The "Internet War"

This forum is for posting meaningful and serious ideas and questions. Can be about interests, observations or serious matters of the world. If it doesn't fit that category, don't post here! Serious posts only.

Re: The "Internet War"

Postby Shuriken on Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:58 am

This is my sandvich. There are many others like it, but this one is mine. My sandvich is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I must master my life. Without me, my sandvich is useless. Without my sandvich, I am useless. I must eat my sandvich true. I must shoot straighter than my enemy, who is trying to kill me. I must shoot him before he shoots me. I will. Before lunch I swear this creed: my sandvich and myself are defenders of my country, we are the masters of our enemy, we are the saviors of my life. So be it, until there is no enemy, but sandvich. Om nom.

Image
Image
User avatar
Shuriken
Old Timer
 
Player: `_´ HaemoGobliN `_´
STEAM_0:1:5456922
 
Posts: 3693
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 2:43 am
Location: I'm on a boat



Image

Re: The "Internet War"

Postby Binerexis on Mon Jan 23, 2012 2:34 pm

It's worth noting that violent action at all will remove validity and only result in a criminal record. Remember when the students started getting violent at protests? That was the precise moment that a lot of people saw it as little else than a group of hoodlums going out for a fight. They gained a little respect back when they cordoned off the thugs in their own ranks but the damage was done by then. Besides, protesting peacefully adds more validity to your cause if police brutality springs up its ugly head.
"Everyone just shut up and enjoy your arena."
"...But we don't enjoy aren-"
"SHUT UP AND ENJOY YOUR ARENA!"
Image
Part three of my quest to lose my sanity

"Bin would get my Unusual hatz since he's the coolest, bravest, smartest and toughest admin." - Bruce Willis
User avatar
Binerexis
Old Timer
UKCS iSeries Attendee
 
Player: Extrodisian
STEAM_0:0:19678834
 
Posts: 5282
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 6:58 pm
Location: The North



Image

Re: The "Internet War"

Postby Snape2255 on Tue Jan 24, 2012 4:55 pm

Binerexis wrote:It's worth noting that violent action at all will remove validity and only result in a criminal record. Remember when the students started getting violent at protests? That was the precise moment that a lot of people saw it as little else than a group of hoodlums going out for a fight. They gained a little respect back when they cordoned off the thugs in their own ranks but the damage was done by then. Besides, protesting peacefully adds more validity to your cause if police brutality springs up its ugly head.


Extremely good point here, peaceful protests although not as fun have more backing behind them. Please note by the way I was only joking when I said about rioting :P As for Police Brutality...it seems the Metropolitan Riot Police have a notorious history of it and it has even been recorded on camera, unprovoked, many times (most notably Ian Tomlinson who had nothing to do with the G20 protests however got knocked down by a police officer for walking past during the protest times and trying to get home - resulting in his death).

I'm not going to lie, I often wish to hear about some sort of 'rioting' to go on during a protest because it's exciting and, admittedly, amusing to watch - however wouldn't do it myself, there's not much point in doing it myself it would just get me in trouble for nothing in the end of the day.
-Snape

Image

"Not the cry, but the flight of the wild duck leads the flock to fly and follow."

English people who have gone through the educational system and still can't spell enrage me. Text speech is used for texting - keep it that way.

Woo I found my 2009 account from back when I was but a wee lad! Can finally prove I'm not the new guy :')

*Me giving directions on microphone*
Player: SHUT UP SNAPE!
Me: Ooooo, well someone is a mr. grumpy boots!
Player: ......

-Snape, trolling trolls since 1994

The Three Mexiteers:
-Taco "MexiTaco" the First Mexiteer!
-Snape "MexiSnape" the Second Mexiteer!
-Duster "MexiDuster" the Third Mexiteer!
User avatar
Snape2255
Regular Member
 
Player: Snape #GBR#
STEAM_0:0:36781301
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 9:45 am
Location: Portsmouth



Image

Re: The "Internet War"

Postby PREDATORPANTS|UKCS| on Tue Jan 24, 2012 11:32 pm

Snape2255 wrote:Who's up for a good ol' fashion protest followed by a (not so)friendly riot after to protest against ACTA lads? LET'S DO THIS! 8) 8) 8)



sounds like a good smash up boss! lets go for it! :cheers: :cheers:
Welcome to the Battlefield...

