 | Entrance | Mainstuff | Wiki | Register |
|
# of watchers: 58
| D20: 4 |
| Wiki-page rating |  Stumble! |
| Informative: | 1 |
| Artistic: | 1 |
| Funny-rating: | 1 |
| Friendly: | 2 |
2011-10-24 [Morgoth]: *also flies in space*... *and wasps, and bees, and a butterfly, and even pigs in space*...
2011-10-24 [GlassCasket]: *walks in casually as though i was never in the soup* anyone see an android around here? Looks like this guy *puts picture frame around face*
2011-10-24 [Morgoth]: Nope, no androids. We did find a couple of iphones though, but we threw them out.
2011-10-24 [GlassCasket]: Basterdo la Iphone!
Looks like i need a spoon >.>
2011-10-24 [GlassCasket]: *collects thousands of spoons, big and small8 Alright spoon platoon, MOVE OUT!!! *spoons all fall over* DAMMIT!
2011-10-24 [Stephen]: Iframe the ET Diner -- that's actually a really good idea. o3o
You should make the iframe bigger, though.
2011-10-25 [lex!!~land]: DID YOU HEAR THAT? its... nothing. how captivating.
2011-10-25 [Morgoth]: So, waddaya think? :D
2011-10-25 [Greg Universe]: -rips the jars off the shelf and points at a random person, which would be [VIX]- GET IN THE KICTHEN AND MAKE ME A SAMMICH, WENCH! -slaps them with a studded glove-
2011-10-25 [Morgoth]: -rips the pants off his legs and "points" at a random person, which would be Vapor Rub- GET IN THE KITCHEN AND SAMMICH MY WRENCH! -slaps them with his "studded love"-
2011-10-25 [Stephen]: Oh my.
/uses BD to surf Elftown now
2011-10-25 [Greg Universe]: <3 Mort. Just sayin'.
2011-10-25 [Sicarius]: ...*nonchalant
2011-10-25 [Nekko fox]: Hey, no using the words scuttling and skittering in the same sentence.
*Pounds nails into things to hold up signs saying "Babies are people too, that grow into people, so abort people who are big babies*
2011-10-25 [Morgoth]: *notices the nails sticking in his spine*... *shrugs and continues eating ramen*...
2011-10-25 [Nekko fox]: *Hammers nails into the ramen to hold up the sign that says "BEWARE OF SPINE NAILS, LEADING CAUSE OF FUCKS-GIVEN WORLDWIDE"*
2011-10-25 [Sicarius]: ...already did...*continu
2011-10-25 [GlassCasket]: HAMMER TIME!
2011-10-25 [Greg Universe]: -said hammer proceeds to slap [GlassCasket] with Mort's "studded love" and leave, rambling about how it's his only day off and he has to deal with this bullshit-
2011-10-25 [GlassCasket]: *eats the whiney hammer*
2011-10-25 [Master Sifu]: My Blood Sugar is low. Gimme some sugar baby. And make it sloppy and spicy.
2011-10-25 [Greg Universe]: -pours lemon juice in [Master Sifu]'s eyes- Sorry. All we have left is my freshly squeezed Lemon Juice. Now 50% Mort's "studded love" juice.
2011-10-25 [Nekko fox]: *Looks up from his bowl of Sugar and Diabetus Brand Cereal, settled in front of a crate of similar branded cereals*
2011-10-26 [Sicarius]: *glances up to take in scene*...*goes back to reading*
2011-10-26 [Fruit Loops]: script errors out the wazoo... saying for veoh using IE :( dont hate me because im lazy lol
2011-10-26 [Sicarius]: ...*looks up from book, voice having a bored tone*...sooo can I just hate you for existing then? *waves hand dismissively*.
2011-10-26 [Schlachter]: poor use of iframes... why don't you try harder; but this time, use cookies... take some free info from the people visiting your diner. it only seems suitable that you know who's coming to your diner... probably mostly horny 50 year olds looking for some young teens with no direction in life.
2011-10-26 [Morgoth]: That first iframe serves a very specific purpose.
And yes, that is the target demographic we're shooting for here.
