Talk:Mexican Mating Machine - Revision history

121.72.177.207 at 05:17, 23 March 2008

2008-03-23T05:17:54Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:17, 23 March 2008
Line 171:		Line 171:
	::Thank you, Pheon, and I completely agree. Seriously guys, give it a rest....--[[User:Jonpro\|Jonpro]] 16:31, 19 March 2008 (CDT)		::Thank you, Pheon, and I completely agree. Seriously guys, give it a rest....--[[User:Jonpro\|Jonpro]] 16:31, 19 March 2008 (CDT)
	::Agreed. - [[user:platypusrex256\|platy]] march 19		::Agreed. - [[user:platypusrex256\|platy]] march 19


			== Just so you know... ==
			I'm an actual New Zealander. And contrary to what the original comment states, we actually do go by the title "New Zealander". Kiwi is just a nickname thing. Like Pom for Brits or Yanks for the Americans.

Platypusrex256: /* What is wrong with note number two */

2008-03-19T22:43:07Z

What is wrong with note number two

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:43, 19 March 2008
Line 170:		Line 170:
	:Okay, I think we've all seen enough of this. The past four or five posts have become argumentative simply for the sake of argument of it, with each person basically telling the other to cease and desist (and if I'm wrong with the numbers, forget it, you get the point). The current note (as far as I can gather) is fine with the majority here, so it stays as is. This discussion has gone on far longer than I think anyone wanted/prefered. So seriously, the discussion's over. --[[User:Phoenician\|Pheon]] 16:12, 19 March 2008 (CDT)		:Okay, I think we've all seen enough of this. The past four or five posts have become argumentative simply for the sake of argument of it, with each person basically telling the other to cease and desist (and if I'm wrong with the numbers, forget it, you get the point). The current note (as far as I can gather) is fine with the majority here, so it stays as is. This discussion has gone on far longer than I think anyone wanted/prefered. So seriously, the discussion's over. --[[User:Phoenician\|Pheon]] 16:12, 19 March 2008 (CDT)
	::Thank you, Pheon, and I completely agree. Seriously guys, give it a rest....--[[User:Jonpro\|Jonpro]] 16:31, 19 March 2008 (CDT)		::Thank you, Pheon, and I completely agree. Seriously guys, give it a rest....--[[User:Jonpro\|Jonpro]] 16:31, 19 March 2008 (CDT)
			::Agreed. - [[user:platypusrex256\|platy]] march 19

Jonpro: /* What is wrong with note number two */

2008-03-19T21:31:32Z

What is wrong with note number two

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:31, 19 March 2008
Line 169:		Line 169:
	:::::*you are the arrogant one because you insist on placing yourself at the nut of your point. if you want to talk about the cultural heritage of the actresses then do it. just leave out the ''many'' and the ''funny'' because those are weak points. - [[useR:platypusrex256\|platy]] march 29		:::::*you are the arrogant one because you insist on placing yourself at the nut of your point. if you want to talk about the cultural heritage of the actresses then do it. just leave out the ''many'' and the ''funny'' because those are weak points. - [[useR:platypusrex256\|platy]] march 29
	:Okay, I think we've all seen enough of this. The past four or five posts have become argumentative simply for the sake of argument of it, with each person basically telling the other to cease and desist (and if I'm wrong with the numbers, forget it, you get the point). The current note (as far as I can gather) is fine with the majority here, so it stays as is. This discussion has gone on far longer than I think anyone wanted/prefered. So seriously, the discussion's over. --[[User:Phoenician\|Pheon]] 16:12, 19 March 2008 (CDT)		:Okay, I think we've all seen enough of this. The past four or five posts have become argumentative simply for the sake of argument of it, with each person basically telling the other to cease and desist (and if I'm wrong with the numbers, forget it, you get the point). The current note (as far as I can gather) is fine with the majority here, so it stays as is. This discussion has gone on far longer than I think anyone wanted/prefered. So seriously, the discussion's over. --[[User:Phoenician\|Pheon]] 16:12, 19 March 2008 (CDT)
			::Thank you, Pheon, and I completely agree. Seriously guys, give it a rest....--[[User:Jonpro\|Jonpro]] 16:31, 19 March 2008 (CDT)

