Life of a Female Chess Player Pt. II: Competition - Chess Forums - Page 9

Elubas

Apr 17, 2016

0

#161

trysts wrote:

Elubas wrote:

trysts wrote:

ab121705 wrote:

actually I will be voting for HIllary, not because I think she's capable of changing much, but because I think she is the best qualified in a field of weak candidates. I don't think anyone else is even close. Her gender is NOT an issue for me. I hope and believe she will be our next president.

None of that really has anything to do with this thread

Best qualified to organize coups, bomb countries to oblivion, laugh at heads of State being murdered, support the horrible governments of Saudi Arabia and Isreal as they murder thousands of innocent people, etc., etc. It's clear to me that when someone says they're voting Hillary because she is "best qualified", that they have no moral compass or are just breathtakingly ignorant.

So the best moral test of a human is who they arbitrarily feel like voting for. 95% of people just sit back, pick the person with the best hairstyle and they're done with it.

So do you see how who just make up stuff and ask people to respond? Where did you see in my writings about "the best moral test"? You made that up.

Well yes, trysts, I expect you to follow things that are logically implied. Whether the term "moral test," or something similar, is used or not, one has to exist to make a comment about someone's morals (talking about someone's moral compass is indeed making such a comment). That's just what it means for there to be a moral test. You could say my use of the word "best" was hyperbole, though.

If I talk about apples, I'm talking about a fruit, whether I use the word fruit or not.

trysts

Apr 17, 2016

0

#162

Elubas wrote:

trysts wrote:

Elubas wrote:

trysts wrote:

ab121705 wrote:

actually I will be voting for HIllary, not because I think she's capable of changing much, but because I think she is the best qualified in a field of weak candidates. I don't think anyone else is even close. Her gender is NOT an issue for me. I hope and believe she will be our next president.

None of that really has anything to do with this thread

Best qualified to organize coups, bomb countries to oblivion, laugh at heads of State being murdered, support the horrible governments of Saudi Arabia and Isreal as they murder thousands of innocent people, etc., etc. It's clear to me that when someone says they're voting Hillary because she is "best qualified", that they have no moral compass or are just breathtakingly ignorant.

So the best moral test of a human is who they arbitrarily feel like voting for. 95% of people just sit back, pick the person with the best hairstyle and they're done with it.

So do you see how who just make up stuff and ask people to respond? Where did you see in my writings about "the best moral test"? You made that up.

Well yes, trysts, I expect you to follow things that are logically implied. Whether the term "moral test," or something similar, is used or not, one has to exist to make a comment about someone's morals (talking about someone's moral compass is indeed making such a comment). That's just what it means for there to be a moral test. You could say my use of the word "best" was hyperbole, though.

If I talk about apples, I'm talking about a fruit, whether I use the word fruit or not.

Okay I read that a few times and I'm missing something but Ill figure I'm just a bit slushy right now

trysts

Apr 17, 2016

0

#163

BlargDragon

Apr 17, 2016

0

#164

this is amazing

everything on this site is just amazing

trysts

Apr 17, 2016

0

#165

You're on acid!

BlargDragon

Apr 17, 2016

0

#166

No I measured it and its pH was pretty close to 7.0

trysts

Apr 17, 2016

0

#167

Wow! You're like a chemist! And your avatar looks like a hit of acid!

BlargDragon

Apr 17, 2016

0

#168

I must confess that there is quite an incriminating mountain of evidence against me. I was going to claim that the avatar actually is me, but that would only make the case worse.

trysts

Apr 17, 2016

0

#169

FRENCHBASHER

Apr 17, 2016

0

#170

Me i think i assume :

Drunken and Politics are the same, they speak for nothing and fortunately won't do what they say.

Like chess games, life of a female in competition is Hillary's challenge, facing Bernie it is not so easy. Hillary will buy soon pudique clothes to get 0.5% of voices more, and bernie will try to have beard and some funny hat the way sonny boys carry it. Lotta fun coming soon.

Bonne journée, OPette (it is OP in female gender). Don't mention others, alcohol freaks, me i think i assume they are, hilarious if 40% of alc. in blood, not less.

trysts

Apr 18, 2016

0

#171

Elubas wrote:

trysts wrote:

Elubas wrote:

trysts wrote:

ab121705 wrote:

actually I will be voting for HIllary, not because I think she's capable of changing much, but because I think she is the best qualified in a field of weak candidates. I don't think anyone else is even close. Her gender is NOT an issue for me. I hope and believe she will be our next president.

None of that really has anything to do with this thread

Best qualified to organize coups, bomb countries to oblivion, laugh at heads of State being murdered, support the horrible governments of Saudi Arabia and Isreal as they murder thousands of innocent people, etc., etc. It's clear to me that when someone says they're voting Hillary because she is "best qualified", that they have no moral compass or are just breathtakingly ignorant.

