Edit: massive rethinking. See origional post below.
A post from Suggo:
"One side is trying to impose their thoughts and ideals upon the other. Only one side is doing that, if that side stops trying to do that, well, that will end my conversation right there and then."
My moral philosophy is probably closest to utilitarianism, E.G. doing things for the greater good. As a rule of thumb, I believe if something gives people as a whole more pleasure then pain, then it's a good philosophy.
So while I think preventing stalling is a good idea because it benefits far more people then it hurts, to suggo it's a bad idea because if we changed it, someone would get hurt in the process. Note that he doesn't mind being hypocritical to justify himself, because "that doesn't make him wrong". He also doesn't mind hurting people if its allowed withen the current rules, and especially hates those that try to change rules as they are now (Sensitive people, especially)
I see only two ways to convince suggo that he is wrong. First, we find a loophole in his logic, and the only one I can see appearantly isn't one according to him (There is no logical differance between an "imposer" and a "resister". A resister won't let anybody change, imposing their values and ethics on everyone else. An imposer tries to change, imposing their values and ethics on everyone else). Second, we convince him that what he thinks is moral and not is completely wrong, which is nearly impossible to do over the internet. Heck, its nearly impossible to do in person. Personally I wouldn't be convinced by him, so I don't expect him to be convinced by me.
Thus, there is no point arguing with suggo (and conversely, there is no point to suggo arguing with us) unless the point is to simply convince those outside the debate that you are correct, or to collect your thoughts. At least, this is how I analyze the situation.
I dont know which group I like least, the jerks, or their apologists ?
So you think there is a point to arguing with Suggo even though he will never change his viewpoint?
Some people never change their minds, they are so convinced they are "right". Its useless arguing with them. In the case of this thread I dont expect to convince anyone of my point of view, I am content that people like suggo are in a tiny minority.
Suggo must get some kinda crize for biggest... mm, yup.
It seems like a lot of meandering and thread space got used just to show how Suggo's argument was illogical and self-contradictory. A worthy cause, and in the interest of etiquette and meta-rules, but really inefficient in terms of time and energy.
I wonder if anyone was convinced to hold the position opposite the one they started with?
Never resign, eh?
For the record, I'm not trying to convince Suggo -- I'm well aware that the attempt is futile.
Although my posts are often directed at him, the actual intended audience are those that might be drawn into believing that his position has any kind of validity. By highlighting the hypocrisy and contradiction in what he's arguing I'd hope that at least one reader has drawn back from the brink of folly and realized that what Suggo is attempting to defend is in fact indefensible.
You see, at the end of the day I am not trying to press my ideals so much as I am merely resisting Suggo's.
If that is true, why are you arguing about it right here? If you say this, I think you would most likely leave the "peace-like conversation".
mjbickley, my point is that I think you are wrong. If everyone learns to accept the fact that these guys are out there, and there is nothing we can do about it, then they can do the following steps when somebody just leaves the computer when they are losing:
1.walk away from the computer.
2.do something fun.
3.come back once in a while to check if he has moved yet.
If we put a rule against this, this is how my book explains this:
"(copyright game maker, yoyo games) The average human brain can only remember 5-9 things of the same subject at a time. So, if you put, say, 15 controls in your game, most people will have forgotten what the first key does by the time they read what the last key does."
It's the same with rules. If you put too many, they forget what the first rule is by the time they read what the last rule is.
If we add the rule, it takes up another tile on the human memory wall. That tile could have been used for remembering, say, another opening.
Why waste their time as well?
It takes me about 5 seconds to read a rule.
That may not seem like much, but it can all add up.
If we put way too many rules on this site, somebody in the year of 2050 will look at the rules and waste a day on them.
And then, mjbickley, you can be the proud creator of one of them.
My point is, If you find out that someone just left the computer because they were losing badly, walk away and do something you like. Only come back to check once in a while.
If you're whiny and care about this, SIMPLY REPORT THE DUMB INCIDENT! IT DOESN'T MATTER! USE SOME COMMON SENSE AND PLAY ANOTHER GAME OR SOMETHING!!!