"dread|UKCS| <on DOD#3>: omg des is doming me "
"dread|UKCS| <on DOD#3>: Im not having this, someone spec him"
"TC|UKCS|: Well done Predator! Brilliant work! :D" ty Mr.President

Image
User avatar
PREDATORPANTS|UKCS|
Experienced Member
UKCS iSeries Attendee
 
Player: солдат001
STEAM_0:0:18109619
 
Posts: 1571
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: United Kingdom, Fire Mission Bunker-6

Re: The "Internet War"

Postby Binerexis on Wed Jan 25, 2012 2:23 pm

Snape2255 wrote:I'm not going to lie, I often wish to hear about some sort of 'rioting' to go on during a protest because it's exciting and, admittedly, amusing to watch


You're aware how foolish that sounds, right? I mean, this is just you joking around again isn't it? To say that you enjoy watching people remove validity from a cause by wantonly destroying the property of others for little to no reason whilst also knowing that they wouldn't really gain anything from it (apart from maybe a new TV and a prison sentence) could make you come off as someone who's not really thinking about the big picture at best or sociopathic at worst. In fact, I would then go on to say that you should set up a fight club ring or even a bum fight enterprise as that achieves the same results only without damaged property and without removing the validity of any cause but that is, of course, assuming you were being serious which, naturally, you weren't. Right?
"Everyone just shut up and enjoy your arena."
"...But we don't enjoy aren-"
"SHUT UP AND ENJOY YOUR ARENA!"
Image
Part three of my quest to lose my sanity

"Bin would get my Unusual hatz since he's the coolest, bravest, smartest and toughest admin." - Bruce Willis
User avatar
Binerexis
Old Timer
UKCS iSeries Attendee
 
Player: Extrodisian
STEAM_0:0:19678834
 
Posts: 5282
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 6:58 pm
Location: The North



Image

Re: The "Internet War"

Postby Snape2255 on Wed Jan 25, 2012 5:19 pm

Binerexis wrote:
Snape2255 wrote:I'm not going to lie, I often wish to hear about some sort of 'rioting' to go on during a protest because it's exciting and, admittedly, amusing to watch


You're aware how foolish that sounds, right? I mean, this is just you joking around again isn't it? To say that you enjoy watching people remove validity from a cause by wantonly destroying the property of others for little to no reason whilst also knowing that they wouldn't really gain anything from it (apart from maybe a new TV and a prison sentence) could make you come off as someone who's not really thinking about the big picture at best or sociopathic at worst. In fact, I would then go on to say that you should set up a fight club ring or even a bum fight enterprise as that achieves the same results only without damaged property and without removing the validity of any cause but that is, of course, assuming you were being serious which, naturally, you weren't. Right?


You say it as if I were implying that I enjoy watching them destroy something with meaning behind it - that's not what I meant. I was saying that I am, admittedly, "entertained" (you could say) by violence in nearly all of its forms - this is why I enjoy watching things like boxing, martial arts, MMA etc (or even street fights) - it's just something that entertains me. I'm not saying I'd go to the extent of being violent 24/7 and deliberately causing fights etc (I see no point in that) - but I enjoy watching a food fight - this is what I meant by the "rioting" - I did not mean it in the context you put it. When I said "rioting" I generally meant a clash between protesters and police etc (admittedly I may have worded this wrongly). For example, football hooliganism - I enjoy watching it. A regular street fight - I enjoy watching it. A boxing match - I enjoy watching it. I implied that I enjoyed watching things like that, however I would never deliberately goad people into doing it - that has no point or sense behind it.

I guess it was just the way I've grown up (I used to grow up and my area was surrounded by violence - at least one fight almost every day and quite often was me when I was younger until I decided I need to stop fighting and grow up - but I still enjoy watching it). I suppose it's a psychological thing - after all you can enjoy violence by chance buy not want it to happen upon someone - this is what I meant. But once again I admittedly worded it wrong.
-Snape

Image

"Not the cry, but the flight of the wild duck leads the flock to fly and follow."

English people who have gone through the educational system and still can't spell enrage me. Text speech is used for texting - keep it that way.

Woo I found my 2009 account from back when I was but a wee lad! Can finally prove I'm not the new guy :')

*Me giving directions on microphone*
Player: SHUT UP SNAPE!
Me: Ooooo, well someone is a mr. grumpy boots!
Player: ......