Phoenician: /* What is wrong with note number two */ that

2008-03-19T21:12:05Z

What is wrong with note number two: that

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:12, 19 March 2008
Line 168:		Line 168:
	:::::~ [[User:Renegade\|Renegade]] ([[User talk:Renegade\|talk]] \| [[Special:Contributions/Renegade\|contribs]]) 04:45, 19 March 2008 (CDT)		:::::~ [[User:Renegade\|Renegade]] ([[User talk:Renegade\|talk]] \| [[Special:Contributions/Renegade\|contribs]]) 04:45, 19 March 2008 (CDT)
	:::::*you are the arrogant one because you insist on placing yourself at the nut of your point. if you want to talk about the cultural heritage of the actresses then do it. just leave out the ''many'' and the ''funny'' because those are weak points. - [[useR:platypusrex256\|platy]] march 29		:::::*you are the arrogant one because you insist on placing yourself at the nut of your point. if you want to talk about the cultural heritage of the actresses then do it. just leave out the ''many'' and the ''funny'' because those are weak points. - [[useR:platypusrex256\|platy]] march 29
			:Okay, I think we've all seen enough of this. The past four or five posts have become argumentative simply for the sake of argument of it, with each person basically telling the other to cease and desist (and if I'm wrong with the numbers, forget it, you get the point). The current note (as far as I can gather) is fine with the majority here, so it stays as is. This discussion has gone on far longer than I think anyone wanted/prefered. So seriously, the discussion's over. --[[User:Phoenician\|Pheon]] 16:12, 19 March 2008 (CDT)

Platypusrex256: /* What is wrong with note number two */

2008-03-19T19:44:27Z

What is wrong with note number two

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:44, 19 March 2008
Line 167:		Line 167:
	::::Like I said before ...... and that is the problem right there. That everything has been explained to you multiple times, and you still sit there repeating the same basic crap, spinning our words, instead of at least trying to understand why we find the cultural heritage of the actresses noteworthy. Adding to that is, ''like I said before'', that you complained that I hadn't replied to multiple of your points, yet, even after multiple requests, you are still unwilling to produce said points. Either you want answers, or you don't. But if you don't, stop discussing and wasting our time.		::::Like I said before ...... and that is the problem right there. That everything has been explained to you multiple times, and you still sit there repeating the same basic crap, spinning our words, instead of at least trying to understand why we find the cultural heritage of the actresses noteworthy. Adding to that is, ''like I said before'', that you complained that I hadn't replied to multiple of your points, yet, even after multiple requests, you are still unwilling to produce said points. Either you want answers, or you don't. But if you don't, stop discussing and wasting our time.
	:::::~ [[User:Renegade\|Renegade]] ([[User talk:Renegade\|talk]] \| [[Special:Contributions/Renegade\|contribs]]) 04:45, 19 March 2008 (CDT)		:::::~ [[User:Renegade\|Renegade]] ([[User talk:Renegade\|talk]] \| [[Special:Contributions/Renegade\|contribs]]) 04:45, 19 March 2008 (CDT)
			:::::*you are the arrogant one because you insist on placing yourself at the nut of your point. if you want to talk about the cultural heritage of the actresses then do it. just leave out the ''many'' and the ''funny'' because those are weak points. - [[useR:platypusrex256\|platy]] march 29

