Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Frederick Smart who wrote (85624)	8/17/2000 12:35:13 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

No GO Freddy boy your babble bubbles over

To: Frederick Smart who wrote (85624)	8/17/2000 12:49:31 PM
From: cosmicforce	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

NO shares past experience. NO saves having to reinvent the wheel. NO will save your life. NO vs. GO? Brings to mind a parody of science shows I saw once called "Science Made Stupid." At our local National Laboratory they have a poster in the thirtieth duplication called "Earl's School for Quantum Mechanics". When you gradiate, you are a Quantum Mechanic. Now go fix them quantums if they're broke. Simplification to extraordinary ends is called "OVERsimplification". One word lemmas that purport to yield great truth and provide guidelines for complex behavior and value assessments are moronic applications of the process of logical reduction. Sure simplify when it clarifies. But how about NO vs. 'ho GO vs. SO? NO vs. Edgar Allen Poe? Is this monosyllabic lexicon of peace, love, energy (oops, 3 syllables, how'd that get in there) and GO! the best way to express a great idea? To quote another great source of wisdom, that is repetitive, oversimplified and irritating, the idiot box, "Where's the beef?"

To: Frederick Smart who wrote (85624)	8/17/2000 1:06:34 PM
From: jbe	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

Fred, you quoted X's post in full, but you didn't answer it. Let me repeat/rephrase her questions, in hopes you will respond to them. 1) Why do you automatically assume that other parents (not yourself, of course!) rely primarily on the word "NO" when raising their children? And why, specifically, do you assume that when addressing parents on this thread? 2) As X pointed out, you at first claimed that children should "lead", not parents; then you wrote that you lead your own children "by example." Two questions here: a. The first is related to (1) above: why did you assume that other parents here do not lead by example? b. Don't you see a contradiction here? If not, why not? jbe