2011-10-26 [Schlachter]: Well, its not serving that purpose. I'm not 50 or horny. So get working...
2011-10-26 [Morgoth]: Give it time!
2011-10-26 [Fruit Loops]: maybe its not so much lazy as stubborn i like my IE i also like to hate it :) its a healthy relationship. But love the idea of the two diners being connected :D
2011-10-27 [Schlachter]: Hah... you expect it to work itself out???
2011-10-27 [Sicarius]: *reaches down while still engrossed in book to pick up random porn magazine*...he
2011-10-27 [Schlachter]: ...and you expect THIS to fix the diner???
Heh, why do you keep that crap around anyways... no wonder it's raining pedos and pervs here.
2011-10-27 [Sicarius]: ...*looks up from book, slight annoyed expression on face*...I can't help that the little buggers get in here...or the infestation of those wretched rags has gotten worse with the passage of time...you merely pointed out that you did not fit the criteria of the targeted demographic...
2011-10-27 [Morgoth]: Hey! We pedos and pervs have feelings too. Sexy feelings. In our pants.
2011-10-27 [Sicarius]: *hands [Morgoth] a copy of Molting Monthly* You seem like the type to go for disgusting bugs going at it...here...*g
2011-10-27 [Schlachter]: You can't help it... that's all you have to say? You're all hyped up about guards abusing you and don't want to do unto others as they have done to you?
2011-10-27 [Morgoth]: I already have this issue. You seen the one from March? Damn, that centerfold had a sweet thorax!
2011-10-27 [Schlachter]: Feelings are irrelevant and irrelevance is the only point of a feeling. Some thoughts were designed to remain EXACTLY from whence they originated. Thank you for your consideration to others.
2011-10-27 [Sicarius]: ...*blinks*...
2011-10-27 [Schlachter]: Well your wonderful wiki was threatned to be shutdown...
Why are you encouraging him???
2011-10-27 [Sicarius]: *blinks*...a veritable fountain of information this one is...*nods solemnly to book*...as for encouraging him...well...i
2011-10-27 [Schlachter]: who? well obviously no one!
so you would not have a problem encouraging a harmless pedo or perv?
2011-10-27 [Morgoth]: I think most pedos are pervs, so a nice 'and/or' may suffice in this situation, rather than just an 'or'.
2011-10-27 [Foxyvixen17]: *peeks from my hiden cove* um...... i aint a pedo but i have been told for a virgin i have the dirtiest mind in town
2011-10-27 [Schlachter]: Unless ALL pedos are pervs, then the "and/or" would be incorrect. Could you be a pedo and not a perv... yes.
2011-10-27 [Schlachter]: ...and a dirty mind these days results in being a perv?
I wouldn't challenge your claim to virginity, but I fail to see how it is relevant to the discussion...
2011-10-27 [Morgoth]: No, IF ALL pedos were pervs, then the 'and/or' would be incorrect, because it would be understood that pedos=pervs and also that not all pervs are pedos. It would be redundant to use 'and/or' in that situation. So, a simple 'or' would work just fine. But, since only most pedos are pervs (presumably), an 'and/or' is the appropriate choice, because it covers pervy pedos, regular pedos, and regular pervs, rather than only regular pervs and regular pedos.
2011-10-27 [Stephen]: Pedobear! :D
2011-10-27 [Stephen]: @[Schlachter]: I encourage Mort. I'm also the one who restored Bob's Diner to him. While I don't encourage people to troll and harass anyone, I do encourage people to have fun and mess around. There's a line, and if you cross it we smack you, but by no means do we expect people to be serious sticks in the mud.
Alllsssoo, the demographic for people in their mid-teens to mid-twenties tends to be horny, so it comes with the territory. :3
2011-10-27 [Schlachter]: Ok, logic failure (also and/or does NOT imply equivalence -- where you fished that from is beyond me, seems like pedo fail-logic):
if a perv is NOT a pedo, you SHOULD NOT use "and/or" PERIOD. There is NO "and/or" unless you wish to imply that a perv is a subclass of pedo (which doesn't make any sense at all). That will imply:
perv and or or pedo -- which essentially legalizes the fact that a perv and pedo will be true under the same circumstances -- thus by Occam's Razor, we pick the "or" only. Unless you want an exclusive-or, or a exclusive-not-
perv | pedo | perv and pedo | perv and or or pedo | perv or pedo |
false| false| false | false | false |
true | false| false | true | true |
false| true | false | true | true |
true | true | true | true | true |
Polish your logic before trying to talk it... it's despicable to see people misuse it.
