quote:
Mortious spewed forth this undeniable truth:
Bloodsage, Snoota?
Oh come on Mort. That really sucks for Snoota. I'd probably still be heart broken...but..your comment...
Is trying really hard not to laugh
Ozius
quote:
Verily, Ozimander J. Griswald doth proclaim:
Oh come on Mort. That really sucks for Snoota. I'd probably still be heart broken...but..your comment...Is trying really hard not to laugh
Ozius
I assure you that Snoota was making a joke geared at Bloodsage 
I had no idea...I'm so gullable..I want to die...
Ozius
quote:
Ozimander J. Griswald's unholy Backstreet Boys obsession manifested in:
I'm so gullible..
Edit: Added the state in case you didn't know where Parcelan lives [ 04-23-2002: Message edited by: Bajah ]
quote:
Everyone wondered WTF when Woody wrote:
My wife and I met online. We talked in a chat room. We talked on the phone. She came to visit. She came to visit again... and again. (no small trip... Illinois to Georgia)I proposed in the chat room (initially). Symbolic gesture I think.
We got married.
It's been 3.5 years and we're happier than ever.
I think it all kind of depends on the "nature" of the relationship from the beginning. You know... what basis the relationship started on. blah blah blah... I'm too stupid to try to tell you that not ALL online relationships are bad.
Edit: points added. typos editted.
My wife and I met in a hot tub.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
They are also different in their goals. What is the goal of a long-term physical relationship? Usually to spend the rest of their lives together. What is the goal of a long-term online relationship? To be able to meet in 'real-life' and accomplish the aforementioned goal of that. Again, this is in 'most standard cases'.
I will not bother to debate with Bloodsage as he has clarified that it is his opinion, and as an opinion it is not right or wrong - it can merely be contrasting.
(Dear lord, I'm turning into a beta version of Cha!)
quote:
ACES! Another post by Lyinar:
I can't really agree with this, Sage. I met Deth when I was 16. We had our ups and downs, I was even with another guy for a while, but I always felt something missing. Deth's always been the one that could soothe anything wrong with me. He's always been the person I had to have in my life, or it wasn't the best it could be. I love Deth, more than anyone else I've ever cared for. And I have since I was 16 years old, long before we met recently.So I do think it's possible to be in actual love before you meet face to face. I feel the same for Deth now as I always did before I met him. I needed no verification that he was perfect for me. Meeting in real life was just icing on the cake, not the realization I really did love him.
What if your experience had been more like Piper's? Would you say that you had been truly in love, or that you had thought you were until you met and discovered the truth?
I'm not discussing any particular relationship, here. Honest.
But, as I said earlier, there is a reason infomercials rely on testimonials. Testimonials are not reliable indicators of potential success. Would you invest your paycheck in the lottery at 100,000,000:1 odds, simply because six or eight or ten former winners told their exciting success stories?
An online relationship is, at best, merely the prelude to something so much better. I don't subscribe to the "one person, one ideal mate" myth, so I think it's better to look IRL rather than online, because the chances of success are better, and the potential reward so much greater.
Why look in the fridge intermingled with the Boone's Farm, when you can search amongst the Dom Perignon?
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
Dr. Vorbis thought about the meaning of life:
The mediums under which relationships are founded cause them to be completely different beasts. There are boons and banes to each. Obviously, text based communication and interaction allows for time to think out and articulate replies and more or less consists of more 'quality' discussion than that of verbal communications. However, with full communications, you are allowed to present the unconscious transmissions; whereas you are not allowed time to articulate an answer as well as if you were allowed to type.They are also different in their goals. What is the goal of a long-term physical relationship? Usually to spend the rest of their lives together. What is the goal of a long-term online relationship? To be able to meet in 'real-life' and accomplish the aforementioned goal of that. Again, this is in 'most standard cases'.
I will not bother to debate with Bloodsage as he has clarified that it is his opinion, and as an opinion it is not right or wrong - it can merely be contrasting.
(Dear lord, I'm turning into a beta version of Cha!)
