0.1% guys hold 50% Bitcoins, that's too CENTRALIZED!

[Anonymous]

It's just a word that can take on various meanings.

The chief use is as an insult based on negative connotations of homosexual sexual orientation.  Used as an insult, as you just used it, that is pretty much the only meaning.  I know you're a kid so you think using bigoted speech that hurts people is edgy and cool, but it isn't, it just makes you sound tasteless and hateful.

It was a word used in sarcastic parody.

If people are hurt by words from random people on the internet, they probably have low self-esteem. They don't need my acceptance to be happy.  

It was neither sarcastic or parody, it was a petulant insult at the end of a post in which a child was losing his temper.  Insults are intended to hurt and express derision, there is no other reason to use them.  If you don't think they will be effective, don't pollute the friendly dialogue of the thread with your bigoted speech.

How do you explain the fact that I agreed with everything evoorhees said? I don't insult people, Rarity, Haha.

[1714017462]

1714017462

[1714017462]

1714017462

[1714017462]

1714017462

[1714017462]

1714017462

[1714017462]

1714017462

[1714017462]

1714017462

[Rassah]

So you're telling me you hate poor people because you like to be entitled to your full value? Faggot.

 -.-

Where's the icon for silently staring in passive-agressive judgement?

[Anonymous]

Look, I have nothing against homosexuals.

It's a word guys. A mixture of symbols. It's only meaning is the intended one. It's a general open-ended insult.

[tysat]

Look, I have nothing against homosexuals.

It's a word guys. A mixture of symbols. It's only meaning is the intended one. It's a general open-ended insult.

I'll agree with you that it doesn't matter, and I don't think gay people should take offense.  South Park put it best when they did an episode talking about calling all the motorcycle riders that roll around town for no reason fags.

But I will say it makes you sound 15 when you use it as a closing statement on the internet.

[Rarity]

^ I think you will find that this episode was not generally well received by large numbers of people in the gay community.  The show is great but definitely should not be used as a guide for how to handle these issues, they have a really mixed record on discussing transgender issues as well.

Look, I have nothing against homosexuals.

It's a word guys. A mixture of symbols. It's only meaning is the intended one. It's a general open-ended insult.

No, it has specific meaning when used as an insult.  It disparages homosexuals.  Stop defending your slur and grow up.

[Anonymous]

Look, I have nothing against homosexuals.

It's a word guys. A mixture of symbols. It's only meaning is the intended one. It's a general open-ended insult.

But I will say it makes you sound 15 when you use it as a closing statement on the internet.

Good because it was a parody that was supposed to mimic a lower intelligence. I'm glad I met my objective.

[tysat]

^ I think you will find that this episode was not generally well received by large numbers of people in the gay community.  The show is great but definitely should not be used as a guide for how to handle these issues, they have a really mixed record on discussing transgender issues as well.

I think you will find that most of their episodes that are about a specific nationality/religion/sexuality/fanboy/etc are not received well by the people in that community.

[Rarity]

^ I think you will find that this episode was not generally well received by large numbers of people in the gay community.  The show is great but definitely should not be used as a guide for how to handle these issues, they have a really mixed record on discussing transgender issues as well.

I think you will find that most of their episodes that are about a specific nationality/religion/sexuality/fanboy/etc are not received well by the people in that community.

Right, which is why you don't use them to inform your opinion on what words are appropriate to use in regards to disadvantaged groups.  The Catholic episodes hit home for me as a former Catholic and they are slightly offensive, but Catholics are not a group that routinely are legally and socially discriminated against so you don't really have to be so careful in how you talk about them.

[Rassah]

Look, I have nothing against homosexuals.

It's a word guys. A mixture of symbols. It's only meaning is the intended one. It's a general open-ended insult.

I wasn't offended. It just made my respect for you drop a lot, and that made me sad 

[Rarity]

It was neither sarcastic or parody

Of course it was. Anyone who has read his posts can see that.

I understand he was setting up a strawman in the post in question but the insult itself was used entirely seriously, this is why he is defending the use of it.  Those who don't consider it legitimately insulting don't use it in a strawman of their opponents.  

I could easily create a strawman of Immanuel that spouts off racial slurs, but it is still an entirely serious use of the slurs by me, not the imaginary opponent.

[tysat]

I think everyone just needs to calm down, if he wants to sound dumb in his posts it's his right to do that.

[evoorhees]

The end game of your race for efficiency leaves us all making a dollar an hour in miserable conditions while the richest few hoard the lion's share of the wealth.