2011-10-27 [Schlachter]: @[Stephen]: heh figures. authority will remain authority until it is no longer attributed that trait -- even though authority rarely understands why it is so.
By "encourag[ ing ] people to have fun and mess around" and in which case some of these people may be pervs or pedos (note the OR and not the AND/OR), you are giving a habitat for the latter two. in which case you should only smack yourself (so go ahead and do it -- more than once preferably -- and acknowledge receipt of doing so) because crossing the line (which is being done as we speak) is part of the nature of being either or both of the two -- and thus should be expected.
Were all human -- that doesn't mean we shouldn't control ourselves; in fact that should be mandatory.
2011-10-27 [Nekko fox]: I hear a whole lot of whining and blathering, but I don't see anyone making that loli-malt that the table of non-pedo's and non-perv's order eight minutes ago.
*He grabs several girls from their respective families, drags them into the kitchen screaming, and dumps them into a blender, adding shaved Chris Hanson for texture as well as flavoring*
*He then dumps it out and reads a book. He doesn't work here, why should he care?*
*He realizes he does work there and for a moment, it dawns on him that...he forgot how to read*
OH SWEET GOD! WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME? ALL I WANTED TO DO WAS READ MY BOOK!
*He drops the Voynich Manuscript and carries on with whatever duties his job implies he needs to do, mostly not caring and blending innocent children into non-pedophile-
2011-10-27 [Morgoth]: "so you would not have a problem encouraging a harmless pedo or perv?"
This sentence implies that the subject can only be a pedo or a perv, but not both, since not all pedos are necessarily pervs and not all pervs are pedos. But what if 'a' here refers to a pervy pedo? Then we would need to concatenate the two with, "a harmless pedo and perv." However, since the subject isn't specified here, we need to allow for both alternatives, which can simply be done with an 'and/or'. And or or allows for both someone who is a pedo and perv and someone who is one or the other, instead of only the latter. 'And/or' doesn't imply that a perv is a subclass of pedo, but it merely means there's a possibility that the subject falls under both categories. *sips his loli-malt*
2011-10-27 [Nekko fox]: Mort, that loli-malt is more of a jailbait malt, actually. We made that for table eight-hundred forty six.
*No such table exists*
Hey, fuck you asterisk-surro
*Make me bitch!*
Oh that is IT!
*BRING IT!*
-Nekko and the asterisk-surro
Hey, the dash-surrounde
*Oh fuck no! Let's get him!*
♂☻Shit goes down yo☻♂
2011-10-27 [Stephen]: @[Schlachter]: I didn't bother to read the past comments that were pushed out of the page, but from what I've seen no one has broken a rule. Mort's free to debate over pointless topics to his heart's desire (he's quite versed in it), and you're free to call him an idiot over and over. Unless someone deliberately goes out of their way to make another member(s) unhappy, then there's nothing wrong being done. From the short bit that I've skimmed, he's saying that being a pedophile does not instantly make someone a pervert, which makes sense. He's not encouraging much of anything, other than perhaps a debate. There's a difference between this and blatantly disrespecting people/authori
Hm, this should be like the /b/ of Elfpack, I suppose.
2011-10-27 [GlassCasket]: Damn what smells like butthurt in here? *looks around sniffing* Oh [Schlachter] is the source!
2011-10-27 [Morgoth]: HEY, YOU GUYS STOP MAKING FUN OF SCHLACHTER. HE'S MY BEST FRIEND.
2011-10-27 [Stephen]: But, don't be too mean. :P
He's entitled to his opinion and to argue it. ;)
2011-10-27 [GlassCasket]: Sorry mort. So ten virgin children this time right?
2011-10-27 [GlassCasket]: Even if he loses? :OHot damn imma argue ALL THE THINGS!!!
