And discuss, of course.
Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite. - John Kenneth Galbraith
AAIIIEEEEEE *runs away screaming*
Runs away from the thread, remembering the promise not to bitch about warez and such anymore
And elected representatives don't put much stock in electronically-generated letters, anyway. If you want your letter read, hand-write it.
Don't blame music and video companies for their reaction to pirates and thieves--blame the pirates and thieves.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
Bloodsage attempted to be funny by writing:
Don't blame music and video companies for their reaction to pirates and thieves--blame the pirates and thieves.
I'm sorry, but this is like saying that we shouldn't blame the terrorists behind the 9/11 attack, but rather the Europeans who supported the Zionist movement, creating feelings of oppression. Yes, the pirates are a problem, but that doesn't excuse the music and video companies' overzealous responses.
It happens to be exactly like blaming the terrorists for what they did. Rather than blaming the government for instituting stricter security procedures, which would have been the correct analogy had you bothered to think.
Second, I suggest you back off the use of ridiculously emotional analogies to try to make your point. Comparing me to someone who sympathizes with terrorist war criminals will get you an ass-chewing you won't soon forget.
There is a reason for Godwin's Law, and it's to prevent ignorant, uninformed, poorly considered personal attacks disguised as historical analogies like you just tried to pull.
Capisce?
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
Iron Chef Cadga probably says this to all the girls:
TOO MUCH TEXT!!AAIIIEEEEEE *runs away screaming*
I agree whole-heartedly
Plus as illegal as pirating is, so are drugs and what not. You don't see people going around on zealous rampages about that. The trueth is it is illegal but there isn't much we can do to stop it. And to further state the trueth the more we oppress the people who do this, the more people will do it. And if we begin severely punishing them then all we do is make them look like martyrs. I do believe that we should ban this and make it illegal, but we shouldn't blow this thing out of porportions. I give you for example prohibition: We tried to rid are country of all drugs, but all we did was invoke more crimminal activity. Our real focus should be preventing people from copying and distrubeting software for there own finacial gain, not trying to threaten kids not to download songs off the internet cause some band is gonna loose a 100 dollars.
quote:
Bloodsage had this to say about Optimus Prime:
First, your analogy sucks, and you should spend a few seconds thinking before you make an idiot of yourself.It happens to be exactly like blaming the terrorists for what they did. Rather than blaming the government for instituting stricter security procedures, which would have been the correct analogy had you bothered to think.
Second, I suggest you back off the use of ridiculously emotional analogies to try to make your point. Comparing me to someone who sympathizes with terrorist war criminals will get you an ass-chewing you won't soon forget.
There is a reason for Godwin's Law, and it's to prevent ignorant, uninformed, poorly considered personal attacks disguised as historical analogies like you just tried to pull.
Capisce?
Sorry, I didn't realize that emotional current events were off limits, shall we go back to talking about which lollipop tastes better? I'll do it if it makes you feel better as you're apparently too concerned about sensitivity to talk about a subject that's on any news show you'd care to watch.
First off, I'm sorry if you took the analogy the wrong way, but it stands nonetheless. In both cases there's a hideous overreaction. If the government had instituted strip searches for every airline passenger in response to 9/11, I would have used that as an example. They didn't. I stand by my analogy, and I suggest you stop trying to put words in my mouth by replacing analogies.
For further argument's sake (as I must admit I'm not an expert on the events surrounding the Zionist movement), let me put forth another analogy, this time a generally less sensitive one.
Let's say I'm driving down a residential street and somebody rear-ends me. I start yelling at the top of my lungs at them.
Were they doing the right thing to rear end me? No.
Was I justified in yelling at them? No.
It was an overreaction, and that was the point of both analogies.
About Godwin's law: For one that professes to be educated as a debater, I'd expect more research before trying to invoke the law. Godwin's law is meant to be an indicator of thread usefulness, not a debating tactic. Furthermore, it's useful as an indicator only when applied to Hitler/Nazi. Sorry, it can't be bent to various uses as one pleases. But I understand, going here and then here would be far too much trouble.
quote:
Verily, Guy with Shotgun doth proclaim:
Um, aren't some of the people here pirates/thieves.
If they are, they're smart enough not to talk about it here. 
Sar...
quote:
Sarudani Miolnir spewed forth this undeniable truth:
If they are, they're smart enough not to talk about it here.Sar...
I wasn't. But everyone knows that.
*anticipates Bloodsage's incoming flame and runs*
I'm rather conversant with Godwin's Law, thanks. But, since you've proven your need for a spanking, consider this, from the FAQ you linked:
quote:
So, what this means in practical terms:o If someone brings up Nazis in general conversation when it
wasn't necessary or germane without it necessarily being an
insult, it's probably about time for the thread to end.
o If someone brings up Nazis in general conversation when it
was vaguely related but is basically being used as an insult,
the speaker can be considered to be flaming and not debating.
o If someone brings up Nazis in any conversation that has been
going on too long for one of the parties, it can be used as
a fair excuse to end the thread and declare victory for the
other side.