Flaem flaem flaem!
Opinions most certainly can be incorrect! Dammit.
{sorry: pet peeve}
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
Bloodsage stopped staring at Deedlit long enough to write:
Flaem flaem flaem!Opinions most certainly can be incorrect! Dammit.
{sorry: pet peeve}
I could have sworn that you argued the exact opposite just a little bit ago. Note: I never stated that the facts used to base the opinions could be incorrect; just that the opinion in itself (as long as it is not centered around a fact 'In my opinion, the Earth is round!') cannot be either right or wrong.
Example: It is my opinion that Swiss is not as good as Cheddar. Prove to me that this is false.
Also, I said right or wrong, NOT incorrect. Neener. 
Neener.
Honestly, I've never argued anything other than that opinions are based upon facts, and therefore subject to debate, whereas belief are held regardless of fact, and are thus not subject to debate.
Desires and feelings fall more into the undebateable belief category. Things like cheese, for example.
One could like vanilla ice cream better than chocolate, for example, but how could one have an opinion that it was better? There could be no basis for that, other than belief.
Now, one could say that vanilla ice cream tastes better, and it would fall into the category of experience rather than true opinion.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
NOT EVERYONE ON THE WEB WALLOWS IN A CESSPOOL.
Excuse me.
One other point, Mr. 'Sage. You say testimonials are not reliable indicators - you dismissed my example of myself finding Amanda as statistically irrelevant, and therefore kept your opinion of "Online relationships are not true relationships"; yet you used Piper's testimonial to support your opinion. Is hers more relevant because you agree with it?
quote:
Bloodsage wrote this stupid crap:
My wife and I met in a hot tub.
Wow. Must be a steamy relationship!
And there's no need to bring up the testimonial argument again. I never said it would be the same for everyone. But you were saying it can never happen, and I was pointing out an instance where it did.
Lyinar Ka`Bael, Piney Fresh Druidess - Luclin
quote:
Bloodsage impressed everyone with:
Right and wrong are moral judgments having nothing to do with cheese.Neener.
Honestly, I've never argued anything other than that opinions are based upon facts, and therefore subject to debate, whereas belief are held regardless of fact, and are thus not subject to debate.
Desires and feelings fall more into the undebateable belief category. Things like cheese, for example.
One could like vanilla ice cream better than chocolate, for example, but how could one have an opinion that it was better? There could be no basis for that, other than belief.
Now, one could say that vanilla ice cream tastes better, and it would fall into the category of experience rather than true opinion.
Right and wrong are also often used colliliquisms (super misspelling powers, HO!) for correct and incorrect. Therefore, I remained ambiguous!
Go me!
Now, go back through all of my post and replace 'opinion' with 'beliefs'.
Neener.
Who are you to tell US to look somewhere else for love. You're a fool to think love is something you look for. It just sort of happens. Unless ofcourse you are in it just for the WILD H0+ S3XX0RZ, then I guess you could look for it.
Just because you found it in person, doesnt mean everyone has to follow your lead. There is no "Dom Perignon" in this business. If there were, everyone would have a significant other that lives down the street from them. Which if that was how it was, it would present its own problems.
You are speaking on a topic that you have no expeirence with. You are feeding off the failures without looking at the successes.
So you can take your biased blind opinion and shove it up your yuppie ass sideways.
quote:
Verily, Tier doth proclaim:
Wow. Must be a steamy relationship!
BAD PUN!
Ozius
quote:
From the book of Dr. Vorbis, chapter 3, verse 16:
I could have sworn that you argued the exact opposite just a little bit ago. Note: I never stated that the facts used to base the opinions could be incorrect; just that the opinion in itself (as long as it is not centered around a fact 'In my opinion, the Earth is round!') cannot be either right or wrong.Example: It is my opinion that Swiss is not as good as Cheddar. Prove to me that this is false.
Also, I said right or wrong, NOT incorrect. Neener.
Actually, I've only ever seen him argue opinions as provable one way or the other. In fact, I've seen that particular position from him more often than any other position, period. I'm fairly certain that he has created multiple threads arguing that exact point. Arguing it rather emphatically, to put it lightly.