2011-10-27 [Schlachter]: Wow... this place becomes a zoo as soon as no one monitors the damn place. Seems like people don't have better things to do while I'm not logged on for the few minutes a day I can manage to.
@[Morgoth]:
I'm a logician by trade (one of the few left by the way because people love to NOT make sense -- though I can respect that, I still require some logic in the communication protocol)...
The "or" function is defined as ONLY being false when ALL inputs are false -- which is not the case BOTH logically AND grammatically. As much as you hate to be wrong, sipping on your nonsensely-non
Friendship need be earned and your morals are VERY questionnable. I can't be insulted unless that which is told has truth to it.
2011-10-27 [Nekko fox]: Hey, starting fee is eleven children, two babies and a cumdumpster and don't act like you don't know already!
That's the cost of Mort's friendship! That and homebrewed ale.
2011-10-27 [GlassCasket]: xD that's funny because if you were a logician then you wouldn't be having an irrelevant argument on the internet. What is the logical point of that?
2011-10-27 [Master Sifu]: *smells spoon and passes out.*
2011-10-27 [GlassCasket]: HAH i knew they'd come through for me!!
*takes advantage of [Master Sifu] sexually*
2011-10-27 [Nekko fox]: *Drags [Master Sifu] away*
NO! MINE!
*Rigs [Master Sifu] up like a marionette and makes them dance a jig*
2011-10-27 [Schlachter]: @[GlassCasket]: Are you shallow enough [ mentally and otherwise ] to have not exhausted the logical possibility that I may be inquiring about how illogical people are?
2011-10-27 [Nekko fox]: If you are asking if people are shallow here at Bob's Diner, you are obviously unfamiliar with the clientele of Bob's Diner.
And Mort.
Mostly just Mort.
Mort's Clientele.
Also, /b/.
2011-10-27 [GlassCasket]: Look bud if you want to argue about something then do not insult your opponent. Your just making yourself look bad. Now let me try this again, IF you were a logician as you claim then you would not be getting upset enough to call me shallow. Now if you want to attempt to prove to me and the rest of the viewers here that you know what your talking about, do so, but do not insult people as you do it.
Your sitting there saying you are a logician and saying you think emotions are worthless but your not comprehending what i am saying so i will break it down. Logicians do not spend their time pondering or investigating illogical causes. You cannot determine why people are illogical so it is a lost cause. IF you were a logician then you would be pondering something that has a possibility to be solved.
2011-10-27 [Schlachter]: I have many questions, and for as long as "self-serve" this diner remains, so will I.
2011-10-27 [Master Sifu]: *Wakes up.*
Hey my asshole hurts. And why is there spaghetti tied around my ankles and wrists?
2011-10-27 [Schlachter]: @[GlassCasket]: I did not insult you nor did I get upset. You made and assumption (and still are), so I asked a question as to why as I did not make any claim to bring up these assumptions. It's like responding to the following question:
"How many oranges are there in the basket?"
with:
"So why the hell is there tofu in my refrigerator?"
I do not need to prove anything to anyone. That is a clear misconception. If I do, it is as a favor so that communication may continue in a progressive direction.
When did I say emotions were worthless? You may want to quote when you want to put words in peoples mouths. You look less like [Morgoth] that way.
You clearly have never met a logician in your life. Logicians spend time MAKING things logical. If everything made sense, we would have no purpose.
2011-10-27 [GlassCasket]: xD THATS your response? Captain Almighty Intelligent Self Gloryifing Hybrid of God? BAHAHAHAHA This proves either how terribly illogical you are or how goddamn awesome i am. Or both? I don't really care a but if you can't come up with anything better than that then you're going to have a lot of trouble proving yourself.
2011-10-27 [Nekko fox]: THE SPAGHETTI IS YOUR FRIEND SIFU!
To Schlachter, simple rule of the internet.
You're a logician? Pics or it didn't happen.
*Sets fire to GlassCasket because the temperature in the overcrowded Diner was falling a few degrees because some asshole opened a window. Or someone died.*
2011-10-27 [Master Sifu]: It must be a sign from the FSM.