That statement is as wrong as if I said up were down, or that ice were hotter than fire, or that 1+1=3

Efficiency enables the production of material wealth at lower material cost. By so doing, more goods are available at lower marginal expense than otherwise. What used to require a pair of hands to work two days, now requires but one day, and tomorrow will merely require a machine, enabling the hands to seek more productive use elsewhere. Notice that your own hands no longer till fields for 12 hours a day merely to keep you fed. You now likely work only 5 days per week, perhaps 8 hours per day, and even so have an income that enables enjoyments far beyond food. Do you not ponder where such advances come from?

The "race for efficiency" is why you and I have computers on which to type messages to each other. It's why we have cars. It's why the poorest people in America have air conditioning and television, when only 100 years ago even the richest were not able to enjoy such luxury.

With so much antagonism toward a "race for efficiency" - do you advocate instead a race for inefficiency? Such a prescription leads to impoverishment, is that not clear to you? You say you care about the worker... yet you prescribe him poison.

Not only is your philosophy economic folly, it is immoral... for as bad as it would be to use violent force to enrich people, it is certainly worse to advocate using force to impoverish them.

[Rarity]

I think everyone just needs to calm down, if he wants to sound dumb in his posts it's his right to do that.

He sounds dumb in most of his posts, I would never take that away from him, but it's better if he does it without tossing in the hate speech too.

-

You now likely work only 5 days per week, perhaps 8 hours per day, and even so have an income that enables enjoyments far beyond food. Do you not ponder where such advances come from?

[evoorhees]

Free market is like communism, it exists only in words.

Wrong. The free market is quite real... it's merely the aggregate of all voluntary exchanges which are not interfered with through violence. Unfortunately, it is under constant encroachment.

[tysat]

I think everyone just needs to calm down, if he wants to sound dumb in his posts it's his right to do that.

He sounds dumb in most of his posts, I would never take that away from him, but it's better if he does it without tossing in the hate speech too.

Hate speech and using a slur once are far different things.

[Rarity]

I think everyone just needs to calm down, if he wants to sound dumb in his posts it's his right to do that.

He sounds dumb in most of his posts, I would never take that away from him, but it's better if he does it without tossing in the hate speech too.

Hate speech and using a slur once are far different things.

You are free to define it however you want, but I don't think that frequency is usually part of the definition.

Hate speech is, outside the law, any communication that disparages a person or a group on the basis of some characteristic such as race, color, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, nationality, religion, or other characteristic.[

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech

hate speech
 
— n
speech disparaging a racial, sexual, or ethnic group or a member of such a group

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hate+speech

[evoorhees]

Hmmmm so productivity has increased, yet inflation-adjusted income has remained flat. Perhaps that means non-inflation adjusted income has risen, and perhaps that means the inflation tax is where you should channel your antagonism - toward the money printing that is robbing families without them knowing, instead of toward the corporations employing people toward productive ends.

[Rarity]

Hmmmm so productivity has increased, yet inflation-adjusted income has remained flat. Perhaps that means non-inflation adjusted income has risen, and perhaps that means the inflation tax is where you should channel your antagonism - toward the money printing that is robbing families without them knowing, instead of toward the corporations employing people toward productive ends.

I do put a large part of the blame there.  That's why I love Bitcoin, once we stop printing the wealthy will no longer be able to unfairly perpetuate their advantages and more rewards for productivity will go where they belong.  As the 53% movement proves, people are working multiple jobs and still not having the full benefits one should expect for that amount of work.  They put the blame for that in different places than the 99% folks, but we are all in agreement it is a problem. 

[bitleaker]

We all live off our own labor.

Don't you live off of your parent's labor?

[evoorhees]

Hmmmm so productivity has increased, yet inflation-adjusted income has remained flat. Perhaps that means non-inflation adjusted income has risen, and perhaps that means the inflation tax is where you should channel your antagonism - toward the money printing that is robbing families without them knowing, instead of toward the corporations employing people toward productive ends.

I do put a large part of the blame there.  That's why I love Bitcoin, once we stop printing the wealthy will no longer be able to unfairly perpetuate their advantages and more rewards for productivity will go where they belong.  As the 53% movement proves, people are working multiple jobs and still not having the full benefits one should expect for that amount of work.  They put the blame for that in different places than the 99% folks, but we are all in agreement it is a problem. 

Good! But again, anger at "the wealthy" is not correctly targeted. The wealthy are not inflating anything. It's the central banks (The Fed in the US), the politicians who permit it, and the public who votes for those politicians (poor and rich alike). Those are the valid targets of ire.