-Snape, trolling trolls since 1994

The Three Mexiteers:
-Taco "MexiTaco" the First Mexiteer!
-Snape "MexiSnape" the Second Mexiteer!
-Duster "MexiDuster" the Third Mexiteer!
User avatar
Snape2255
Regular Member
 
Player: Snape #GBR#
STEAM_0:0:36781301
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 9:45 am
Location: Portsmouth



Image

Re: The "Internet War"

Postby Binerexis on Wed Jan 25, 2012 7:22 pm

Your wording still doesn't put you in the best light.
"Everyone just shut up and enjoy your arena."
"...But we don't enjoy aren-"
"SHUT UP AND ENJOY YOUR ARENA!"
Image
Part three of my quest to lose my sanity

"Bin would get my Unusual hatz since he's the coolest, bravest, smartest and toughest admin." - Bruce Willis
User avatar
Binerexis
Old Timer
UKCS iSeries Attendee
 
Player: Extrodisian
STEAM_0:0:19678834
 
Posts: 5282
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 6:58 pm
Location: The North



Image

Re: The "Internet War"

Postby Snape2255 on Wed Jan 25, 2012 9:13 pm

Binerexis wrote:Your wording still doesn't put you in the best light.


I never hoped it did :) I never said it was a good thing to enjoy violence, or at least watching it - I'm just saying that you took what I said into the wrong context. :)
-Snape

Image

"Not the cry, but the flight of the wild duck leads the flock to fly and follow."

English people who have gone through the educational system and still can't spell enrage me. Text speech is used for texting - keep it that way.

Woo I found my 2009 account from back when I was but a wee lad! Can finally prove I'm not the new guy :')

*Me giving directions on microphone*
Player: SHUT UP SNAPE!
Me: Ooooo, well someone is a mr. grumpy boots!
Player: ......

-Snape, trolling trolls since 1994

The Three Mexiteers:
-Taco "MexiTaco" the First Mexiteer!
-Snape "MexiSnape" the Second Mexiteer!
-Duster "MexiDuster" the Third Mexiteer!
User avatar
Snape2255
Regular Member
 
Player: Snape #GBR#
STEAM_0:0:36781301
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 9:45 am
Location: Portsmouth



Image

Re: The "Internet War"

Postby Cotillion on Wed Jan 25, 2012 10:41 pm

I disagree with bringing violence to a protest also. It just doesn;t work and makes the opposit side only stronger in there defence most of the time. Reason should be the thing domenating a protest. Violence doesn;t have any place in it. For me Violence doesn;t have any place at all and enjoining watching it is something i can't understand. And comparing Martial arts with violence doesn;t make any sense to me as well. So i don;t see it where Binerexis put it into the wrong context. I've watched video material of riots and stuff but that doesn't mean i like it. It makes me sick to be honest. I watch movies and read books with violence in them, and i enjoy watching / reading them but you really can't compare it with real violence in riots or war or what ever. It is fiction as where real violence is just a primal expression of being incapable to discus matters with sense and reason imho.
your personal ignis fatuus
Image
User avatar
Cotillion
UKCS Admin
UKCS iSeries Attendee
 
Player: Cotillion \m/
STEAM_0:1:32290831
 
Posts: 1643
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 9:25 am
Location: The Netherlands



Image

Re: The "Internet War"

Postby Snape2255 on Thu Jan 26, 2012 12:31 am

Cotillion wrote:I disagree with bringing violence to a protest also. It just doesn;t work and makes the opposit side only stronger in there defence most of the time. Reason should be the thing domenating a protest. Violence doesn;t have any place in it. For me Violence doesn;t have any place at all and enjoining watching it is something i can't understand. And comparing Martial arts with violence doesn;t make any sense to me as well. So i don;t see it where Binerexis put it into the wrong context. I've watched video material of riots and stuff but that doesn't mean i like it. It makes me sick to be honest. I watch movies and read books with violence in them, and i enjoy watching / reading them but you really can't compare it with real violence in riots or war or what ever. It is fiction as where real violence is just a primal expression of being incapable to discus matters with sense and reason imho.


Difference of opinion I guess.