2011-10-27 [Schlachter]: @[Nekko fox]:
SimplEST rule of the internet: there are no rules (and yes, thats a BLATANT contradiction).
Why? Because I understand how the net works better than you.
How? You want to take it, great (I mean, analyzing the way I argue and speak, it's blatant that I have a rich logical academic background). You want a proof? Make it worth my while, my time ticks... yours? Who knows, maybe you don't have a purpose for it.
2011-10-27 [GlassCasket]: xD i'm not going to waste my time running back and forth to quote you if you can't remember what you said. You have everything to prove and if you can't see that then your as blind as my pet hamster! You clearly have no concept of what logic is. Keep trying to act smart buddy but to be honest we all know that your just some chubby kid trying to provoke people on the internet because you have nothing better to do than that. You cannot make something that is as illogical as people into something logical because people are not logically beings. We do not thrive on logic, we thrive on knowledge and wisdom. We use that knowledge and wisdom to better act upon our emotions, which are also illogical. Pondering humanity is pointless because you will NEVER find logic in it.
2011-10-27 [Nekko fox]: Well Schlachter, if you won't follow the basic rule of "Pics or it didn't happen", I guess we all can call bullshit on your logician claim and there won't be a means for you to prove otherwise. But hey, it's not like we care here or anything.
Because I don't. I'm here for the free pedo's who aren't pervs.
2011-10-27 [GlassCasket]: Meanwhile i'll continue being awesome. To be honest i am not sure why i am even arguing with you xD Psst...I bet the reason he used blatant so much is because he just learned that word.
Aside from the fact that i am more awesome than you i could beat you up and in the end that is all that matters :D
2011-10-27 [GlassCasket]: I'm here for the pervs...Maybe a little pedo ;D
2011-10-27 [Nekko fox]: Delicious pervs....who are most certainly not pedos.
2011-10-27 [Nekko fox]: *Basks in GlassCasket's glorious, radiant awesome....mmm
2011-10-27 [Schlachter]: @[GlassCasket]: Yes, don't. I remember exactly what I said. You didn't because it goes right through you. Your pet hamster could likely avoid an owl during daytime... you couldn't see it coming from miles should you be that size.
I have nothing to prove. You are simply paranoid. The cases in which I would be lying or not correct are VERY statistically obscure.
Uhh, this is hilarious. Ok ok ok, I'll humour you, what is logic? LOL man this is worth it. Let's see how bad you can fail while trying to cough up some form of the incompleteness theorems' rules.
All of science is trying to make that which is illogical... logical. You really are proving something LOL... keep going. I know a fool when I meet one, but he will never find it out himself -- you are confirming my theorem lol, thanks.
You contradicted yourself in your own message. This is grand.
2011-10-27 [GlassCasket]: sharing is caring :D
2011-10-27 [GlassCasket]: Look kid, come see me when your balls drop, I'm done with this argument. There is no point to it if you won't consider what i am saying. Aside from the fact that i win at everything i do i could probably hurt you. Badly. The fact that you argue with your personal sense of logic shows that your cocky when you really don't have a right to be. I could break you and as previously stated thats all that really matters in the end :D If you can't move your jaw then you can't argue with anyone. Therefore i'm done here. *humps Nekko*
2011-10-27 [Schlachter]: @[Nekko fox]: everyone is free to their own opinions and conclusions... for they are like assholes -- everyone has one. If you don't want to believe me, that is your problem. I have publications to my name which I CLEARLY would not give you the honor of reading without a fee like the rest of the academic world... but there are many other reasons as to why I wouldn't want to TEACH you how to think intelligently. It doesn't seem like you could tell intelligence from non-intelligen
@[GlassCasket]: no, it's just one of the more powerful english words -- other languages have richer vocabs, so I would use something else should we change the language. Obvious is not such a nice replacement...
2011-10-27 [Schlachter]: @[GlassCasket]: balls don't drop, "kid". I'm older than you by a long shot... I'm not just implying physically.
Hahaha... I am considering what you're saying, I just asked you for your *gasp* opinion *gasp*. I am TOTALLY all ears... or eyes as I have to read. Ok ok, I'll back down on you and let you lick your wounds a bit, I understand I hurt your ego, yes?