And next time, find the user, and write his/her username on a sticky note, and then title it,"Dont play against:".
You shouldn't care about this.
Were humans. So were usually intelligent.
Dig 1 millimeter into your stash of common sense to find out that you should spend your time effectively.
Don't wait. Do something while you wait for his time to run out.
Say your opponent goes off the computer and lets his time run out after almost losing.
You have an hour wait.
What could you do in an hour?
Listed from dumbest to smartest:
-whine about it
-resign/disconnect
-wait the hour
-chat with your opponent(happily)
-play outside
-go to an online game site to play games on another window
-play another live chess game while watching your one that you are waiting
-play another live chess game against someone you trust while watching the other one
-go surfing
-eat lunch
SMARTEST:
DO YOUR FAVORITE THING!!!!!!!!!!!!!
FOR GOD'S SAKE! WHO DOESN'T KNOW THIS???????????
Dumb dudes whine.
Smart dudes go do their favorite thing.
For all you complainers, you should really read this post.
WHY DOES IT MATTER?
You're the bad one because you're wasting your time staring at the screen!
In your time at least help your community by picking up litter!
Or learn by reading a book!
Or do your homework!
Or help your brother/sister/parents!
DO SOMETHING!!!!!!!!!
Choose one of the following:
a)Stare at the screen, waiting.
b)Do something you like and be happy!
If you are on the right side of your brain, you choose b.
Let them wait.
You have more inportant things to do.
Let them be grumpy.
You shouldn't care.
They are trying to make you resign or mad.
They want to make you unhappy.
So, DON'T LET THEM DO IT!!!
DO SOMETHING YOU LIKE!
YOU ARE IMPORTANT. SO MAKE YOURSELF HAPPY!
I hope I've gotten through to you all.
If I haven't, you're hopeless.
[off topic]I guess I'm okay...[/off topic]
Anyway, am I right?
"So I will let you have your response and that way the people out there who are rooting for you, and yourself, can feel that you have in some way shown me up"
LOL, I hope you all feel better now! lol
LOL, I knew you couldn't bear to leave in silence. You just had to come back one last time to remind us: "Remember guys, I'm only letting you have the final word so you can feel you've won, remember that!" ....Uh sure, whatever preserves your dignity, lol
Well Suggo, since you avoided nearly all our questions/points, and there's no one here who shares your views to answer for you, this won't get us anywhere, so I'll be done here too. Go ahead if you want to fire something back (you are itching to do that, aren't you? lol)
Nobody wins. Isn't it a draw?
Stalemate.
Or threefold repetition?
50 moves with no captures.
Right, what's interesting about both threefold and 50 move is that the draw must be claimed.
Well, I don't think anybody is going to claim a draw, so it's gotta' be a stalemate.
That's the whole thing - it will actually keep going on unless someone claims the draw. Because stalemate indicates that there are no more moves to be made actually, which I don't believe is the case here.
If they wanted to, they could keep arguing whatever it is they're arguing for awhile yet.
All players should know what is accepted by majority as polite. They can then do what they will with that info.
As nobody needs my posts here, I am officially leaving this damn thread. I can't make heads or tails of this at all. Goodbye.
Yes, I agree. They should also know that just because the majority agree on something, it doesn't make it right! It used to be etiquette to play golf with knee high socks pulled up...the majority accepted this as polite...now? lol
What a retarded argument.
You are correct - just because the majority agree, does not make something right.
However, in this case, it is right. And using specious, off the wall examples will not change this. We can do it too:
"Hahaha, sneezing in someone's face has never been polite and never will be."
There we go.
With regards to your stupid golf analogy: yes, people wore knee-high socks when that was seen as the done thing to do. But then people realised that was silly, and it stopped. Ergo the majority view decided it was not the 'polite' thing to do.
With regards to being polite, the large majority does rule. As politeness is a social convention, the *only* real barometer of what is rude and what is not is what the community thinks.
And here the community thinks otherwise to you.