So the best moral test of a human is who they arbitrarily feel like voting for. 95% of people just sit back, pick the person with the best hairstyle and they're done with it.

So do you see how who just make up stuff and ask people to respond? Where did you see in my writings about "the best moral test"? You made that up.

Well yes, trysts, I expect you to follow things that are logically implied. Whether the term "moral test," or something similar, is used or not, one has to exist to make a comment about someone's morals (talking about someone's moral compass is indeed making such a comment). That's just what it means for there to be a moral test. You could say my use of the word "best" was hyperbole, though.

If I talk about apples, I'm talking about a fruit, whether I use the word fruit or not.

Okay, I read you sober and it still doesn't make sense

Elubas

Apr 18, 2016

0

#172

I'm not sure what part doesn't make sense. If you know what words mean, you shouldn't have any trouble. I assume you know what words like "test" mean, but there is google if you need it.

TRextastic

Apr 18, 2016

0

#173

Elubas wrote:

I'm not sure what part doesn't make sense. If you know what words mean, you shouldn't have any trouble. I assume you know what words like "test" mean, but there is google if you need it.

Uh no, it's you. You may have a solid grasp of "what words mean", but you have a very poor grasp of how to compose a comprehendable sentence. Your comments are unnecessarily wordy and the point of most of your comments is impossible to understand. You go on tangent after tagent in a single post, the aftermath of which is only clear to you. Your comments are a mess and then you feel the need to subject us all to 30 of them a day.

You criticizing someone else's language comprehension skills is ridiculous. You have poorer communicating skills than anyone I've seen on here. And this site is full of foreigners who speak/write English as a second language.

You should stop your attempts to sound intelligent and relearn the basics of how to communicate with someone other than your own conscious.

trysts

Apr 18, 2016

0

#174

PoolPlayerToo

Apr 18, 2016

0

#175

dashkee94 wrote:

Well, we disagree on Bernie--he's been fighting the good fight for years. I'm one of those 60s kids who still believe that we were right, and history has born out that all we fought for and fought against was the right fight. And he is a third-party candidate: Sanders became a Dem in order to run a serious campaign to win the Pres and actually change things. He's the longest serving independent is US political history, and if you read his speeces from 1972 to now, the message hasn't changed. He's never taken big-business money, not then or even now when it could help out--if he gets bought, he wants to be owing you and me, not them. But--and this is a big but--he can't do it alone. He needs like-minded people in the House and Senate to vote for his policies, and that is the problem. If they are bought and paid for, it doesn't matter who occupies the White House.

And, BTW, I know more that a few people who were anti-war, anti-corporation, anti-Nixon until they got some cushy jobs and completely turned a 180, and I have nothing to do with them--people with no moral compass and no core values, swayed by nothing more than what the crowd around them yells. They are traitors to themselves, sheeple who will vote for going to the slaughterhouse with a smile on their face. I agree with your distain for them. But there is a chance here to get one of us in the WH, and I'll do whatever I can to get him there. He, like me, believes in the same values and has the same moral compass--how can I not support him? He and I are both children of the 60s and neither one of us has wavered on this long road of life. Besides, look at the others in the race--fear-mongering war-hawks who have as much integrity as a snake-oil salesman. This is a once-in-my-life chance to vote for someone rather than against someone and that feels good to me. As I said earlier, if Sanders doesn't win and chooses not to run as a third-party candidate, then I'm voting for Jill Stein--I cannot vote for any of the others. A vote for them means we're at war within a year.

that was pretty intense. a child of the 60's were you. by my math you were a child in the 60's. you must have had some hippie parents to be so politically aware at that age. anyway, anyone who lists the MC5 as a favorite band is ok with me.

Elubas

Apr 18, 2016

0

#176

TRextastic wrote:

Elubas wrote:

I'm not sure what part doesn't make sense. If you know what words mean, you shouldn't have any trouble. I assume you know what words like "test" mean, but there is google if you need it.

Uh no, it's you. You may have a solid grasp of "what words mean", but you have a very poor grasp of how to compose a comprehendable sentence. Your comments are unnecessarily wordy and the point of most of your comments is impossible to understand. You go on tangent after tagent in a single post, the aftermath of which is only clear to you. Your comments are a mess and then you feel the need to subject us all to 30 of them a day.

You criticizing someone else's language comprehension skills is ridiculous. You have poorer communicating skills than anyone I've seen on here. And this site is full of foreigners who speak/write English as a second language.

You should stop your attempts to sound intelligent and relearn the basics of how to communicate with someone other than your own conscious.

