New Clansman

Cynth · Post by **Cynth** » Wed Apr 20, 2005 12:01 pm

GaryKelly---I do basically agree with you, but in this case I think the protestor in this thread was sticking up for someone who made a statement and then later said she was joking (I thought it was hard to tell if she was joking). He can't be said to be jumping on a bandwagon, because we all disagreed with him. So that is why I think he was valiant even though he apparently got the wrong end of the stick. Which doesn't get a person very far, but nevertheless.....

GaryKelly · Post by **GaryKelly** » Wed Apr 20, 2005 12:20 pm

Cynth wrote:GaryKelly---I do basically agree with you, but in this case I think the protestor in this thread was sticking up for someone who made a statement and then later said she was joking (I thought it was hard to tell if she was joking). He can't be said to be jumping on a bandwagon, because we all disagreed with him. So that is why I think he was valiant even though he apparently got the wrong end of the stick. Which doesn't get a person very far, but nevertheless.....

Not so. Go to page one and you'll note that no offense was registered at all until Stacy's joke (and any regular folks visiting the board over the last 6 months would've recognised it as such.

Unseen122 wrote:I think a line should be draw somewhere because it does affend some people I know Stacey showed some offence at it meaning that it might affend more poeple. I personally don't have anything against it except for the fact that it was affending some people.

Personal opinion plus misconception ("it does affend some people I know Stacey showed some offence") plus false extrapolation and presumption ("meaning that it might affend more people"), followed by bandwagonicity and/or sheepitudiness ("I personally don't have anything against it except for the fact that it was affending some people"). You'll note that in previous posts by the same author in pages 1 and 2, the author was happy to join in with the majority's amusement, and no offense at all was expressed then or previously.

Sorry, I don't see the valiance. But then I concede I may be somewhat distracted by avatars. The simple, non-PC statement "I don't have anything against it" would have saved several pages of posts I reckon, including this one. But at least it gave me the chance to use the word 'embiggen' a few times so it's not all bad.

Cynth · Post by **Cynth** » Wed Apr 20, 2005 12:33 pm

Oh shoot! See, I think "I don't have anything against it" was the PC statement, because that was the feeling of the thread. It was more with it to not have anything against it than to object to it. Now, what that has to do with anything at all I could not say. Drat! Foiled again!

Jerry Freeman · Post by **Jerry Freeman** » Wed Apr 20, 2005 12:36 pm

I'm a little confused.

Could we run through that again?

Best wishes,
Jerry

StewySmoot · Post by **StewySmoot** » Wed Apr 20, 2005 1:18 pm

I am not sure either but I think someone is calling me a sheep. Never herd such talk...

curioso · Post by **curioso** » Wed Apr 20, 2005 2:09 pm

OK Stewy, (who has been revealed to be a guy

with a more bodacious avater than stacey of fipple fame), can you PLEASE show us the rest of the picture??? Am I the only one who wants to know what the whole girl looks like???

amar · Post by **amar** » Wed Apr 20, 2005 2:23 pm

curioso wrote:OK Stewy, (who has been revealed to be a guy with a more bodacious avater than stacey of fipple fame), can you PLEASE show us the rest of the picture??? Am I the only one who wants to know what the whole girl looks like???

no

Cynth · Post by **Cynth** » Wed Apr 20, 2005 4:22 pm

Well, I don't know what to say. I don't want to be guilty of bandwagonicity, but, on the other hand, I wouldn't want to make false extrapolations or presumptions based on misconceptions held due to lack of evidence. Sigh. What would a valiant person do? No, what would the politcally incorrect thing to do in this situation be? Because that's what I would want to do. Right? Uh oh, I think I have entered sheepitudiness.

AaronMalcomb · Post by **AaronMalcomb** » Wed Apr 20, 2005 4:25 pm

There's what she looks like. Are you happy now?

Cynth · Post by **Cynth** » Wed Apr 20, 2005 5:25 pm

No problem here.

Unseen122 · Post by **Unseen122** » Wed Apr 20, 2005 8:29 pm

AaronMalcomb wrote:Are you in this mix, Avery?

Second from the right in the second row. I am one of the taller ones if you notice I am wering a different Hat (I had a Balmoral instead of a Glengarry if you know what I mean) and jacket than everyone else I did not have the correct ones at the time but I do now.

michael_coleman · Post by **michael_coleman** » Wed Apr 20, 2005 10:33 pm

AaronMalcomb wrote:

There's what she looks like. Are you happy now?

Good old Conan O'Brien, one show I will never miss...

CHIFF FIPPLE · Post by **CHIFF FIPPLE** » Thu Apr 21, 2005 1:15 am

Hey!!!
What ever you guys have been smoking can Get a puff.

GaryKelly
You should run for Prime mininster

I think you have a great future, I did not understand a word of yer post

An -------------walrii wrote:

:roll:

walrii · Post by **walrii** » Thu Apr 21, 2005 7:34 pm

littlejohngael wrote:Your tusks are making me uncomfortable.

If you think they are uncomfortable to look at, try eating with them for a week!

littlejohngael · Post by **littlejohngael** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 7:52 am

walrii wrote:
littlejohngael wrote:Your tusks are making me uncomfortable.
If you think they are uncomfortable to look at, try eating with them for a week!