As for the main issue in the thread, I'll readily acknoledge that online relationships have far more hurdles to overcome, and are certainly not the ideal way to meet someone. Real-life interactions offer far more versatility and expression, and far less possibility for deception.
However, I think saying that true love is impossible is going too far, for two reasons. First, love is going to be a hard thing to define no matter the circumstances, so saying "it is here" or "it isn't here" is going to be difficult.
Second, deception is possible in any relationship, not just online ones. You can't say that possible unknown facts decide whether it's true love or not. "How can it be true love if you're not sure they won't annoy the bejeezus out of you if you ever meet?" is no different from saying "How can it be true love if you're not sure they aren't hiding some annoying trait, like being a slob?" There's always unknown in a relationship, that doesn't stop anyone from experiencing love. Yes, the unknowns are greater in an online relationship, but they exist in all relationships. Maybe that person online actually has a red-hot temper they can't control in real life, but by the same token, maybe that person across the dinner table has a personality disorder that periodically shows up, such as a manic depressive. For something as subjective as love, you can't draw a line saying "This much uncertainty is ok for love, this much isn't."
Yes, online relationships offer the least amount of information on the other person, but who's to say that isn't enough for some people to fall in true love? [ 04-23-2002: Message edited by: Chalesm ]
In the beginning the Universe was created.Douglas Adams, 1952-2001
quote:
Chalesm said this about your mom:
Second, deception is possible in any relationship, not just online ones. You can't say that possible unknown facts decide whether it's true love or not. "How can it be true love if you're not sure they won't annoy the bejeezus out of you if you ever meet?" is no different from saying "How can it be true love if you're not sure they aren't hiding some annoying trait, like being a slob?" There's always unknown in a relationship, that doesn't stop anyone from experiencing love. Yes, the unknowns are greater in an online relationship, but they exist in all relationships. Maybe that person online actually has a red-hot temper they can't control in real life, but by the same token, maybe that person across the dinner table has a personality disorder that periodically shows up, such as a manic depressive. For something as subjective as love, you can't draw a line saying "This much uncertainty is ok for love, this much isn't."Yes, online relationships offer the least amount of information on the other person, but who's to say that isn't enough for some people to fall in true love?
EXACTLY.
quote:
Pesco had this to say about (_|_):
You realize BS, that everytime you say that damn comment about Dom Perignon vs. Boone's Farm. That you are belittling most everyone on this forum. Saying none of us would make a good partner for another, that none of our relationships will work because it was based online.Who are you to tell US to look somewhere else for love. You're a fool to think love is something you look for. It just sort of happens. Unless ofcourse you are in it just for the WILD H0+ S3XX0RZ, then I guess you could look for it.
Just because you found it in person, doesnt mean everyone has to follow your lead. There is no "Dom Perignon" in this business. If there were, everyone would have a significant other that lives down the street from them. Which if that was how it was, it would present its own problems.
You are speaking on a topic that you have no expeirence with. You are feeding off the failures without looking at the successes.
So you can take your biased blind opinion and shove it up your yuppie ass sideways.
WTF are you talking about, asshole?
Simply because you cannot read doesn't mean I'm insulting you or anyone you know.
Is case you're simply being stupid for the sake of argument, you have alread agreed with me that personal relationships are much, much richer than online relationships, since they contain all of the elements impossible to share via binary. Hence the Boone's Farm vs. Dom Perignon example.
Fuckchop.
So now you've changed your tune yet again, and are asserting that, in spite of what you've already said, online relationships are just as richly textured as personal ones? You've changed your mind why? Just to try to flame me?
I haven't said a goddamn thing you accuse me of, and it's getting annoying to have dipshits incapable of discussing a given subject in the abstract without dragging their personal bullshit into the conversation attempt to flame me.
Show me where I said a single derogatory thing about a particular relationship. Point it out, dickbreath.
I never claimed that all online relationships are doomed to failure. I never said that all personal relationships succeed. Anywhere. Ever.