I don't know, the fact that you would use so many derogatory words in just a few paragraphs makes it look like you're attaching a huge part of the blame to me. You seem to not at all want to consider that maybe you just don't want to actually figure out what a person is saying. Yeah, there's always the question of how much is it about the person posting, and how much is it about the person reading it, but you just go 1000% with blaming me and that is just vicious. I've even tried on other threads to see where people didn't get me, because I genuinely didn't know. But it's not exactly an appealing process when I have to repeat myself four times (and be made fun of four times as well) because people won't listen the first time.

So yeah, it's one thing for me to say that I frankly don't know how other people will get what I am trying to say, but quite another to say I don't know how to communicate. I think quite a lot about my word choice actually; I even think about what words do people have more negative associations with, and try to make them more neutral if possible. I'm putting a lot of effort there and it's pretty obnoxious for you to assume otherwise. Bad as these comments may be, they take a long time to make, and they take a lot of thought, and you don't even want to consider that, instead labeling me as this big villain, even though your one comment just now is way more aggressive than anything I've posted here.

So, thanks. I put in tons of time to think my thoughts through, and I'm just a fiend. You know, even if I fail to communicate effectively, it's pretty sad that it's like the more effort I put in, the more people will hate me. And these tend to be the same people that barely think about what the person is trying to say, and just assume that the person is a jerk just because they post a differing view.

Elubas

Apr 18, 2016

0

#177

But uh, yeah... if you make a comment about someone's morals, you have a reason for doing so, you put a person through tests if you will. You say "I think your morals are bad because of x." Well, that x, is the test, or the reason why you think someone's morals are bad.

That takes maybe 30 seconds to think through, but the people who don't want to do that are the people who say I can't handle language. Really, from the people who don't even seem to grasp the basic implications of certain words. You just could never admit that you don't feel like listening. Nope, you have to put it all on me, with an incredibly rude tone. Well geez, put me in prison or something, you sound like you want me executed or something.

Elubas

Apr 18, 2016

0

#178

Yeah, I'm just trying to show my angle on things. There are things I wanted to say to her and I did. I'm not ashamed of that.

Elubas

Apr 18, 2016

0

#179

"Your comments are a mess and then you feel the need to subject us all to 30 of them a day."

Which you can simply decide not to read. I use up sincere energy writing up ideas, only to be portrayed as someone terrorizing the place. Talk about not tolerating how a person likes to be. Let a person think in peace, goodness gracious. You haven't been posting all that much, but I don't tell you to post more/less. Can you just let people be? I'm really not asking for that much.

Elubas

Apr 18, 2016

0

#180

HueyWilliams wrote:

Elubas wrote:

But it's not exactly an appealing process when I have to repeat myself four times (and be made fun of four times as well) because people won't listen the first time.

Good Lord looby, stop taking yourself so seriously! You're not that important--nobody is. Whenever you get into one of these morose moods of yours you start reminding me of the following quote by Roger Ailes about Nixon: "Let's face it, a lot of people think Nixon is dull. Think he's a bore, a pain in the ass. They look at him as the kind of kid who always carried a bookbag. Who was forty-two years old the day he was born. They figure other kids got footballs for Christmas, Nixon got a briefcase and he loved it. He'd always have his homework done and he'd never let you copy."

So lighten up a bit and stop carrying the weight of the world on your shoulders quite so much.

And honestly, the reason I simply shut off most of those effusions of yours is because they all seem so schoolboyish to me: earnest and logical, and completely unacquainted with the ways of the world. Apparently it hasn't occurred to you (yet) that a lot of the stuff one picks up in the classroom is rather simplistic--even downright silly--and bears little if any resemblance to reality. But I believe you can still come to see that--if you only stop trying to impress the professor quite so damned much.

No see, you're wrong. I'm not trying to "impress the professor." You just can't imagine, apparently, that this could actually be how I want to communicate, how I naturally am. I try to organize my thoughts in a logical way... for my own sake. Because that's how I understand things better. When they are logical. It has nothing to do with impressing others (it doesn't impress others, as you clearly see, so it would be pointless to try).

And people aren't tolerant of that. I'm just trying to think about things, and share what I find; I don't claim to be right, I just share, and discuss, because that's one thing I like to do. And I get these ridiculous accusations from people who can not get through in their head, that people think about things, and write about things, differently. Do I post differently than you? Hmm, maybe that's because I'm a different person, heaven freaking forbid.

So, I guess my style makes a lot people dislike me. I don't enjoy that, but I'm not going to change who I am just because others don't tolerate me. That would be really unfair to me. If I was writing a real thing, I would consider my audience, etc etc. When I'm here, though, yeah, I post in the way I want. I come here to discuss freely. So I don't need to hear lessons about how I should target a chess.com audience -- you're not that important. Trust me, I know that you consider your audience when you write something, but this is chess.com, not a newspaper.