Platypusrex256: /* What is wrong with note number two */

2008-03-19T19:39:51Z

What is wrong with note number two

Platypusrex256: /* What is wrong with note number two */

2008-03-19T19:20:59Z

What is wrong with note number two

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:20, 19 March 2008
Line 154:		Line 154:
	::::In addition to the fact that it this interesting to note as a trivia fact, some of us also find that relation amusing, especially in light of constant reminders of the characters how much they think the two are alike.		::::In addition to the fact that it this interesting to note as a trivia fact, some of us also find that relation amusing, especially in light of constant reminders of the characters how much they think the two are alike.
	::::That is what we want, that is what we mean - there is no way to explain it any clearer, so I'm not going to do it again. If you still don't get it, try harder.		::::That is what we want, that is what we mean - there is no way to explain it any clearer, so I'm not going to do it again. If you still don't get it, try harder.
			:::::*i see the connection between new zealand and australia. i'm a traveled person and have traveled to both of those countries. i just don't see the connection of all that sophistry to this video. - [[useR:platypusrex256\|platy]] march 29
	::::{{quote\|platy\|if renegade has a point at all, it is this: ''gina, the character, presumably has nothing to do with australia or new zealand, so crystal's campy impersonation of erwin is brilliant acting - an expert pretending to be a novice!'' drop the vague attribution and the opinions and go strait to the meat of the observation.}}		::::{{quote\|platy\|if renegade has a point at all, it is this: ''gina, the character, presumably has nothing to do with australia or new zealand, so crystal's campy impersonation of erwin is brilliant acting - an expert pretending to be a novice!'' drop the vague attribution and the opinions and go strait to the meat of the observation.}}
	::::The fact that you think that is "meat of the observation" is the root of the problem.		::::The fact that you think that is "meat of the observation" is the root of the problem.
			:::::*i'm a professional journalist. would you prefer i call it the nut? haha - [[useR:platypusrex256\|platy]] march 29

	::::{{quote\|platy\|what is so arrogant about that? i am trying to see the value of your ideas and i just get shot down like i'm retarded.}}		::::{{quote\|platy\|what is so arrogant about that? i am trying to see the value of your ideas and i just get shot down like i'm retarded.}}
	::::Like I said before ...... and that is the problem right there. That everything has been explained to you multiple times, and you still sit there repeating the same basic crap, spinning our words, instead of at least trying to understand why we find the cultural heritage of the actresses noteworthy. Adding to that is, ''like I said before'', that you complained that I hadn't replied to multiple of your points, yet, even after multiple requests, you are still unwilling to produce said points. Either you want answers, or you don't. But if you don't, stop discussing and wasting our time.		::::Like I said before ...... and that is the problem right there. That everything has been explained to you multiple times, and you still sit there repeating the same basic crap, spinning our words, instead of at least trying to understand why we find the cultural heritage of the actresses noteworthy. Adding to that is, ''like I said before'', that you complained that I hadn't replied to multiple of your points, yet, even after multiple requests, you are still unwilling to produce said points. Either you want answers, or you don't. But if you don't, stop discussing and wasting our time.
	:::::~ [[User:Renegade\|Renegade]] ([[User talk:Renegade\|talk]] \| [[Special:Contributions/Renegade\|contribs]]) 04:45, 19 March 2008 (CDT)		:::::~ [[User:Renegade\|Renegade]] ([[User talk:Renegade\|talk]] \| [[Special:Contributions/Renegade\|contribs]]) 04:45, 19 March 2008 (CDT)

Shiori: /* What is wrong with note number two */

2008-03-19T11:47:30Z

What is wrong with note number two

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:47, 19 March 2008
Line 9:		Line 9:

	== What is wrong with note number two ==		== What is wrong with note number two ==
			:'''''This conversation is officially over. It's just running around in circles over semantics anymore. Per admins backing this comment, it is to stay intact.''''' - [[User:Shiori\|Shiori]] 06:47, 19 March 2008 (CDT)
	''Many have commented on Gina's accent sounding odd'' - There are two things wrong with this part. First, the attributing subject (many) is ambiguous. How many is many? Who are these people? Why do we care? Second, the wording is clunky and awkward.		''Many have commented on Gina's accent sounding odd'' - There are two things wrong with this part. First, the attributing subject (many) is ambiguous. How many is many? Who are these people? Why do we care? Second, the wording is clunky and awkward.