So jumpstart whatever fetid, rotting mass of goo you substitute for brains, and start paying attention.
I have asserted nothing other than that online relationships are both more difficult and have less depth than personal ones. Every single person here has agreed that the eventual aim of an online relationship is to become a personal relationship.
If online relationships are just as good or better, why is that?
So take your emotional bullshit, cram it up your ass (remove whatever dick is there now), and learn to get your facts straight before throwing a fit.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
Be careful. I've tried it before and didn't learn my lesson too soon. Keep that in mind.
This message brought to you by an angst ridden teenager
Ozius
quote:
Bloodsage probably says this to all the girls:
and learn to get your facts straight before throwing a fit.
I find a terrible irony in that statement.
quote:
Chalesm had this to say about the Spice Girls:
Actually, I've only ever seen him argue opinions as provable one way or the other. In fact, I've seen that particular position from him more often than any other position, period. I'm fairly certain that he has created multiple threads arguing that exact point. Arguing it rather emphatically, to put it lightly.
As for the main issue in the thread, I'll readily acknoledge that online relationships have far more hurdles to overcome, and are certainly not the ideal way to meet someone. Real-life interactions offer far more versatility and expression, and far less possibility for deception.However, I think saying that true love is impossible is going too far, for two reasons. First, love is going to be a hard thing to define no matter the circumstances, so saying "it is here" or "it isn't here" is going to be difficult.
Second, deception is possible in any relationship, not just online ones. You can't say that possible unknown facts decide whether it's true love or not. "How can it be true love if you're not sure they won't annoy the bejeezus out of you if you ever meet?" is no different from saying "How can it be true love if you're not sure they aren't hiding some annoying trait, like being a slob?" There's always unknown in a relationship, that doesn't stop anyone from experiencing love. Yes, the unknowns are greater in an online relationship, but they exist in all relationships. Maybe that person online actually has a red-hot temper they can't control in real life, but by the same token, maybe that person across the dinner table has a personality disorder that periodically shows up, such as a manic depressive. For something as subjective as love, you can't draw a line saying "This much uncertainty is ok for love, this much isn't."
Yes, online relationships offer the least amount of information on the other person, but who's to say that isn't enough for some people to fall in true love?
Of course, but, as you agreed, it's much harder to deceive someone IRL than online.
Unless you live in Thailand, there's little chance that hot chick you met at the museum is actually a dude. Online, such things are rather commonplace.
I'll stand by the point that true love simply isn't, as a rule, possible without meeting and spending time together.
That's like deciding something is your favorite food based upon smell alone, without seeing or tasting it.
Sure, one can get damn close, and there may be rare exceptions. But that doesn't change anything, really. The exception tests the rule, as the (properly translated) expression goes.
All I'm arguing is that looking IRL rather than online increases the odds of success because there are fewer barriers, and decreases the number of outright wackos one must wade through to meet someone desireable. I've not said a thing about those who choose to do otherwise; individual circumstances differ, and we are discussing the subject abstractly.
Or I was, at any rate.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
MaxlisKudro probably says this to all the girls:
Alright, this is getting rediculous. Would some one please lock this before Sage makes a bigger ass of himself?
You should fuck off now.
Why do morons like you never address your lunacy to those actually starting flames?
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
The logic train ran off the tracks when Tegadil said:
I find a terrible irony in that statement.
Because?
Or were you simply trying to be clever with your half-assed innuendo?
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
Bloodsage thought this was the Ricky Martin Fan Club Forum and wrote:
I haven't said a goddamn thing you accuse me of, and it's getting annoying to have dipshits incapable of discussing a given subject in the abstract without dragging their personal bullshit into the conversation attempt to flame me.Show me where I said a single derogatory thing about a particular relationship. Point it out, dickbreath.
I never claimed that all online relationships are doomed to failure. I never said that all personal relationships succeed. Anywhere. Ever.
