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 : Don't Ask Rambi -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: nasdaqian who wrote (54881)	8/18/2000 1:54:55 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71178

"supposed to" - so what? Women originally weren't "supposed to" vote. Lots of things that once were "supposed to" be- aren't any more. And of course you have to ask- WHO SAYS "supposed to"? Every group has a different take on supposed to. I probably wouldn't like the way you think things are "supposed to" be. You definitely wouldn't like the way I think things are "supposed to" be- only I wouldn't use a stupid construct like "supposed to"- I would probably say, "I would prefer..." or "the way I would like things to be" or "the way that I think might bring the greatest good to the greatest number." Of course MY ways don't RING of moral superiority as if God on high had made a pronouncement. That's why people like to use "SUPPOSED TO" I suppose. There really isn't any supposed to about things (imo)- except on the relative level. Even interpreting the laws and statutes comes down to opinion. And we all know opinions are like anuses.... You know your name makes me think Loofah sponge, every time I look at it- so waht does it mean?