Renegade: /* What is wrong with note number two */ minor fixes

2008-03-19T10:05:11Z

What is wrong with note number two: minor fixes

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:05, 19 March 2008
Line 149:		Line 149:
	::::OK...for the...what? third time? (and you wonder why I sound like I'm explaining it to a retard): Gina-Bree -> close resemblance, but not equal, like siblings. Actress of Bree -> Spent time in New Zealand, thus New Zealandian speech patterns for Bree/Actress of Gina -> Half-Australian, thus Australian speech patterns for Gina. Public image of Australia/New Zealand -> close resemblance, but not equal, like siblings. The emphasis in that part is on "public image" - it's not fucking important how distant from each other Australia and New Zealand in reality are, because in the public stereotype of almost the entire world, Australia and New Zealand are basically the same thing - just slightly different.		::::OK...for the...what? third time? (and you wonder why I sound like I'm explaining it to a retard): Gina-Bree -> close resemblance, but not equal, like siblings. Actress of Bree -> Spent time in New Zealand, thus New Zealandian speech patterns for Bree/Actress of Gina -> Half-Australian, thus Australian speech patterns for Gina. Public image of Australia/New Zealand -> close resemblance, but not equal, like siblings. The emphasis in that part is on "public image" - it's not fucking important how distant from each other Australia and New Zealand in reality are, because in the public stereotype of almost the entire world, Australia and New Zealand are basically the same thing - just slightly different.
	----		----
	::::The cultural heritage of each actress, either intentionally or not, lead to the inclusion of distinct speech patterns in their dialogue. In the public eye, the stereotype of the world the countries they originate from as well as their accents sound very close, and are yet different. This remarkable given the fact that the same basic fact is often attributed to siblings - they are superficially very similar, in many cases easily identifiable as siblings, and yet, under the surface, they are very different. Thus, the relation between the cultural heritages of the actresses of the characters mirrors the relation between their characters. That is a fact that several of us find noteworthy, and would like to have included on episode page.		::::The cultural heritage of each actress, either intentionally or not, lead to the inclusion of distinct speech patterns in their dialogue. In the public eye, the stereotype of the world, the countries they originate from as well as their accents sound very close, and are yet different. This is remarkable given the fact that the same basic fact is often attributed to siblings - they are superficially very similar, in many cases easily identifiable as siblings, and yet, under the surface, they are very different. Thus, the relation between the cultural heritages of the actresses of the characters mirrors the relation between their characters. That is a fact that several of us find noteworthy, and would like to have included on episode page.
	----		----
	::::In addition to the fact that it this interesting to note as a trivia fact, some of us also find that relation amusing, especially in light of constant reminders of the characters how much they think the two are alike.		::::In addition to the fact that it this interesting to note as a trivia fact, some of us also find that relation amusing, especially in light of constant reminders of the characters how much they think the two are alike.

Renegade: /* What is wrong with note number two */

2008-03-19T09:45:57Z

What is wrong with note number two

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:45, 19 March 2008
Line 121:		Line 121:
	::::* okay... i still don't see the connection. i think it is obvious that the creators decided to get gina to do the erwin voice because it would remind us of bree. but the ethnic heritage of the actresses truly has nothing to do with the video.		::::* okay... i still don't see the connection. i think it is obvious that the creators decided to get gina to do the erwin voice because it would remind us of bree. but the ethnic heritage of the actresses truly has nothing to do with the video.
	:::* if renegade has a point at all, it is this: ''gina, the character, presumably has nothing to do with australia or new zealand, so crystal's campy impersonation of erwin is brilliant acting - an expert pretending to be a novice!'' drop the vague attribution and the opinions and go strait to the meat of the observation. what is so arrogant about that? i am trying to see the value of your ideas and i just get shot down like i'm retarded. - [[user:platypusrex256\|platy]] march 19		:::* if renegade has a point at all, it is this: ''gina, the character, presumably has nothing to do with australia or new zealand, so crystal's campy impersonation of erwin is brilliant acting - an expert pretending to be a novice!'' drop the vague attribution and the opinions and go strait to the meat of the observation. what is so arrogant about that? i am trying to see the value of your ideas and i just get shot down like i'm retarded. - [[user:platypusrex256\|platy]] march 19