By the way, it seems you were threatning me physically. If you want my address, just ask... I'd be more than glad to send you to the hospital on the basis of "idiot stalking me" -- it has been done before with others much bigger, dumber/smarter and self-conceited then you so don't be shy. Not to mention, a fat thing like yourself should be a little more careful as to threaten a full-blown adult with a mind like mine. You shouldn't threaten people you don't know very well... you should know by now that those stories NEVER end well (and you will rarely win -- but there's a first for everything right :)
2011-10-27 [GlassCasket]: xD why are you on EP if your so awesome and amazing and famous? Shouldn't you be arguing on some site for crazy overly-intelli
2011-10-27 [Master Sifu]: *Orders troll with potatoes and gravy.*
*Dumps moldy ketchup on it.*
Ooh needs some spice.
2011-10-27 [GlassCasket]: [Master Sifu] if you want some spices just ise the cheese grater the jewish orphans!
2011-10-27 [Master Sifu]: *Everyone in the room removes their prosthetic limbs and organs and pass them to [GlassCasket].*
Now You've got plenty of amunition.
2011-10-27 [GlassCasket]: FUCK YEAH!!! *prepares the limb cannon*
2011-10-27 [Master Sifu]: Duck and cover.
2011-10-27 [Schlachter]: @[GlassCasket]: "the crazy intelligent people" have become stupid. I never said I was famous. So I'm seeking sentience in the least likely places.
I have hands and a brain... so for you I guess that would be a real challenge -- possibly an impossible one. But I only need to worry about that provided someone could actually break my jaw -- and in 25 years, that hasn't happened. Yet, your fat-jesty claims they could accomplish that? LOL do you seriously want to go through with this? I could make another meatbag on sticks lol, just, come over here will ya?
2011-10-27 [Morgoth]: The 'and/or' in this particular case would serve as a logical disjunction, while a simple 'or' would be an exclusive disjunction. The non-mathematic
2011-10-27 [Morgoth]: ...evidently, you people typed a lot of comments that I didn't read before posting, so my comment may or may not be valid anymore. But, thanks to denial, I'm sure it is, I'm right, and I've already won this debate/friendl
2011-10-28 [Sicarius]: ...*sighs*...s
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: @[Morgoth]: how would you like to be hung drawn and quartered?
OR in almost every popular, grammatical and logical definition is defined as I had defined it. An EXOR is a SPECIAL function denoted as an O with a cross inside.
Yes, finally some sense: the "and/or" would then be equivalent to the "or"... thus why write "and/or"? Oh wait, didn't you JUST contradict yourself? If OR is like EXOR, you wouldn't get the truth table I demonstrated. You just bit your own tail. Your argument is finished unless you can provide more evidence -- which you can't. So try another direction in the statements -- try your logic... erm *COUGHS* luck... that way.
2011-10-28 [Sicarius]: ...so...the pissing match is not quite over...*talks as though talking to self, tone just as bored as before*...funn
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: @[Sicarius]: as fathomable as it sounds, yes there is a purpose -- on my end... I'm not so sure about your dead penguin though... if he's even yours. Don't you know its bad to keep such pets?
Well, next time you find an idiot who will just stand there and take your golf club -- or whatever other instrument you want to mention -- without moving, PLEASE let me know IMMEDIATELY! Besides, its a lot quicker to just shoot the people and you will get the exact same jail sentence with less than half the drama... though were you implying you have the experience?
Well, then I suppose with your statement regarding stupidity, you are also generalizing about yourself then?
You are also generalizing about stupidity in general... without stupidity, you cannot define intelligence. So you may want to reweight your axioms, and change the tune XD
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: @[Sicarius]: I'm not done playing yoyo with your/the penguin. For as long as he thinks he can win, I will be interested to hear the argument he has to put forward... if it even is an argument. When it boils down to "well, you're just a fat bloated idiot with christmas lights up your ass far enough to create a modern disco ball when you speak" on his side, then we have a conclusion lol. I have been wrong before, but I'm afraid this case is just a deja-vu... but then again, your/the penguin is quite versed in bullshit, so I can't be sure.