As for Binerexis taking* it into the wrong context - it's because he took it into the context that I supported violence in protest which would destroy the point - which I don't (I'm pretty certain I explained this enough already). As for martial arts - it is a form of violence, no matter what you say you cannot counter the fact that Martial Arts and any other contact sport is a form of violence. As for violence in general - anything can be seen as an act of violence, anything which has the potential to cause any physical harm to someone, especially behaviour which does whether intentionally or not, can be counted as violence. As for me enjoying watching violence etc - I guess it was just because of the area I grew up in, I enjoy watching fights etc no matter what context they're in. As for violence not having a place - violence will forever be with us no matter how much we may try to change it, it is one of our basic instincts (in a way) and we cannot get rid of it, no matter how much you may condemn violence - every human being will have taken part in some sort of violent act in their life so in turn condemning violence is condemning homosapiens as a whole. As for violence being a 'primal expression', so is; eating, drinking, sleeping, having sex, finding shelter, communicating and survival in general (amongst others) - condemning violence for being a primal expression is to condemn eating, sleeping, drinking etc and any other basic human instincts and functions. Without violence humans would not have survived until now, we would have died off as a species long ago - so condemning violence is also condemning your ancestry and lineage, it's basically saying that you do not wish to have survived up to this point because you disagree with life and the way you are.

All humans have the capability for violence. All humans have done at least one violent act in the past whether it was a few seconds ago or when you were born. Violence is part of who you are as a human - you cannot condemn it or state that it has no place it all, that's ludicrous at best. Nothing can change the fact that the need for violence and acts of violence are wired deeply into the human brain whether in the cerebral cortex as a conscious thought - for instance a criminal or a boxer etc (which to be honest counts as everyone, since everyone consciously considers violence at least on a daily basis probably for some reason) or in the primitive brain as an unconscious, instinctive need and thought (which will be 100% of the human population - and let's face it, 100% of all animals altogether). For instance the killing and eating of an animal can be seen as an act of violence, or on the opposite end of the scale throwing an empty bottle of coke at your mate messing around can also be seen as an act of violence.

If I'm to be more precise, I should have rather said I like to watch "fighting" as it amuses me, rather than using the term "violence". Violence is too vast a term really.
-Snape

Image

"Not the cry, but the flight of the wild duck leads the flock to fly and follow."

English people who have gone through the educational system and still can't spell enrage me. Text speech is used for texting - keep it that way.

Woo I found my 2009 account from back when I was but a wee lad! Can finally prove I'm not the new guy :')

*Me giving directions on microphone*
Player: SHUT UP SNAPE!
Me: Ooooo, well someone is a mr. grumpy boots!
Player: ......

-Snape, trolling trolls since 1994

The Three Mexiteers:
-Taco "MexiTaco" the First Mexiteer!
-Snape "MexiSnape" the Second Mexiteer!
-Duster "MexiDuster" the Third Mexiteer!
User avatar
Snape2255
Regular Member
 
Player: Snape #GBR#
STEAM_0:0:36781301
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 9:45 am
Location: Portsmouth



Image

Re: The "Internet War"

Postby Cotillion on Thu Jan 26, 2012 1:11 am

Snape2255 wrote:Difference of opinion I guess.

As for Binerexis taking* it into the wrong context - it's because he took it into the context that I supported violence in protest which would destroy the point - which I don't (I'm pretty certain I explained this enough already). As for martial arts - it is a form of violence, no matter what you say you cannot counter the fact that Martial Arts and any other contact sport is a form of violence.


It is a form of self defence trough controlled countering actions. And the sport part of it is just that, sport. There is no violence there. If it is fought the way it is meant to be fought.

As for violence in general - anything can be seen as an act of violence, anything which has the potential to cause any physical harm to someone, especially behaviour which does whether intentionally or not, can be counted as violence. As for me enjoying watching violence etc - I guess it was just because of the area I grew up in, I enjoy watching fights etc no matter what context they're in. As for violence not having a place - violence will forever be with us no matter how much we may try to change it, it is one of our basic instincts (in a way) and we cannot get rid of it, no matter how much you may condemn violence - every human being will have taken part in some sort of violent act in their life so in turn condemning violence is condemning homosapiens as a whole. As for violence being a 'primal expression', so is; eating, drinking, sleeping, having sex, finding shelter, communicating and survival in general (amongst others) - condemning violence for being a primal expression is to condemn eating, sleeping, drinking etc and any other basic human instincts and functions. Without violence humans would not have survived until now, we would have died off as a species long ago - so condemning violence is also condemning your ancestry and lineage, it's basically saying that you do not wish to have survived up to this point because you disagree with life and the way you are.


You went totally wrong with this one. Violence is not meaning the stuggle for survival, And in rejecting violence is not rejecting life and our past. Condemning violence is not condemning eating, sleeping drinking etc. because these are basic needs. You have to eat, drink, sleep to life. for where as Violence is a choice and no basic need to life.