			::::{{quote\|platy\|i never spun anything. i removed a note twice and all a sudden he's flagging my talk page for spam.}}
			::::I'm sure you don't even see the irony of that statement.

			::::{{quote\|platy\|then i try to explain my reasoning and he just argues against me}}
			::::How dare I?!

			::::{{quote\|platy\|using vulgar language towards me}}
			::::Which words I use is irrelevant as long as the logical point I'm trying to make gets conveyed as I want it. The whole concept of "vulgar language" is flawed in itself - it doesn't matter if you talk of stool, poo, shit or crap - the substance meant Is the same in all four cases. Randomly declaring a word "vulgar" is ridiculous, and this ridiculousness is basically proven by the euphemism treadmill. I am certainly not going to let myself be forced in a speech pattern unnatural to me, giving myself a disadvantage, just because you have been socially trained to feel awkward around certain representations of a fact.

			::::{{quote\|platy\|and talking at me as if i'm retarded. i might not understand but that doesn't make me retarded.}}
			::::Not as if you're retarded - as if I have to repeat and rephrase the same answers over and over again because you keep evading the answer, nitpicking small details in phrasing instead.

			::::{{quote\|platy\|and for gods sake, my attempt to verbalize my feelings articulately is not arrogant or stubborn.}}
			::::"no, the opinions of forum members are not noteworthy", "please take the night off. is st.patrick's day getting the best of you?", "[...] because they don't involve you and you are not familiar with the situations", "I suggested that you take a break and let things cool off because you seem worked up.", "I had no idea that I was alone in my opinion, nor do I care.", "quit this. if you want to argue further, send me a message on aim or msn. see my profile ", ...
			::::Constantly treating people like they're stupid, drunk, or little children is normal for you, then?
			::::The constant refusal to name the points I allegedly did not reply to is not stubborn, then?

			::::{{quote\|platy\|<nowiki>1) it is of the unattributed subjects' opinion that gina's steve erwin voice is odd
			* i'm guessing these steve erwin voice critics are experts on the steve erwin voice and are not satisfied with gina's performance. but i'm not sure.
			2) it is the opinion of the note's authors that this is funny because crystal is australian and native american
			* opinions of pedians are not noteworthy unless the are central to the plot. as pedians, we should already know our opinions and don't need the pedia to reinforce our opinions.
			3) jessica rose is from new zealand! which is kind of like australia only not because (insert history of new zealand / australia rivalry)
			* okay... i still don't see the connection. i think it is obvious that the creators decided to get gina to do the erwin voice because it would remind us of bree. but the ethnic heritage of the actresses truly has nothing to do with the video.</nowiki>}}
			::::OK...for the...what? third time? (and you wonder why I sound like I'm explaining it to a retard): Gina-Bree -> close resemblance, but not equal, like siblings. Actress of Bree -> Spent time in New Zealand, thus New Zealandian speech patterns for Bree/Actress of Gina -> Half-Australian, thus Australian speech patterns for Gina. Public image of Australia/New Zealand -> close resemblance, but not equal, like siblings. The emphasis in that part is on "public image" - it's not fucking important how distant from each other Australia and New Zealand in reality are, because in the public stereotype of almost the entire world, Australia and New Zealand are basically the same thing - just slightly different.
			----
			::::The cultural heritage of each actress, either intentionally or not, lead to the inclusion of distinct speech patterns in their dialogue. In the public eye, the stereotype of the world the countries they originate from as well as their accents sound very close, and are yet different. This remarkable given the fact that the same basic fact is often attributed to siblings - they are superficially very similar, in many cases easily identifiable as siblings, and yet, under the surface, they are very different. Thus, the relation between the cultural heritages of the actresses of the characters mirrors the relation between their characters. That is a fact that several of us find noteworthy, and would like to have included on episode page.
			----
			::::In addition to the fact that it this interesting to note as a trivia fact, some of us also find that relation amusing, especially in light of constant reminders of the characters how much they think the two are alike.
			::::That is what we want, that is what we mean - there is no way to explain it any clearer, so I'm not going to do it again. If you still don't get it, try harder.