Note the middle example, fuckchop. Your gratuitous use of the terrorist attack of last September as a half-assed analogy in a discussion of copyright law, of all things, can be taken as nothing short of an attempt to compare anyone who disagrees with you as a terrorist-sympathizer.
Especially given the way you constructed the analogy.
Your car analogy makes even less sense.
Your original analogy was flawed, as I pointed out. It's rather stupid to say you "stand by" your original analogy without correcting the deficiencies.
Blaming increased copyright security on pirates and thieves is exactly like blaming increased security measures on the terrorists who attacked last September. In each case, the security was instituted to meet a very real threat. In each case, the law-abiding people face inconvenience due to the unacceptable, illegal acts of others.
In poor taste as it was, your analogy makes my point much better than it makes yours.
Further, if you're going to use an analogy, you should try to have the first clue about what it means. Do you have the faintest clue what a "Zionist" is, or how the term applies to your half-assed attempt to paint others as terrorist sympathizers? Or have you simply adopted the rhetoric of such notable people as Yasser Arafat, Saddam Hussein, and Osama bin Laden, without really understanding what you're saying?
If you want to have a discussion, I suggest you first figure out what the fuck you're talking about, then try to discuss it in rational terms, without bizarre analogies that not only make your opponent's case, but insult anyone who might disagree with you.
Otherwise, keep jumping in the blender, Mr. Bunny. You'll soon know what pate feels like.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
Guy with Shotgun wrote this then went back to looking for porn:
Um, aren't some of the people here pirates/thieves.Plus as illegal as pirating is, so are drugs and what not. You don't see people going around on zealous rampages about that. The trueth is it is illegal but there isn't much we can do to stop it. And to further state the trueth the more we oppress the people who do this, the more people will do it. And if we begin severely punishing them then all we do is make them look like martyrs. I do believe that we should ban this and make it illegal, but we shouldn't blow this thing out of porportions. I give you for example prohibition: We tried to rid are country of all drugs, but all we did was invoke more crimminal activity. Our real focus should be preventing people from copying and distrubeting software for there own finacial gain, not trying to threaten kids not to download songs off the internet cause some band is gonna loose a 100 dollars.
I do believe we've found a pirate.
LOCK AND LOAD, KIDS, WE GOT SOME ASS-KICKIN' TO DELIVA, NOW Y'HEA.
quote:
Nobody really understood why Guy with Shotgun wrote:
Um, aren't some of the people here pirates/thieves.Plus as illegal as pirating is, so are drugs and what not. You don't see people going around on zealous rampages about that. The trueth is it is illegal but there isn't much we can do to stop it. And to further state the trueth the more we oppress the people who do this, the more people will do it. And if we begin severely punishing them then all we do is make them look like martyrs. I do believe that we should ban this and make it illegal, but we shouldn't blow this thing out of porportions. I give you for example prohibition: We tried to rid are country of all drugs, but all we did was invoke more crimminal activity. Our real focus should be preventing people from copying and distrubeting software for there own finacial gain, not trying to threaten kids not to download songs off the internet cause some band is gonna loose a 100 dollars.
By your {flawed} logic, we shouldn't have any laws at all, and no one should ever be punished for anything.
Think about that and get back to us.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
How.... Bloodsage.... uughhhhhh:
You're pressing your luck Mr. Bunny.
quote:
I'm rather conversant with Godwin's Law, thanks. But, since you've proven your need for a spanking, consider this, from the FAQ you linked:Note the middle example, fuckchop. Your gratuitous use of the terrorist attack of last September as a half-assed analogy in a discussion of copyright law, of all things, can be taken as nothing short of an attempt to compare anyone who disagrees with you as a terrorist-sympathizer.
quote:
Especially given the way you constructed the analogy.Your car analogy makes even less sense.
quote:
Your original analogy was flawed, as I pointed out. It's rather stupid to say you "stand by" your original analogy without correcting the deficiencies.
quote:
Blaming increased copyright security on pirates and thieves is exactly like blaming increased security measures on the terrorists who attacked last September. In each case, the security was instituted to meet a very real threat. In each case, the law-abiding people face inconvenience due to the unacceptable, illegal acts of others.
quote:
In poor taste as it was, your analogy makes my point much better than it makes yours.
quote:
Further, if you're going to use an analogy, you should try to have the first clue about what it means. Do you have the faintest clue what a "Zionist" is, or how the term applies to your half-assed attempt to paint others as terrorist sympathizers? Or have you simply adopted the rhetoric of such notable people as Yasser Arafat, Saddam Hussein, and Osama bin Laden, without really understanding what you're saying?
quote:
If you want to have a discussion, I suggest you first figure out what the fuck you're talking about, then try to discuss it in rational terms, without bizarre analogies that not only make your opponent's case, but insult anyone who might disagree with you.
quote:
Otherwise, keep jumping in the blender, Mr. Bunny. You'll soon know what pate feels like.
