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.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Philosopher who wrote (64441)	10/28/2002 11:23:18 AM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 82486

For one example, I doubt that jla has ever gotten into in his real life the sort of exchanges he routinely gets into with X. If that's a reflection of how he normally treats other people, it's no wonder he has so much time to spend on SI, becasue for sure he wouldn't have any clients. Oooops!!! You know what happens when you assume, Reverend? I've never been afraid to express my opinion nor to act on them, anytime, anywhere.....in fact, it is one reason I have a good and loyal client base. I tell people what they need to hear, not what they want to hear.....its the mark, IMO, of a particularly effective lawyer. No surprises. You always know where you stand with me. No guessing required. Exchanges with XXX on SI are a special case. They fall into the category of recreation. JLA

To: The Philosopher who wrote (64441)	10/28/2002 11:25:36 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

If we do not blame people for things, we are not angry at them. That is already part of the logic of our emotions. Thus, someone behaving appropriately as part of a game we agree to engage in is not an object of hostility. If, however, he seems to have gone out of his way to injure me, I will be angry, which is appropriate, at least until I learn differently. Similarly, disagreement need not reflect personally on one, and, in any case, is not a malicious injury, but a part of the process of refining opinion and seeking truth. On the other hand, if someone in the seminar seems to be unnecessarily sarcastic, he will be widely disliked, for maliciously demeaning his interlocutors. And, again, unless there is a mistake, this is appropriate. I have no intention of allowing other people to control my responses. I have no intention of giving them that sort of power over me. This, in my opinion, is the most revealing thing you said in this post. Identifying honest emotional response as "weakness", you will have none of that. Of course you do not want to lose control, but that is different from supposing that you are absolutely impervious. Reputation is, by its nature, general. It is not what someone thinks of you, but what people tend to say about you to one another. Thus, the concern is not primarily with the person who is determined to dislike one, but with onlookers. I have met people who knew who I was through an alumnus, where it had a bearing on the business we were conducting. It is not always predictable. Perhaps "quiz" is too strong. But unless one is simply insincere on line, it does reflect on one, and allows one to test oneself. For example, I may not be so "pendantic" in normal social intercourse, but I am when I am in seminar, or even a serious enough conversation informally. So it is not irrelevant.......

To: The Philosopher who wrote (64441)	10/28/2002 2:10:56 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

Few people are in such total control of their emotions no matter how much they examine their lives. Socialized and biologically hard wired responses are difficult to overcome that completely. You can reduce their internal impact and perhaps minimize any response outside of your own internal thoughts and emotions if you make the effort but most people don't and even those who do make the effort rarely if ever meet perfect success. You give the example of football players, but they do get angry at each other and sometimes let the anger effect their actions, getting in to fights or getting stupid penalties, or just holding it inside and disliking the person they are angry at. They are more used to getting hit and then go in to the game knowing they will be hit so their reaction to getting hit is normally a lot milder then the reaction of an ordinary person but it is not nonexistent even within the context of the game. And outside of the game they are unlikely to be "the master or their soul" enough to decide what reaction they will have, they will most likely have the normal hard wired "fight or flight" reaction. No one seems exactly the same in all contexts. In a different place and situation and dealing with different people, people will act differently but unless we are assuming a persona (and perhaps to a lesser extent even then) we are revealing aspects of our personality and ideas when we interact with others on SI or in 3d. The fact that someone might act differently on SI then in a particular 3d situation doesn't mean that what is presented on SI is not real. People act differently in different 3d situations as well. Does that mean that people are always phony? I don't think so. Tim

To: The Philosopher who wrote (64441)	10/28/2002 10:30:41 PM
From: Solon	Respond to of 82486

"I can't imagine Solon have any friends who would put up with the endless discourses he routinely tosses out here." Oh, but they do! It is true I must pick them up and bring them over. As well, I must feed them, and provide a bottomless liquor cabinet. And so what if I get them off the street (or rather the alley). They are still good friends...and damn talkative, too! ;-) AS to the rest of your post...your need to slip in your hostility against so many people while pretending a serious endeavor is certainly not lost on those who care for you.