			::::{{quote\|platy\|if renegade has a point at all, it is this: ''gina, the character, presumably has nothing to do with australia or new zealand, so crystal's campy impersonation of erwin is brilliant acting - an expert pretending to be a novice!'' drop the vague attribution and the opinions and go strait to the meat of the observation.}}
			::::The fact that you think that is "meat of the observation" is the root of the problem.

			::::{{quote\|platy\|what is so arrogant about that? i am trying to see the value of your ideas and i just get shot down like i'm retarded.}}
			::::Like I said before ...... and that is the problem right there. That everything has been explained to you multiple times, and you still sit there repeating the same basic crap, spinning our words, instead of at least trying to understand why we find the cultural heritage of the actresses noteworthy. Adding to that is, ''like I said before'', that you complained that I hadn't replied to multiple of your points, yet, even after multiple requests, you are still unwilling to produce said points. Either you want answers, or you don't. But if you don't, stop discussing and wasting our time.
			:::::~ [[User:Renegade\|Renegade]] ([[User talk:Renegade\|talk]] \| [[Special:Contributions/Renegade\|contribs]]) 04:45, 19 March 2008 (CDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:43, 19 March 2008
Line 170:		Line 170:
	:Okay, I think we've all seen enough of this. The past four or five posts have become argumentative simply for the sake of argument of it, with each person basically telling the other to cease and desist (and if I'm wrong with the numbers, forget it, you get the point). The current note (as far as I can gather) is fine with the majority here, so it stays as is. This discussion has gone on far longer than I think anyone wanted/prefered. So seriously, the discussion's over. --[[User:Phoenician\|Pheon]] 16:12, 19 March 2008 (CDT)		:Okay, I think we've all seen enough of this. The past four or five posts have become argumentative simply for the sake of argument of it, with each person basically telling the other to cease and desist (and if I'm wrong with the numbers, forget it, you get the point). The current note (as far as I can gather) is fine with the majority here, so it stays as is. This discussion has gone on far longer than I think anyone wanted/prefered. So seriously, the discussion's over. --[[User:Phoenician\|Pheon]] 16:12, 19 March 2008 (CDT)
	::Thank you, Pheon, and I completely agree. Seriously guys, give it a rest....--[[User:Jonpro\|Jonpro]] 16:31, 19 March 2008 (CDT)		::Thank you, Pheon, and I completely agree. Seriously guys, give it a rest....--[[User:Jonpro\|Jonpro]] 16:31, 19 March 2008 (CDT)
			::Agreed. - [[user:platypusrex256\|platy]] march 19

