drama, when Liz is invariably in the middle of it, often inciting it, and so plainly getting joy from it? This is the epitome of hypocrisy.

Armchair psychiatrist thinks it's obvious Liz suffers from either antisocial, borderline, and/or narcissistic personality disorder(s). The person is clearly disturbed. Why anyone would continue to associate with or make excuses for it is beyond my personal comprehension. It's only explainable within the context of internet culture, and the degenerated, diseased minds that have resulted from it.


Fact is, Word has displayed more "balls"—and let me again point out the misogyny inherent in that term—integrity, maturity, wit, and intellect than most of you pea-brained, petty, Lord of the Flies-aping cretins combined.

[Gaz]

Fact is, Word has displayed more "balls"—and let me again point out the misogyny inherent in that term—integrity, maturity, wit, and intellect than most of you pea-brained, petty, Lord of the Flies-aping cretins combined.

lold. suck is dick more, or has he sucked yours so you would say this... or both?

[Phytotron]

Astonishing. One must wonder if you're even aware of yourself. You continue to reinforce my case against you.

[Soul]

Word did not revive this topic. Psy did, and I really don't know why, other than to ostentatiously muse over what he thinks he's learned from his gender studies class(es) at university, or whatever he's babbling about. Certainly nothing interesting has come of it.


As I pointed out in the other thread, all of this jibber-jabber since the subject has been revived is nothing but idiotic internet clan/clique/gang/tribal bullshit. None of you (Liz, Gaz, et al) give one rat's ass about any universal principles, especially regarding the proper treatment of people. Liz never has. S/he (I'm increasingly skeptical of its gender; henceforth to be referred to as "it") has been on both sides of just about everyone in this game—whatever's convenient for its mean-spirited shit-spewing. And yet weak-minded teens continue to associate with it. Get a clue, kids. If you think you're on its good side, in its clique, for now; just wait, you're about to get stabbed in the back.

And here Liz is telling other people they have no life? That others thrive on idiotic, contrived drama, when Liz is invariably in the middle of it, often inciting it, and so plainly getting joy from it? This is the epitome of hypocrisy.

Armchair psychiatrist thinks it's obvious Liz suffers from either antisocial, borderline, and/or narcissistic personality disorder(s). The person is clearly disturbed. Why anyone would continue to associate with or make excuses for it is beyond my personal comprehension. It's only explainable within the context of internet culture, and the degenerated, diseased minds that have resulted from it.


Fact is, Word has displayed more "balls"—and let me again point out the misogyny inherent in that term—integrity, maturity, wit, and intellect than most of you pea-brained, petty, Lord of the Flies-aping cretins combined.

I couldn't stop laughing as I read this. Well done phyto.

[Gonzap]

and there you got it!! you've been working so hard for this moment Word. Enjoy it.

[Zenith]

God dang. Wow, well done.

[Kijutsu]

if i was in a lord of the flies situation, i'd win

sociopaths ftw

[Titanoboa]

^ I have heard both mya, Oddeuro and Minxy

And how can you forget Destiny!

Oddeuro and Mixny are guys srsly? DESTINY TOO?

Actually he's saying that he's heard all of the listed females speak, so they are "confirmed" females.