Don't get me wrong, i will defend myself if necessary, but this is where the difference is. i don't choose it. I will never be the one who makes the first strike and will always try to avoid it. Only when it is inevitable will i defend myself. Is that violence?

All humans have the capability for violence. All humans have done at least one violent act in the past whether it was a few seconds ago or when you were born. Violence is part of who you are as a human - you cannot condemn it or state that it has no place it all, that's ludicrous at best. Nothing can change the fact that the need for violence and acts of violence are wired deeply into the human brain whether in the cerebral cortex as a conscious thought - for instance a criminal or a boxer etc (which to be honest counts as everyone, since everyone consciously considers violence at least on a daily basis probably for some reason) or in the primitive brain as an unconscious, instinctive need and thought (which will be 100% of the human population - and let's face it, 100% of all animals altogether). For instance the killing and eating of an animal can be seen as an act of violence, or on the opposite end of the scale throwing an empty bottle of coke at your mate messing around can also be seen as an act of violence.


an animal that kills an other animal to eat it does not act out any violence at all. It is survival. It has no other choice then to kill and eat. IMHO violence takes place when you choose for it.

Also that we sometimes think of violence doesn't mean that you have to act on it. that is where the sane, logical, intellect or what ever should step in. Violence is never a sollution.
your personal ignis fatuus
Image
User avatar
Cotillion
UKCS Admin
UKCS iSeries Attendee
 
Player: Cotillion \m/
STEAM_0:1:32290831
 
Posts: 1643
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 9:25 am
Location: The Netherlands



Image

Re: The "Internet War"

Postby Snape2255 on Thu Jan 26, 2012 8:22 am

It is a form of self defence trough controlled countering actions. And the sport part of it is just that, sport. There is no violence there. If it is fought the way it is meant to be fought.


Regardless of whether it is in self-defence and a sport, it is still deemed as violence - it's not the intention in any way, it's the action itself that is deemed as a "violent action". Any contact sport such as Boxing, Wrestling, Martial Arts etc contains violence - regardless of reasoning this fact cannot be averted - unless you would like to ask them very kindly to 'stop hitting each other'.

You went totally wrong with this one. Violence is not meaning the stuggle for survival, And in rejecting violence is not rejecting life and our past. Condemning violence is not condemning eating, sleeping drinking etc. because these are basic needs. You have to eat, drink, sleep to life. for where as Violence is a choice and no basic need to life.


Violence is simply a basic instinct for human beings, whether a defensive mechanism or just a want/need - it's still a basic instinct. For instance if something larger than you or something you deem dangerous and threatening comes towards you, you will not hesitate to cause it harm in any way you can to protect yourself - even if you're protecting yourself, this is STILL an act of violence.

Don't get me wrong, i will defend myself if necessary, but this is where the difference is. i don't choose it. I will never be the one who makes the first strike and will always try to avoid it. Only when it is inevitable will i defend myself. Is that violence?


The point is, regardless of intentions if you harm someone in anyway it is an act of violence - you try telling a Police Officer that you were only using self-defence...you still hit the guy in an act of violence, you'll be punished all the same.

an animal that kills an other animal to eat it does not act out any violence at all. It is survival. It has no other choice then to kill and eat. IMHO violence takes place when you choose for it.


Even if it's part of survival, it is STILL violence. It doesn't matter about the intentions behind an act - it's still violence. Causing an injury or harm to anything through force is deemed as a violent act regardless of it's context.

Also that we sometimes think of violence doesn't mean that you have to act on it. that is where the sane, logical, intellect or what ever should step in. Violence is never a sollution.


I never said you had to act on it, however you still consider violence in itself which makes it part of you as a person regardless of how much you don't want it to be. Also, there are many situations where violence would be the only sollution - for instance if you were being chased by a gang of kids and you got cornered, you're not going to sit there trying to reason with them...you're simply going to go charging in to defend yourself and try and get out of there. Also, if you're sane then you will consider violence still - violence is a logical sollution to some situations, like the one stated above...reasoning would be the illogical sollution, it depends on the circumstances and there are a lot of situations which can and will require violence to be solved. Violence is also a part of everyone regardless of intellectual ability - you push a kid with a 200 IQ to the extreme and he'll act violent towards you I guarantee it.

The point of what I've been saying is that no matter how much you condemn violence and are against it, it's part of every human being no matter how much you do not want it to be - that is a fact, a logical fact, a sane fact and an intellectual conclusion when looking at all the evidence if you put your morals against it aside and look at it plain and simple. My point is that no matter how much you don't want to be violent, there will always be a situation that arises where you will be - whether it's in self-defense, messing around with mates or you're trying to beat someone up, it's still an act of violence the moment you exert any force to harm or injure someone or something - and yes this includes anything from kicking someone in the face to throwing an empty bottle at your mates head.

