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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (566033)	5/13/2010 2:01:40 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1579772

"Its not the same. " Yes it is. The RWers have made those observations about left wing extremist posts. Light is shed on the posts by directing attention to the offense and other persons confirm what is being viewed is such a violation. I am not in your head. You don't have to be. I am not even stand next to you...... Yes in the 2D sense we are virtually side by side observing posts and the phenomenon described. ...and I am certainly not making the same observations you are. Wrong. You have made the observations I reported with regard to how it feels to be a left winger and having to witness the phenomenon I described, which left wingers commonly complain about. Other left wingers have also. You are not making the observations on how it feels to be a right winger and have the same experience from their perspective because you can't from your position. The reasoning, however, is easily generalized from one position to the other especially when those from either position regularly confirm it to be the case. Me directing your attention to the light on the duck pond is analogous to me providing the evidence (both sides confirming from their respective points of view) and the rational, which makes the truth an obvious thing to see for anyone willing to take an open minded look. "Its not the same. " Try again>>> "Its like we are both standing in the park watching the pond and the cloud moves, allowing the sun to shed light on the pond. Oh, says I, the cloud moved and now we can see what the baby ducks are doing over there where the light is shining on them. Then you demand empirical evidence to prove the statement to be true...Not applicable. " It was not applicable at the duck pond as long as you were willing to take a look at what was being presented in front of your nose, same in the other situation. Gotta be willing to see beyond the end of your nose though, both in the visual sense and in the abstract sense.