Michael Jackson - RIP

PegLegHolly · Post by **PegLegHolly** » 25 Jun 2009 21:02

rip michael

full nelson · Post by **full nelson** » 25 Jun 2009 21:08

Ugh. Noise. Jeremy, I know you've picked up a lot of good argument techniques at the RichardDawkins.net forum, but in one the most effective of them all, tailoring to an audience, you have absolutely no grasp. Perhaps your pompous prattle can change the world at PerezHilton.com.

Great singer-songwriter. It's a shame.

BainbridgeShred · Post by **BainbridgeShred** » 25 Jun 2009 21:10

You guys are coming down too hard on young Jerome. Regardless of the fact that anyone today dying at 50 is a tragedy, Jeremy is right in that this kind of stuff should get only passing mention on the news, not a whole two or three days devotion which is what's likely to happen. As a species we stand on the brink of destruction at our own hands. If our biggest concern was a comet hitting the Earth or a black hole swallowing us up, I wouldn't care if we wanted to spend 72 hours on MJ. This is 2009 not 1979, we have more profound things to be using our brainpower on.

So really, the question isn't whether MJ's death is a tragedy, that goes without saying. His whole life was a tragedy, beggining with his abuse as a child, and spanning out decades infront of us. And the more we wondered and questioned and snapped pictures at him, the more he probably felt like an animal outside the sphere of normal society. We the public most certainly played a role in driving him to insanity, and eventually, to an early death.

So yes, his death is a shame, but like said that's a given. The real question, is why did we love this pervert so much? All because of his abnormal vocal range? If you say so..

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 25 Jun 2009 21:16

full nelson wrote:Ugh. Noise. Jeremy, I know you've picked up a lot of good argument techniques at the RichardDawkins.net forum, but in one the most effective of them all, tailoring to an audience, you have absolutely no grasp. Perhaps your pompous prattle can change the world at PerezHilton.com.

What does this even mean? What is the modified audience? How should I have tailored my argument to it? Why don't you show me how it's done by rewriting the content of my post in an argument tailored for the modified audience, otherwise I'll go ahead with my assumption reading your post, which is that you're unable to refute the content of what I've posted, so you're making ad hominem attacks instead.

The end of this debate is a good response to you;

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AP7TDDeR2gI[/youtube]

full nelson · Post by **full nelson** » 25 Jun 2009 22:04

Ad hominem, yes. I meant to be scathing. Youâ€™re an excellent player, very intelligent, and your contributions to footbag are commendable. Even so, Iâ€™m willing to bet the majority of people at modified think youâ€™re pompous. Good content or not, how you present your positions matters. For someone well versed in politics, youâ€™re surprisingly oblivious. Rewriting your argument would be a waste of time. Iâ€™m not responsible for your inability to communicate.

Edit: You asked for my response then post a video implying you don't want it. Are those questions rhetorical? Fine, you don't care. I like Christopher Hitchens too.

sen · Post by **sen** » 25 Jun 2009 22:04

The point here is that someone died. Someone that people had respect for. One such person felt like expressing his feelings toward the deceased and got shit on by Jeremy.

What could be considered a collegue passed away and our friend wanted to express his feelings. This post originally had nothing to do with dying children and never should have. Sure that's an issue. But it has absolutley no place in this thread. 27 000 kids died? Bummer. Really it's a terrible thing. But what the fuck does that have to do with this?

I'd like to have a conversation with your mother Jeremy.

There's a handy button at the top of the page. It's called NEW THREAD.

GET OUT!

rip

BainbridgeShred · Post by **BainbridgeShred** » 25 Jun 2009 22:21

I'd like to have a conversation with your mother Jeremy.

Judging by Jeremy's signature, I assume he drinks Pabst.

(It's funny cause he wont know what that means!)

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 25 Jun 2009 22:27

full nelson wrote:Ad hominem, yes. I meant to be scathing. Youâ€™re an excellent player, very intelligent, and your contributions to footbag are commendable. Even so, Iâ€™m willing to bet the majority of people at modified think youâ€™re pompous. Good content or not, how you present your positions matters. For someone well versed in politics, youâ€™re surprisingly oblivious. Rewriting your argument would be a waste of time. Iâ€™m not responsible for your inability to communicate.

Don't you think it's funny how some people seem to have absolutely no problem understanding what I'm saying most of the time, while other people seem to always misunderstand.

For the record, I'm well aware of different ways of expressing opinions and making arguments. Were I trying to win an election on this issue I would probably write things differently, however I'm not. Actually one of my really big hates about politics and politicians is the manipulative language they use and I made a decision a few years ago to not do that, but instead to be open and honest about exactly how I feel, which is what I try to do now, even though it's often unpopular and I know it's going to be unpopular. There are, of course, exceptions, so you don't need to go and point those out, but as a scientist and a believer of science, I want to see debates and disagreements argued based on the actual points for and against, not on using tricky language to manipulate the framing of the issue.

