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 (73261)	8/25/2003 5:57:45 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

You went beyond it being not nice to it being intentionally and deliberately cruel and insulting even if the people themselves didn't care whether they were invited to the party. Just what do you think "not nice" means? "Not nice" is not a neutral condition. It is manifest in lots of ways including acts that are cruel and insulting. You know as a lawyer that people can be harmed as a result of an act that is not deliberate. Sure, the liability is greater if it was deliberate, but the harm is the same. Even if not the result of a deliberate act, nice people take responsibility for carelessness. The law can and does assess liability for careless disregard, as well. No, Chris, it doesn't need to be intentional. Society judges certain acts to be insults. I, for one, do not agree with all of what society so judges, but what I think isn't controlling. If society, or this thread, says, for example, that it's insulting to talk about imaginary friends, then it's insulting. If Miss Manners says its rude to not invite the only whatever on the block to a party, then it's rude. The world doesn't revolve around what you think is insulting or not. You, of course, are free as am I to act according your standards, but an insult is still an insult. The only difference between a deliberate insult and an insult from ignorance is that you would be judged more harshly for one than the other and the victim might forgive more easily for one than the other. An insult that results from deliberate ignorance or careless disregard is no better than a deliberate one. You are on notice that Miss Manners says you don't invite everyone on the block but one. You can't claim ignorance any more. If you do it, or advocate it, then you have to recognize that face in the mirror as someone who is not a nice person. All your red herrings and their associated imagined "differences" compounded by your rationalizations notwithstanding, an insult is an insult.