I don't say violence is good, no. But I also do not condemn it at all - it's part of human nature no matter how you look at it. Whether governments or society deem it to be wrong and unjust and try to negate it by social norming and legal authority against such acts - it is still a part of human nature which we cannot escape. There will ALWAYS be a point in a person's life that they will commit an act of violence. This truth is inescapable I'm afraid.
-Snape

Image

"Not the cry, but the flight of the wild duck leads the flock to fly and follow."

English people who have gone through the educational system and still can't spell enrage me. Text speech is used for texting - keep it that way.

Woo I found my 2009 account from back when I was but a wee lad! Can finally prove I'm not the new guy :')

*Me giving directions on microphone*
Player: SHUT UP SNAPE!
Me: Ooooo, well someone is a mr. grumpy boots!
Player: ......

-Snape, trolling trolls since 1994

The Three Mexiteers:
-Taco "MexiTaco" the First Mexiteer!
-Snape "MexiSnape" the Second Mexiteer!
-Duster "MexiDuster" the Third Mexiteer!
User avatar
Snape2255
Regular Member
 
Player: Snape #GBR#
STEAM_0:0:36781301
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 9:45 am
Location: Portsmouth



Image

Re: The "Internet War"

Postby Cotillion on Thu Jan 26, 2012 10:26 am

Snape2255 wrote:Violence is simply a basic instinct for human beings, whether a defensive mechanism or just a want/need - it's still a basic instinct. For instance if something larger than you or something you deem dangerous and threatening comes towards you, you will not hesitate to cause it harm in any way you can to protect yourself - even if you're protecting yourself, this is STILL an act of violence.


Thsi is were you are wrong, i tried to explain it. Violence isn;t a basic instinct. It is something we choose, it is a expression. I really think you don't understand what violence is. i looked it up for you:

vi·o·lence
   [vahy-uh-luhns] Show IPA
noun
1. swift and intense force: the violence of a storm.
2. rough or injurious physical force, action, or treatment: to die by violence.
3. an unjust or unwarranted exertion of force or power, as against rights or laws: to take over a government by violence.
4. a violent act or proceeding.
5. rough or immoderate vehemence, as of feeling or language: the violence of his hatred.

Point 3 makes it al to clear that an act of selfdefence is not violence.

I think you mistake agression with violence. The intentions matter.

But i think this discussion should not take place in this topic. we are derailing it to much ;)
Last edited by Cotillion on Thu Jan 26, 2012 11:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
your personal ignis fatuus
Image
User avatar
Cotillion
UKCS Admin
UKCS iSeries Attendee
 
Player: Cotillion \m/
STEAM_0:1:32290831
 
Posts: 1643
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 9:25 am
Location: The Netherlands



Image

Re: The "Internet War"

Postby Gh0st.IRE on Thu Jan 26, 2012 10:58 am

So wonderful Ireland, with our wonderful government has decided that we need our own SOPA too.

God I hate this damn place.
Ex-TF2 Admin. Forum Moderator. Add me on Steam or PM me here!
Image
Heresy MMO Guild Member.
User avatar
Gh0st.IRE
Moderator
 
Player: Rear Naked Bugs
STEAM_0:0:12137987
 
Posts: 4635
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2008 3:09 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland



Image

Re: The "Internet War"

Postby Cotillion on Thu Jan 26, 2012 11:05 am

i find it very disturbing laws like these are proposed. I fidn it a act of violence against the internet. Bullying by governments and entertainment industry. so please people sign the petition: https://www.accessnow.org/page/s/just-say-no-to-acta
your personal ignis fatuus
Image
User avatar
Cotillion
UKCS Admin
UKCS iSeries Attendee
 
Player: Cotillion \m/
STEAM_0:1:32290831
 
Posts: 1643
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 9:25 am
Location: The Netherlands



Image

Re: The "Internet War"

Postby Snape2255 on Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:25 pm

Cotillion wrote:
Snape2255 wrote:Violence is simply a basic instinct for human beings, whether a defensive mechanism or just a want/need - it's still a basic instinct. For instance if something larger than you or something you deem dangerous and threatening comes towards you, you will not hesitate to cause it harm in any way you can to protect yourself - even if you're protecting yourself, this is STILL an act of violence.