2011-10-28 [Sicarius]: *sets down book for a moment, quirking an eyebrow*...I do not keep such pets as penguins, and I assure you, my last name is not Popper...Nay, I keep pigs...of the guinea variety...I find them to be of fairly decent intelligence, if a little more chatty than I prefer...and they are most excellent disposers of unwanted literature...A
As for my previous statement regarding stupidity, you suppose correctly. I do not think so highly of myself as to believe I am above behaving in a matter others would deem assinine...and I find your statement about defining intelligence to be quite correct...I only wish I'd thought of it first...
Regarding the penguin (I really wanted to capitalize that), at least it isn't elephant shit, yes? *picks up tome once more and begins to diligently read once more*
2011-10-28 [Morgoth]: Why use 'and/or' instead of simply 'or' if they technically mean the same? Well, for one, you're just a fat bloated idiot with christmas lights up your ass far enough to create a modern disco ball when you speak, but also, it's more of a clarification issue here. 'and/or' is the better alternative, because it's clearer and, as opposed to your use of 'or', it doesn't typically result in long winded debates. But, even if you did mean 'or' in the same sense as 'and/or' and not 'either or', which your sentence implied, it still wouldn't be the better option, because not everyone is as well versed in truth tables as myself and, to a lesser extent, you.
So, yes, 'and/or' is the equivalent of 'or', but only 'or' in the mathematical sense. 'or', as you used it, implies that 'a' can be either a 'pedo' or a 'perv' but not a 'pedo' and a 'perv'. Like when someone says, "Yo, gimme a latte or a bag of dog blood," the waiter is going to bring him either a latte or a bag of dog blood (or neither), but not both or a combination of both. The 'or' used there, as well as in your sentence, is an understood 'either or'. This fits the description of an exclusive disjunction, as I stated earlier. 'and/or', on the other hand, gets the mathematical value of just 'or', whereas 'or' gets the value of 'either or'. So yeah, they'd mean the same... if everyone thought in terms of truth tables. But, they (and by they, I mean [Stephen]'s mom) don't typically think in such terms.
2011-10-28 [Nekko fox]: *Applauds [Morgoth], but mostly because he has nothing better to do with his hands. He'd already read of enough of the false-logician
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: @[Morgoth]: so I see you found the cat you let out of the bag (shame on you for tying it in there) and are now petting it.
How is it better if you have to think? The "or" is well-defined and almost instinctive and natural -- there is no syntacting complication at the speech-to-thou
The debate was of your genius I'm afraid... I just caught onto the idea that you couldn't possibly be more wrong to start and argument over it... but then I was wrong, because not only did you do that, but you tried to argue it in vain -- and still are hopelessly trying to.
OK also more points "and/or" is NOT "and or", "either or" is longhand exor. Should we ever decide to go with your definitions in language (or really anything I'm convinced now) we would still be cavemen due to the lack of lo... no even they would have more technology then we would; I retract that... you reek contradiction and it seems your partner in nonsense [Nekko fox] is also supporting your lost cause fullheartedly -- maybe because he also got a dent to his ego and wants to get back at me for it.
How is it "understood" that an "or" is an "either or"? You are just trying to weasel yourself out of defeat by conveniently changing the premises AND definitions.
Second, what does [Stephen]'s mom have anything to do with this? I'm sure she's a nice, dignified and respectable woman, like all our moms. I guess you are just trying to say -- choking on the words in the process -- that you had no clue what a truth table was until I brought it up (which caused you to google furiously to attempt to instantly have all the knowledge I have on them -- which was a failure, so you tried to take it out on an a bystander you despise (since you know insults without basis are uninsulting to me)).
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: @[Nekko fox]: you wouldn't know a logician even if you were one *gasp*... which is a natural impossibility seeing as you lack the sight of reason.
2011-10-28 [Sicarius]: *raises book closer to face to hide slight smile*...the plot thickens...*co
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: @[Sicarius]: poor penguins, now they'll all have to apply for green cards to zoos with the polar ice caps melting so quickly.
Guinea pigs are chatty or noisy? Any animal is ultimately intelligent by definition. It fits exactly the function in nature it is meant to.