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:31, 19 March 2008
Line 169:		Line 169:
	:::::*you are the arrogant one because you insist on placing yourself at the nut of your point. if you want to talk about the cultural heritage of the actresses then do it. just leave out the ''many'' and the ''funny'' because those are weak points. - [[useR:platypusrex256\|platy]] march 29		:::::*you are the arrogant one because you insist on placing yourself at the nut of your point. if you want to talk about the cultural heritage of the actresses then do it. just leave out the ''many'' and the ''funny'' because those are weak points. - [[useR:platypusrex256\|platy]] march 29
	:Okay, I think we've all seen enough of this. The past four or five posts have become argumentative simply for the sake of argument of it, with each person basically telling the other to cease and desist (and if I'm wrong with the numbers, forget it, you get the point). The current note (as far as I can gather) is fine with the majority here, so it stays as is. This discussion has gone on far longer than I think anyone wanted/prefered. So seriously, the discussion's over. --[[User:Phoenician\|Pheon]] 16:12, 19 March 2008 (CDT)		:Okay, I think we've all seen enough of this. The past four or five posts have become argumentative simply for the sake of argument of it, with each person basically telling the other to cease and desist (and if I'm wrong with the numbers, forget it, you get the point). The current note (as far as I can gather) is fine with the majority here, so it stays as is. This discussion has gone on far longer than I think anyone wanted/prefered. So seriously, the discussion's over. --[[User:Phoenician\|Pheon]] 16:12, 19 March 2008 (CDT)
			::Thank you, Pheon, and I completely agree. Seriously guys, give it a rest....--[[User:Jonpro\|Jonpro]] 16:31, 19 March 2008 (CDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:12, 19 March 2008
Line 168:		Line 168:
	:::::~ [[User:Renegade\|Renegade]] ([[User talk:Renegade\|talk]] \| [[Special:Contributions/Renegade\|contribs]]) 04:45, 19 March 2008 (CDT)		:::::~ [[User:Renegade\|Renegade]] ([[User talk:Renegade\|talk]] \| [[Special:Contributions/Renegade\|contribs]]) 04:45, 19 March 2008 (CDT)
	:::::*you are the arrogant one because you insist on placing yourself at the nut of your point. if you want to talk about the cultural heritage of the actresses then do it. just leave out the ''many'' and the ''funny'' because those are weak points. - [[useR:platypusrex256\|platy]] march 29		:::::*you are the arrogant one because you insist on placing yourself at the nut of your point. if you want to talk about the cultural heritage of the actresses then do it. just leave out the ''many'' and the ''funny'' because those are weak points. - [[useR:platypusrex256\|platy]] march 29
			:Okay, I think we've all seen enough of this. The past four or five posts have become argumentative simply for the sake of argument of it, with each person basically telling the other to cease and desist (and if I'm wrong with the numbers, forget it, you get the point). The current note (as far as I can gather) is fine with the majority here, so it stays as is. This discussion has gone on far longer than I think anyone wanted/prefered. So seriously, the discussion's over. --[[User:Phoenician\|Pheon]] 16:12, 19 March 2008 (CDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:39, 19 March 2008
Line 133:		Line 133:
	::::{{quote\|platy\|using vulgar language towards me}}		::::{{quote\|platy\|using vulgar language towards me}}
	::::Which words I use is irrelevant as long as the logical point I'm trying to make gets conveyed as I want it. The whole concept of "vulgar language" is flawed in itself - it doesn't matter if you talk of stool, poo, shit or crap - the substance meant Is the same in all four cases. Randomly declaring a word "vulgar" is ridiculous, and this ridiculousness is basically proven by the euphemism treadmill. I am certainly not going to let myself be forced in a speech pattern unnatural to me, giving myself a disadvantage, just because you have been socially trained to feel awkward around certain representations of a fact.		::::Which words I use is irrelevant as long as the logical point I'm trying to make gets conveyed as I want it. The whole concept of "vulgar language" is flawed in itself - it doesn't matter if you talk of stool, poo, shit or crap - the substance meant Is the same in all four cases. Randomly declaring a word "vulgar" is ridiculous, and this ridiculousness is basically proven by the euphemism treadmill. I am certainly not going to let myself be forced in a speech pattern unnatural to me, giving myself a disadvantage, just because you have been socially trained to feel awkward around certain representations of a fact.
			:::::*intelligent people don't need feces or fornication to make a point. - [[useR:platypusrex256\|platy]] march 29