Mommy, the mean person on the internet is hurting me with his cruel words...make the bad man stop! What the fuck is your obsession with empty threats like this?
quote:
Guy with Shotgun had this to say about Robocop:
Um, aren't some of the people here pirates/thieves.Plus as illegal as pirating is, so are drugs and what not. You don't see people going around on zealous rampages about that.
Yup, no zealous rampages here. [ 06-11-2002: Message edited by: Rabidbunnylover ]
[ 06-11-2002: Message edited by: Rabidbunnylover ]
If you can't even explain and defend what you've said, or address those who point out flaws in your logic, you should cease making yourself look moronic by insisting, "Is not!" over and over.
Yes, everyone knows Godwin's Law applies to Nazi references.
But the point of me mentioning Godwin's Law was by way of analogy--something you obviously don't understand very well--in that your patently absurd attempt to label anyone who disagrees with you as similar to people who sympathize with terrorists is exactly like calling someone a Nazi simply to discredit them through the emotional baggage inherent in the term, which is why Godwin's Law came about.
You see, if you're not very good at seeing the similarities in various situations, you shouldn't attempt to reason by analogy.
Whether or not you see the entertainment industry's increased security awareness as an overreaction is immaterial, and just another of your poorly reasoned red herrings designed to derail the real discussion. The fact is that the pirates and the thieves are to blame for the response.
Which contradicts your first use of the terrorist analogy. Which points out why the analogy helps my point more than yours.
Because, frankly, calling the response an overreaction cedes the important points to me: the pirates and thieves are to blame, and some sort of response is warranted.
You lose, sorry.
Perhaps, if you'd care to think through your position, you can return with a reasonable argument detailing why you think the entertainment industry has gone too far. Given your recent performance, however, I suggest you simply let it drop.
It's obvious you aren't up to having this conversation, as all you've done is characterize people as terrorist-sympathizers and insist how right you are without ever explaining your point.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
The entertainment industry is severely overreacting on the issue of piracy and such; which can be seen by the various proposals that have come from the MPAA and the RIAA about going as far as to have DRM embedded into hardware.
Right, I'm sure everyone wants their soundcard to check whether the music they're playing is legal.
It's a known fact that since Napster and other P2P services came about, no drop in CD sales have been noted. Only a climb, whether that climb is due to P2P is unsure, but it's a climb nonetheless. The RIAA keeps claiming though that P2P is hurting the record companies' sales.
*shrug* I'm too tired right now to go find the references but I'll supply them tomorrow when I get back from work.
quote:
Bloodsage had this to say about John Romero:
you can return with a reasonable argument detailing why you think the entertainment industry has gone too far.
sigpic courtesy of This Guy, original modified by me
[ 06-11-2002: Message edited by: Rabidbunnylover ]
quote:
Rabidbunnylover stopped beating up furries long enough to write:
Edit:whoops, quote instead of edit
[ 06-11-2002: Message edited by: Rabidbunnylover ]
quote:
Rabidbunnylover enlisted the help of an infinite number of monkeys to write:
Nope, sorry...doesn't work that way. That would be a point by point rebuttal, something that apparently you don't understand.Unless you are willing to respond with an intellectual discussion, rather than expecting everybody to follow along by trying to paint things into my responses which simply weren't there (ie. saying that my response was "is not", when I explained my rational for switching from the first analogy to the second, and reiterating pertinent points from my previous responses, which you didn't address), I'm terminating this debate.
-RBL
Good. Perhaps next time, you'll think about what you're saying, and use that whole "logic" thing instead of simply trying to paint your opponents as evil terrorist-sypmathizers.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
Bloodsage had this to say about Optimus Prime:
Good. Perhaps next time, you'll think about what you're saying, and use that whole "logic" thing instead of simply trying to paint your opponents as evil terrorist-sypmathizers.
Actually 'sage I didn't see him do that, although his analogy could've been chosen better.
quote:
The logic train ran off the tracks when MadCat said:
I'll throw in some fodder just because I feel like it;The entertainment industry is severely overreacting on the issue of piracy and such; which can be seen by the various proposals that have come from the MPAA and the RIAA about going as far as to have DRM embedded into hardware.
Right, I'm sure everyone wants their soundcard to check whether the music they're playing is legal.
