Cane Thumping

[Κracus]

You know... I was going to retort about how you're just devolving into name calling and being dense about this but really, you are the problem. People like you are exactly what's wrong in today's society. You're so sure of yourselves and your bullshit and every time someone comes along and points out how horribly flawed your ideals are you simply ignore what's been said, insult people trying to help you and then bury your head in the sand because you don't want to hear it. Your ego is so frail you can't even stand the idea of having other views on a subject. You and people like you make me sad to be alive today.

[YourGrandpa]

Dude, you haven't and still don't understand how horrifically stupid you sound most of the time (ask other forum posters). Talk about dense. There's no discussing things with you. Instead of acknowledging any kind of plausibility, you insistently argue the extreme contrary with complete disregard. At least I can agree that there are many redeeming aspect of social media and that it's not entirely responsible for the decline of social skills. Furthermore, my ideas aren't flawed. That's your ignorance getting in the way. Speaking to you is incredibly frustrating and unrewarding. The only positive thing I can take away from any conversation with you is the brief moment of pleasure I get from calling you an idiot. And if this so "sad" to you, maybe ending it would be the best thing for everyone forced to deal with you on a daily basis.

Cheers.

[Transient]

Dude, you haven't and still don't understand how horrifically stupid you sound most of the time (ask other forum posters). Talk about dense. There's no discussing things with you. Instead of acknowledging any kind of plausibility, you insistently argue the extreme contrary with complete disregard.

Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others.[1] For example, a person who is habitually intolerant may constantly accuse other people of being intolerant. It incorporates blame shifting.

[YourGrandpa]

Yeah... So you and Kramp-ass should knock that shit off.

[Transient]

I see what you did there.

[YourGrandpa]

Probably not though.

[Eraser]

Get off my lawn!

[YourGrandpa]

You gonna be okay bro?

[Κracus]

Do you have to be the last to reply to everything? You do don't you?

[YourGrandpa]

No. Do you?

[MKJ]

Stop ruining every thread, thanks

[YourGrandpa]

Yeah. All this conversation happens by itself.

Hey people posting here. Stop ruining "every" thread.

K Thanks.

[Transient]

There was the potential for debate, but that chance pretty much went up in smoke when Kracus invoked Godwin's Law and you fell for it.

[YourGrandpa]

Who fell for what?

[Whiskey 7]

I'd never heard of Godwin's Law.

Urban Dictionary: Godwin's Law
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define. ... %27s%20Law

A term that originated on Usenet, Godwin's Law states that as an online argument grows longer and more heated, it becomes increasingly likely that somebody will bring up Adolf Hitler or the Nazis. When such an event occurs, the person guilty of invoking Godwin's Law has effectively forfieted the argument.

[Transient]

Who fell for what?

He got to you. You guys are bickering over a point of view neither of you are going to change. Debating it is one thing, but you're just pushing each other's buttons.

[MKJ]

Yeah. All this conversation happens by itself.

Hey people posting here. Stop ruining "every" thread.

K Thanks.

I don't care about pigheaded discussions. However endless namecalling and "no u" back and forths are not conversations and are indeed 'ruining' threads.
I don't care who starts them, just don't contribute to it.

[YourGrandpa]

Who fell for what?

He got to you.

As if. LOL.

[YourGrandpa]

I don't care about pigheaded discussions. However endless namecalling and "no u" back and forths are not conversations and are indeed 'ruining' threads.
I don't care who starts them, just don't contribute to it.

You want cooperation? Don't single people out. Especially if there are other contributors. Address the group and make your request. Otherwise, what you're doing is unfair, bias and not applicable to all. Therefore not applicable to anyone.

[MKJ]

You are right, I shouldn't single anyone out. Which is why I didn't quote anyone specific in my first post.

We can argue semantics all day - which I'm not going to - but the point still stands. So to all: either stop it or take it to the Void. Thank you.

[Κracus]

There was the potential for debate, but that chance pretty much went up in smoke when Kracus invoked Godwin's Law and you fell for it.

I wouldn't say I invoked Godwins law in this case, it was a joke, not meant as an argument. The rest of my discussion however where I tried to show Gwamps how technology isn't the problem here is my actual argument. I really do believe technology helps people to stay in touch with others rather than the opposite which is what Gwamps is suggesting. I may be pushing Gwamps buttons but that's like impossible to not do when someone absolutely refuses to look at the holes in their own argument. Social media helps people meet others, water is wet. This isn't my opinion these are facts that gwamps disagrees with so there's no debating that with him until he pulls his head out of the sand.

[YourGrandpa]

You're doing it again and you don't even see it... I NEVER said technology was "the" problem. I NEVER said technology doesn't help people communicate. I can acknowledge that social media and the internet have plenty of redeeming qualities. If used properly and in moderation or conjunction with actual personal/physical interactions they can only complement one another. But when you have people who live the majority of their life interacting with others virtually, you can only expect problems when the virtual element is removed. And that's what is happening in this world of instant gratification as more and more aspects of every day existence can be fulfilled by technology. People lose their ability and patience to participate in what should be normal human interactions. This is clearly more prevalent in younger people as they have less experience or reference to what it's like to do something without their cell phone/internet.

[Transient]

That doesn't turn people into mass murderers, though.

[YourGrandpa]

Certainly not every person. But there are people being desensitized to the value of human life due to diminishing interaction.

[Transient]

Was there a spike in murders after radio was invented? How about TV? Did we get more mass killers after people stopped being hunter-gatherers and started living in houses?