	::::{{quote\|platy\|and talking at me as if i'm retarded. i might not understand but that doesn't make me retarded.}}		::::{{quote\|platy\|and talking at me as if i'm retarded. i might not understand but that doesn't make me retarded.}}
Line 140:		Line 141:
	::::"no, the opinions of forum members are not noteworthy", "please take the night off. is st.patrick's day getting the best of you?", "[...] because they don't involve you and you are not familiar with the situations", "I suggested that you take a break and let things cool off because you seem worked up.", "I had no idea that I was alone in my opinion, nor do I care.", "quit this. if you want to argue further, send me a message on aim or msn. see my profile ", ...		::::"no, the opinions of forum members are not noteworthy", "please take the night off. is st.patrick's day getting the best of you?", "[...] because they don't involve you and you are not familiar with the situations", "I suggested that you take a break and let things cool off because you seem worked up.", "I had no idea that I was alone in my opinion, nor do I care.", "quit this. if you want to argue further, send me a message on aim or msn. see my profile ", ...
	::::Constantly treating people like they're stupid, drunk, or little children is normal for you, then?		::::Constantly treating people like they're stupid, drunk, or little children is normal for you, then?
	::::~~The constant refusal~~ to ~~name the points I allegedly did not reply~~ to ~~is not stubborn, then?~~		:::::*this is an example of something i would rather talk to you in a private forum about. it has nothing to do with this space. most of your responses have nothing to do with this space. - [[useR:platypusrex256\|platy]] march 29


	::::{{quote\|platy\|<nowiki>1) it is of the unattributed subjects' opinion that gina's steve erwin voice is odd		::::{{quote\|platy\|<nowiki>1) it is of the unattributed subjects' opinion that gina's steve erwin voice is odd
Line 154:		Line 156:
	::::In addition to the fact that it this interesting to note as a trivia fact, some of us also find that relation amusing, especially in light of constant reminders of the characters how much they think the two are alike.		::::In addition to the fact that it this interesting to note as a trivia fact, some of us also find that relation amusing, especially in light of constant reminders of the characters how much they think the two are alike.
	::::That is what we want, that is what we mean - there is no way to explain it any clearer, so I'm not going to do it again. If you still don't get it, try harder.		::::That is what we want, that is what we mean - there is no way to explain it any clearer, so I'm not going to do it again. If you still don't get it, try harder.
	:::::*i see the connection between new zealand and australia. i'm a traveled person and have traveled to both of those countries. i just don't see the connection of all that sophistry to this video. - [[useR:platypusrex256\|platy]] march 29		:::::*i see the connection between new zealand and australia. i'm a traveled person and have traveled to both of those countries. i just don't see the connection of all that sophistry to this video. if you want to write an essay about the casting of lg15 then go ahead and do it. but i don't feel that these ideas are best represented in a single sentence and attached to this video. - [[useR:platypusrex256\|platy]] march 29
			:::::*also, i made other points here that you have failed to address. such as ''opinions of pedians are not noteworthy unless the are central to the plot. as pedians, we should already know our opinions and don't need the pedia to reinforce our opinions.'' or ''i'm guessing these steve erwin voice critics are experts on the steve erwin voice and are not satisfied with gina's performance. but i'm not sure.'' - [[useR:platypusrex256\|platy]] march 29


	::::{{quote\|platy\|if renegade has a point at all, it is this: ''gina, the character, presumably has nothing to do with australia or new zealand, so crystal's campy impersonation of erwin is brilliant acting - an expert pretending to be a novice!'' drop the vague attribution and the opinions and go strait to the meat of the observation.}}		::::{{quote\|platy\|if renegade has a point at all, it is this: ''gina, the character, presumably has nothing to do with australia or new zealand, so crystal's campy impersonation of erwin is brilliant acting - an expert pretending to be a novice!'' drop the vague attribution and the opinions and go strait to the meat of the observation.}}
	::::The fact that you think that is "meat of the observation" is the root of the problem.		::::The fact that you think that is "meat of the observation" is the root of the problem.