Thsi is were you are wrong, i tried to explain it. Violence isn;t a basic instinct. It is something we choose, it is a expression. I really think you don't understand what violence is. i looked it up for you:

vi·o·lence
   [vahy-uh-luhns] Show IPA
noun
1. swift and intense force: the violence of a storm.
2. rough or injurious physical force, action, or treatment: to die by violence.
3. an unjust or unwarranted exertion of force or power, as against rights or laws: to take over a government by violence.
4. a violent act or proceeding.
5. rough or immoderate vehemence, as of feeling or language: the violence of his hatred.

Point 3 makes it al to clear that an act of selfdefence is not violence.

I think you mistake agression with violence. The intentions matter.

But i think this discussion should not take place in this topic. we are derailing it to much ;)


Please feel free to tell that to my college lecturers who taught me Psychology and Criminology and taught me how violence was a part of basic human nature. Also in that definition, no where does it say it has anything to do with intentions - in none of them 5 definitions does it say anything about intentions. Definition 3 also mentions nothing about self-defence...at all. They do, however, state that it is defined by causing harm or injury to someone or something which is what I've stated many times now. I'm still waiting to be proven wrong I'm afraid.

As for the petition, they never really get anywhere. I've signed countless petitions both in real life and online before and they've never been successful so there is no point in my opinion - I've seen ones that have had over 50,000 signatures be ignored.

P.S.: Please feel free to google "Is Violence part of human nature".
Last edited by Snape2255 on Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-Snape

Image

"Not the cry, but the flight of the wild duck leads the flock to fly and follow."

English people who have gone through the educational system and still can't spell enrage me. Text speech is used for texting - keep it that way.

Woo I found my 2009 account from back when I was but a wee lad! Can finally prove I'm not the new guy :')

*Me giving directions on microphone*
Player: SHUT UP SNAPE!
Me: Ooooo, well someone is a mr. grumpy boots!
Player: ......

-Snape, trolling trolls since 1994

The Three Mexiteers:
-Taco "MexiTaco" the First Mexiteer!
-Snape "MexiSnape" the Second Mexiteer!
-Duster "MexiDuster" the Third Mexiteer!
User avatar
Snape2255
Regular Member
 
Player: Snape #GBR#
STEAM_0:0:36781301
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 9:45 am
Location: Portsmouth



Image

Re: The "Internet War"

Postby Cotillion on Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:34 pm

Well they are wrong, agression is part of basic human nature. Violence is what some of us choose to do with agression. To say Violence is part of the basic human natur is very short sighted and doesn't speak very well for the humans at all. From agression you can go several ways, violence is just one path to channeling agression. So there you have your intentions.

And about the google thing: http://www.groundreport.com/Opinion/Does-Human-Nature-Explain-Violence/2885614
your personal ignis fatuus
Image
User avatar
Cotillion
UKCS Admin
UKCS iSeries Attendee
 
Player: Cotillion \m/
STEAM_0:1:32290831
 
Posts: 1643
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 9:25 am
Location: The Netherlands



Image

Re: The "Internet War"

Postby Snape2255 on Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:47 pm

Cotillion wrote:Well they are wrong, agression is part of basic human nature. Violence is what some of us choose to do with agression. To say Violence is part of the basic human natur is very short sighted and doesn't speak very well for the humans at all. From agression you can go several ways, violence is just one path to channeling agression. So there you have your intentions.


I never said Violence wasn't intentional, I said it can be both intentional and unintentional - however most actions can be deemed as an act of violence in some way, just the same as the fact that ANYTHING (I'm not joking here) can be deemed as a weapon (learnt this little beauty of a fact in a lesson by an ex police officer). As a whole the human race isn't very good anything, we're a violent and self-centered race of people as a whole. Aggression is also different, aggression is an emotion more than an act, violence however is an act. Also, saying my lecturers are 'wrong' about this matter is extremely stubborn and ignorant seeing as they have university degrees in the subjects they teach and some even have masters degrees etc in it hence easily knowing more on the subject than both of us combined - I already had this discussion with one of them and the result was what I'm saying. Violence is part of human nature, no argument can negate that fact. If you don't believe me, feel free to google "Is Violence part of human nature?" and see for yourself (I was going to find you links but there are too many good websites with answers to these questions so I'll let you find it yourself).

Enjoy. :)
-Snape

Image

"Not the cry, but the flight of the wild duck leads the flock to fly and follow."

