adults only groups/clubs/teams

Sort:
kenmack
blackfirestorm666 wrote:

i wouldnt see the need to lie about my age most people around the world class 18 as being an adult! Saying that u need to be a subscriber to the site b4 creating a group/team. therefore chances r u pay for it with a credit / debit card / paypal yes? u HAVE to be 18+ to get ANY of these (well u do in my country)

i obviously cant say 100% that anyone in my group is 25+ unless i know them personally and seeing as most of my members r overseas i cant verify it!

saying that tho me and my superadmin have a system of checking such as profile pics, blogs, links to websites (such as myspace) things like that that can hint at someones age


Right, so you do a little background check.  That's fine.  Well go on then, I've nothing to hide.  I have a good job; I'm college educated; so, I trust all will be in order.  Although, I don't believe in myspace or facebook, sorry.  I did pay for a subscription, though.

On the other hand, I feel adequately confident that you, black-satanist and your hatchet man Kepler are indeed of sufficient age.  So, as you English chaps say, Bob's your uncle!  Lets fill out the appropriate paper work and team up.  I firmly believe such an action would be beneficial to both parties, increasing my enjoyment of chess.com and increasing your enjoyment of your group. 

blackfirestorm

well thats great but if the parents dont check on wot their child is doing on a chess site such as this then that isnt my problem.

i completely agree, it isnt an indicator but things like blogs and pictures on a players profile and things like telling everyone how long they played chess for etc r ALL indicators

Aubergine
Kepler wrote:

Lies damned lies and statistics! Liars, damned liars and statisticians by extension. I should know cos I are one.

 


 I know sir. (Sigh).

One laboured brilliantly on the tailored slight.

;o)

shakje
PerfectGent wrote:
sohowgoodami wrote:

Shakje, I will try and give you a definition of swearing.

Swearing is the misuse of holy words (we call this blasphemy),


corretion - blasphemy is taking god's name in vain (god being whichever religion you belong to) - so swearing has very little to do with blasphemy and an awful lot to do with the woeful grasp of language by the swearer.


 Why woeful grasp of language? I would have thought that it was perfectly clear that language is an evolving beast and constantly changing. Condemning anyone who uses certain words that are on your own personal list seems a little silly...

I posted recently and I can't see it so I'm assuming someone took offence to the one letter of a starred out word that was visible and used for an example, so I'm taking care not to post any examples this time. If blasphemy is only taking your own god's name in vain, I can think of plenty of words which would be deemed as swear words and which do not fit the definition offered at all. So I'd be glad to hear your definition of swearing.

Curious is all.

sohowgoodami
PerfectGent wrote:
sohowgoodami wrote:

Shakje, I will try and give you a definition of swearing.

Swearing is the misuse of holy words (we call this blasphemy),


corretion - blasphemy is taking god's name in vain (god being whichever religion you belong to) - so swearing has very little to do with blasphemy and an awful lot to do with the woeful grasp of language by the swearer.


 PerfectGent,

Firstly I said holy words because people have different gods and different beliefs so by saying holy words I was being inclusive.

Secondly, if you are going to quote someone and then correct them, the least you can do is at least quote the complete sentence, which was:

Swearing is the misuse of holy words (we call this blasphemy), or the use of base, sexually or physically explicit language that will insult or outrage those we direct the words at, or others that hear us.

Finally, although in most cases I would agree that swearing is due to a lack of vocabulary, it does have its place as a warning just like a dogs growl.

wormrose
sohowgoodami wrote:
PerfectGent wrote:
sohowgoodami wrote:

Shakje, I will try and give you a definition of swearing.

Swearing is the misuse of holy words (we call this blasphemy),


corretion - blasphemy is taking god's name in vain (god being whichever religion you belong to) - so swearing has very little to do with blasphemy and an awful lot to do with the woeful grasp of language by the swearer.


 PerfectGent,

Firstly I said holy words because people have different gods and different beliefs so by saying holy words I was being inclusive.

Secondly, if you are going to quote someone and then correct them, the least you can do is at least quote the complete sentence, which was:

Swearing is the misuse of holy words (we call this blasphemy), or the use of base, sexually or physically explicit language that will insult or outrage those we direct the words at, or others that hear us.

Finally, although in most cases I would agree that swearing is due to a lack of vocabulary, it does have its place as a warning just like a dogs growl.


Absolutely! The growl of a dog! And it is in this sense that I object to it. It is intended to offend, a sign of oncoming aggressiveness, hostility and/or abuse. Abuse is, and must always be, defined by the abused rather than the abuser. Then the abuser always tries to convince the abused that what they are saying or doing is not harmful so that they may continue to abuse.

sohowgoodami

Wormrose, I would agree with you in most cases. However, sometimes a dog grows because it is threatened. Although a contradiction in terms sometime aggression is purely defensive and a mouth full of foul language from a softly spoken person can cause enough shock to defuse a situation. Therefore with all due respect I do believe that swearing does have a place in any language, the problem is that most people never truly learn its place and proper use.