Edit: You asked for my response then post a video implying you don't want it. Are those questions rhetorical? Fine, you don't care. I like Christopher Hitchens too.

Yes they were rhetorical. I understood what you meant, but I didn't think there was any content to what you were saying at all, or else you'd be able to demonstrate how I should have approached things. Like Hitchen's opponent in that video, your complaining about trivial and meaningless issues rather than my content.

Sen wrote:The point here is that someone died. Someone that people had respect for. One such person felt like expressing his feelings toward the deceased and got shit on by Jeremy.

What a tragedy.

What could be considered a collegue passed away and our friend wanted to express his feelings.

"Collegue? [sic]" Give me a fucking break.

We have free speech on this forum don't we? He's completely entitled to express his opinions just as much as I am, I don't have a problem with him doing so. In fact I'd rather know how he, and everybody else, feels than not know, even if I don't feel the same way.

This post originally had nothing to do with dying children and never should have. Sure that's an issue. But it has absolutley no place in this thread. 27 000 kids died? Bummer. Really it's a terrible thing. But what the fuck does that have to do with this?

I'm pretty sure I made it very clear in those posts where I brought that up, although I'm aware of the slight contradiction in my two statistics. You should go back and read those posts if you don't understand the context. I don't think it's hard to grasp.

I'd like to have a conversation with your mother Jeremy.

There's a handy button at the top of the page. It's called NEW THREAD.

GET OUT!

No. People should always be able to post disagreement in every topic on modified (except perhaps footblogs). This is clearly an appropriate place for me to be expressing myself on this issue. If you don't want to read counter opinions, don't express yourself in public.

edit; Re; saying things that I know will be unpopular - here is a great essay on that subject by Freeman Dyson, who is a legend even though I disagree strongly with a lot of what he says;

http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/dysonf0 ... index.html

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 25 Jun 2009 22:30

BainbridgeShred wrote:
I'd like to have a conversation with your mother Jeremy.
Judging by Jeremy's signature, I assume he drinks Pabst.

(It's funny cause he wont know what that means!)

I'm guessing some kind of beer?

full nelson · Post by **full nelson** » 25 Jun 2009 23:20

I apologize. It was a criticism made in poor taste.

SlashC · Post by **SlashC** » 26 Jun 2009 00:37

MichaelJackson vs DaftPunk

Billie Jean and Michael Jackson together forever.

abstract · Post by **abstract** » 26 Jun 2009 06:35

Well, he was a rich fucking shit-heel, who wrote fucking crap music for 2 decades, and used the proceeds to build a fucking theme park to make it easier for him to fuck children. Seriously. Fuck him. - Facebook Dood

truth or not, i still lol'd.

It's funny, because I don't know the guy. - Homer Simpson

jackson 5 was good times. motown4eva.

Tsiangkun · Post by **Tsiangkun** » 26 Jun 2009 09:10

Jeremy wrote:
Me wrapping myself in a flag is a joke.

Sorry, my mistake. In America, lots of people who lack empathy, compassion, and the ability to interact with people different than themselves wrap themselves up in the American flag. I mistook you for one of them.

C-Fan · Post by **C-Fan** » 26 Jun 2009 09:26

Classic.

Frank_Sinatra · Post by **Frank_Sinatra** » 26 Jun 2009 09:31

I pretty much agree with Harold Dray on this one.

Colin · Post by **Colin** » 26 Jun 2009 09:40

Frank_Sinatra wrote:I pretty much agree with Harold Dray on this one.

Those are all pretty sweet. That's always been my favourite section of the onion. Probably because it just hits the limits of my attention span.

Laroche · Post by **Laroche** » 26 Jun 2009 14:11

I wanted to Re-RIP Michael Jackson one more time, his music was an inspiration to my own musical career.

Jeremy, if you're so concerned about everything happening in the world, shake your ass out of school, get in the real world, stop playing footbag, and devote your life to helping instead of talking about helping.

God I can't stand you. I hope you really dislike me too.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 26 Jun 2009 16:36

It's pretty ironic that you're complaining about what you wanted this topic to be, given your comments in my topics, hypocritical much?

But thanks for the advice, I have a fairly solid long term plan regarding helping the world which is on track.

You have to do a lot more than post shit on an internet forum for me to dislike you, but obviously we have different perspectives on reality.

Laroche · Post by **Laroche** » 26 Jun 2009 17:39

Jeremy wrote:It's pretty ironic that you're complaining about what you wanted this topic to be, given your comments in my topics, hypocritical much?

But thanks for the advice, I have a fairly solid long term plan regarding helping the world which is on track.

You have to do a lot more than post shit on an internet forum for me to dislike you, but obviously we have different perspectives on reality.

Your online persona is so aggravating that it's hard to imagine liking you in real life.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 26 Jun 2009 21:55

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0Q5JFHrGNk[/youtube]