English people who have gone through the educational system and still can't spell enrage me. Text speech is used for texting - keep it that way.

Woo I found my 2009 account from back when I was but a wee lad! Can finally prove I'm not the new guy :')

*Me giving directions on microphone*
Player: SHUT UP SNAPE!
Me: Ooooo, well someone is a mr. grumpy boots!
Player: ......

-Snape, trolling trolls since 1994

The Three Mexiteers:
-Taco "MexiTaco" the First Mexiteer!
-Snape "MexiSnape" the Second Mexiteer!
-Duster "MexiDuster" the Third Mexiteer!
User avatar
Snape2255
Regular Member
 
Player: Snape #GBR#
STEAM_0:0:36781301
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 9:45 am
Location: Portsmouth



Image

Re: The "Internet War"

Postby Cotillion on Thu Jan 26, 2012 8:07 pm

Explain me this then: If violence is an act, how can it be a part of human nature? human nature is al things that trigger the acting. Not the acting it self.

And well more profressors were wrong in the past about a lot of things so why not your teachers? I'm not stubborn and ignorant for questioning others in things i believe different. In fact i'm far from ignorant and stubborn. I won't take anything for granted, i question things so i learn from it. I heard some really talent people with high education say al kinds of different things on one subject: does that make them stubborn and ignorant? No they just have different opinions on a topic.

and on the google thing. I can probably find the same amount saying different if i search for it... so that says almost nothing
your personal ignis fatuus
Image
User avatar
Cotillion
UKCS Admin
UKCS iSeries Attendee
 
Player: Cotillion \m/
STEAM_0:1:32290831
 
Posts: 1643
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 9:25 am
Location: The Netherlands



Image

Re: The "Internet War"

Postby Snape2255 on Thu Jan 26, 2012 8:27 pm

Cotillion wrote:Explain me this then: If violence is an act, how can it be a part of human nature? human nature is al things that trigger the acting. Not the acting it self.

And well more profressors were wrong in the past about a lot of things so why not your teachers? I'm not stubborn and ignorant for questioning others in things i believe different. In fact i'm far from ignorant and stubborn. I won't take anything for granted, i question things so i learn from it. I heard some really talent people with high education say al kinds of different things on one subject: does that make them stubborn and ignorant? No they just have different opinions on a topic.

and on the google thing. I can probably find the same amount saying different if i search for it... so that says almost nothing


"Human nature refers to the distinguishing characteristics, including ways of thinking, feeling and acting, that humans tend to have naturally." - A direct quote from Wikipedia.

I'm saying you're being stubborn and ignorant for saying they're wrong - you've just pretty much said it's about what you believe - you cannot once say that someone else's beliefs are wrong (something you will not find me doing throughout this whole debate - I've been backing my case through logical reasoning and explanation along with references to material which will support my argument - I have not, however, said that you or anyone/anything you've said is 'wrong'. This is why I said you're being stubborn and ignorant.

If I'm honest I really do not care if you disagree with me on violence, the reason I was debating it was because you were constantly saying I was "wrong" and were attempting to prove I was wrong - something which is, in all fairness, a complete contradiction from you as you've just said about the difference of opinions and neither of them are wrong for having a different opinion. I'm quite entitled to back my case up regarding something I believe in - I've supported it with references, as much evidence as I can really give regarding the matter, logical reasoning and explanation - however once again you've told me I am "wrong" - I'm fairly certain you won't find me saying that you are wrong. You'll find me countering your statements with reasoning and evidence, however you won't find me telling you your beliefs etc are "wrong".

But once again, I'm still yet to be proven "wrong".
-Snape

Image

"Not the cry, but the flight of the wild duck leads the flock to fly and follow."

English people who have gone through the educational system and still can't spell enrage me. Text speech is used for texting - keep it that way.

Woo I found my 2009 account from back when I was but a wee lad! Can finally prove I'm not the new guy :')

*Me giving directions on microphone*
Player: SHUT UP SNAPE!
Me: Ooooo, well someone is a mr. grumpy boots!
Player: ......

-Snape, trolling trolls since 1994

The Three Mexiteers:
-Taco "MexiTaco" the First Mexiteer!
-Snape "MexiSnape" the Second Mexiteer!
-Duster "MexiDuster" the Third Mexiteer!
User avatar
Snape2255
Regular Member
 
Player: Snape #GBR#
STEAM_0:0:36781301
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 9:45 am
Location: Portsmouth



Image

PreviousNext

Return to Thinkers Topics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 1 guest