It's a known fact that since Napster and other P2P services came about, no drop in CD sales have been noted. Only a climb, whether that climb is due to P2P is unsure, but it's a climb nonetheless. The RIAA keeps claiming though that P2P is hurting the record companies' sales.
*shrug* I'm too tired right now to go find the references but I'll supply them tomorrow when I get back from work.
You should double-check your "well-known fact." Last time we had this discussion, Drysart provided some rather convincing figures regarding singles sales dropping sharply due to piracy.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
Bloodsage had this to say about Jimmy Carter:
Don't blame music and video companies for their reaction to pirates and thieves--blame the pirates and thieves.
To bring a different view into this let me state something. I personally blame the pirates and thieves for forcing the media companies into reacting. I blame the media companies for reacting in a way that isn't the wisest way to go about it.
quote:
Bloodsage stopped staring at Deedlit long enough to write:
You should double-check your "well-known fact." Last time we had this discussion, Drysart provided some rather convincing figures regarding singles sales dropping sharply due to piracy.
Do me a favor and dig up that thread mmkay?
Sales over the year 2001 overall didn't drop, they did drop for certain genres of music, but whether that was due to piracy wasn't proven, the RIAA just assumed it was and used that to fuel their "omg!@# P2P r bad!" campaigning.
quote:
MadCat had this to say about Duck Tales:
Actually 'sage I didn't see him do that, although his analogy could've been chosen better.
He said that it was like not blaming the terrorists for the attack, but rather blaming the political situation that caused it.
Now, not only was what I said exactly like blaming the terrorists for the attack, his phrasing suggests anyone who reasons the way I did would not blame the terrorists for what they did, but rather blame the situation that got them upset.
Seems to me that calling terrorists poor victims of circumstance and oppression is sympathizing with them.
I find that rather offensive.
Besides the logical flaws in his argument, of course. Being offensive is bad enough; being offensive and totally wrong makes one wonder if being offensive wasn't the entire point to begin with. Hence my reference to Godwin's Law.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
Mortious had this to say about Tron:
You expect me to read all this crap?
No.
quote:
MadCat stopped staring at Deedlit long enough to write:
No.
Good, because I wasn't going to. 
quote:
MadCat obviously shouldn't have said:
Do me a favor and dig up that thread mmkay?Sales over the year 2001 overall didn't drop, they did drop for certain genres of music, but whether that was due to piracy wasn't proven, the RIAA just assumed it was and used that to fuel their "omg!@# P2P r bad!" campaigning.
This thread. Post #93, though there are others.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
Bloodsage had this to say about Tron:
He said that it was like not blaming the terrorists for the attack, but rather blaming the political situation that caused it.Now, not only was what I said exactly like blaming the terrorists for the attack, his phrasing suggests anyone who reasons the way I did would not blame the terrorists for what they did, but rather blame the situation that got them upset.
Seems to me that calling terrorists poor victims of circumstance and oppression is sympathizing with them.
I find that rather offensive.
Besides the logical flaws in his argument, of course. Being offensive is bad enough; being offensive and totally wrong makes one wonder if being offensive wasn't the entire point to begin with. Hence my reference to Godwin's Law.
Well, the interpretation of his analogy can differ I guess; in a way I agree with it in the sense that a political situation caused terrorists to exist; and a political situation caused them to strike at the USA. Same with the IRA in the UK, it's largely political.
So I agree with the analogy up to that point, I don't say the terrorists did the right thing (they didn't), however, I do still think that the political situation in the US caused the attacks to happen.
I don't necessarily think though that if you didn't agree with RBL that you'd be a terrorist sympathizer, I didn't read that much into that analogy. But as I said, interpretation can be a bitch 
Calling terrorists poor victims of circumstance and opression; hmm, they are in a way you know? I don't condone their actions, but I can see where they're coming from - some of them anyway. Bin-Laden is just on a personal crusade against the USA, which is bad and can count on no sympathy from me. The IRA however, yeah, I do think they're victims of politics and opression. However, their methods are fucked up, so that gets no sympathy. They get some sympathy because I can see where they're coming from.
On the flaws in logic, logic is a funny thing - your logic doesn't seem too logical to me, just as my logic probably looks like nonsense to you; it all boils down again to interpretation - and if you get 10 different people reading the same piece of text, you're most likely to get 10 different interpretations. Debates can't be purely won on logic alone, or facts alone, or wit alone for that matter. Need a good combination of the three to get a good debate going.
That'll be all - I'm too tired to type up some decent reply, so I'll hold off till tomorrow to debate 
Thesis: The music companies (and software companies too, at that) are to be blamed for their reaction because it was unnecessary given the situation it resulted from.
Evidence of this overreaching response: D/nem-x's article
The article here
This one
This too
Response? [ 06-11-2002: Message edited by: Rabidbunnylover ]