?
quote:
I'll stand by the point that true love simply isn't, as a rule, possible without meeting and spending time together.
quote:
Lyinar had this to say about Robocop:
I would say I still had loved that person, I just made an unwise decision and move on. I loved things about Jeff. But Jeff was not for me. I do subscribe to the "One ideal mate" idea, but I do think you can have an "almost" ideal. Jeff was my "almost" ideal. Adam is my ideal.And there's no need to bring up the testimonial argument again. I never said it would be the same for everyone. But you were saying it can never happen, and I was pointing out an instance where it did.
Perhaps I unintentionally overstated my case.
My reply to Chalesm should clear that up.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
Bloodsage had this to say about Punky Brewster:
You should fuck off now.Why do morons like you never address your lunacy to those actually starting flames?
Because you keep them going and this is my thread.
The two statements aren't contradictory, as far as I can tell.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
MaxlisKudro enlisted the help of an infinite number of monkeys to write:
Because you keep them going and this is my thread.
No, this is a conversation you happened to have initiated.
If you want to be useful, quit your pathetic attempts to blame me, and address the morons who can't discuss the subject calmly.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
We were all impressed when Bloodsage wrote:
Don't understand your point, D.The two statements aren't contradictory, as far as I can tell.
I think it's an agreement.
All sweeping statements about it are false.
Bloodsage is wrong. Lyinar is wrong. Otaku Penguin is wrong. Mightion is wrong.
It can happen, sometimes it does happen. Sometimes it's the real thing, sometimes it's not. Just like meeting someone in person.
Really, meeting someone on the Internet is no less shameful than meeting them in some meatmarket singles bar, or in the laundromat, or at the bus stop, or even in a hot tub. It's the same stuff no matter where you go. Belittling it just because it's online is ignorant; but at the same time, saying it's the best thing since sliced bread is just as ignorant. [ 04-23-2002: Message edited by: Drysart ]
(i haets ubb) [ 04-23-2002: Message edited by: Kagrama ]
quote:
I never claimed that all online relationships are doomed to failure.
Alright. That's not too hard to understand, I hope. Hell, you wrote it.
Then you go with
quote:
I'll stand by the point that true love simply isn't, as a rule, possible without meeting and spending time together.
I can point from quote to quote all day long if you like.
But that was a nice addition
quote:
Bloodsage impressed everyone with:
Because?Or were you simply trying to be clever with your half-assed innuendo?
I shall respond solely for the sake of arguement, but none after this.
Because, you said to get your facts straight before he threw a fit. The irony, to me at least, is that you were throwing a fit in an attempt to fend off the ever growing mob.
And as per your second statement, I have no idea what exactly you are trying to infer by that, and honestly, I don't think you do either. Goodbye. [ 04-23-2002: Message edited by: Tegadil ]
quote:
Drysart had this to say about Robocop:
Love is unexplainable, uncategorizable, unstereotypable, and unpredictable.All sweeping statements about it are false.
Bloodsage is wrong. Lyinar is wrong. Otaku Penguin is wrong. Mightion is wrong.
It can happen, sometimes it does happen. Sometimes it's the real thing, sometimes it's not. Just like meeting someone in person.
Really, meeting someone on the Internet is no less shameful than meeting them in some meatmarket singles bar, or in the laundromat, or at the bus stop, or even in a hot tub. It's the same stuff no matter where you go.
Never said it was shameful.
I said online relationships are less rich and textured than personal ones. No one has argued the point, but many have flamed me for it.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
ACES! Another post by Tegadil:
I shall respond solely for the sake of arguement, but none after this.Because, you said to get your facts straight before he threw a fit. The irony, to me at least, is that you were throwing a fit in an attempt to fend off the ever growing mob.
And as per your second statement, I have no idea what exactly you are trying to infer by that, and honestly, I don't think you do either.
I'm flamed, yet it's me who's throwing the fit? Not sure how that works.
Yes, I do know exactly what I was implying by that sentence. Basically, I was accusing you of not having the least thing to back up your claim of ironic behavior on my part, and so chose to slip the barb via innuendo rather than direct proof.
So neener.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