Well, does someone who willingly takes a beating like that become that way, or are they born that way? If they are born that way... then I must add to my statement that the individual must be sentient and in good mental health. Otherwise, if it is of their direct doing... well I would like to see such an oaf with my own two eyes...
My... you are violent for a woman... o.0'
No one can think of something first if the thought already existed to start with :) So, you can still keep your high and mighty complexion still if you want to -- if it could cross my mind, it might as well cross yours.
Well... I'm not really sure what it [ the penguin ] is... but it sure loves to argue nonsense... not to mention, I'm still trying to identify it.
2011-10-28 [Sicarius]: ...ah, yes, because penguins are people too...decent people, most of them...and quite delicious when roasted and slathered in barbeque sauce...or so I'm told...I would like to think of them as chatty as opposed to noisy...the constant chuttering, chattering, weeking and squeaking seems more friendly than tiresome...wit
...Yes, I have violent thoughts...tho
I could, but I will not...*grins*.
As for arguing nonsense, well, there are worse things...less entertaining things...
2011-10-28 [Morgoth]: Yeah, [Stephen]'s mom is a nice, kind, respectable citizen... of HOOKERSVILLE! *high fives a crossing guard, causing many hilarious wrecks*
'either or' is indeed longhand exor, but the typical use of 'or' in the English language is shorthand for 'either or'. Therefore, 'or', in its non-mathematic
Picture there is a sack. In this sack is an apple or an orange. Now, notice how I didn't say it was either an apple or an orange, but simply said it was an apple or an orange. Both sentences mean the same thing in English. There is only one of the two in the sack, not both. 'or' = 'either or' in this sense. Simply using 'or' is more common than using 'either or' in English, so it's implied that when you use 'or' you mean 'either or'. 'and/or' would imply that there could be an orange, an apple, or an orange and an apple. 'or' implies only one or the other is in the sack.
You can't honestly say that when you are told by a random fellow in a trench coat, "Hey, buddy. Wanna buy some crack or meth for five bucks?" that you are getting a deal on both crack and meth. If you try to take both for the price of one, you'll get shot and/or raped. What that druggie means to say, and is implying, is, "Hello, fine gentleman. Would you like to partake in the purchase of either crack cocaine or methamphetamin
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: @[Sicarius]: well, I have no objection on having a tasty bird roasted. But I mean... a penguin? Must be very fatty... hmm.
Would you object to roasting a guinea pig though?
I like to believe that retards are not born retards. But there are genetic complications that result from irresponsible parenting and parental planning.
That is relieving... a violent woman is possibly one of the most scariest things there is.
It is vacuously true though, so it is not quite untruthful :)
Less entertaining things? Now that is something I want to hear about XD
2011-10-28 [Nekko fox]: Hey, cut me some...SCHLACH
But I don't. I'm forwarding Mort's cause because you're prattling on and on, banging your head against this wall, and to anybody who knows Mort to any degree, this is all for his amusement. To see you trying, just...TRYING to make headway here is like watching a man trying to survive drowning by pushing the water aside one cupful at a time. Plus, you're filling the Diner with your word vomit and it's getting on the customers.
*the few customers that survived the massive wall of text that was dumped here mutter gravely about wanting money back. They are ignored, as is company policy*
2011-10-28 [Sicarius]: ...Ah, but the fact it -is- fat, keeps people coming back...see? *points to long line of customers lined up demanding pulled penguin sandwiches (there are none)*...and the best part of believing, my dear, is the lie in the middle...my apologies, I could not resist making such a statement...an
Indeed.
...Really? Do you really?
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: @[Morgoth]: Well, see that's the kind of talk that gets this place shut down. Don't come crying to me (and tons of other people) next time to honor your cause of spewing bullshit about other people. Insulting someones mom is very low... could you figure out a way to go any lower? Common, impress me...
Ok, do you have ANY idea how stupid a language English would be if it confused "or" and "exor"? No one would want to use it... "Could you pass me that tissue or that tissue?" "Oh no wait, I can't do that, I would violate [Morgoth]'s idiotic and poor language exclusion principle that doesn't make sense"... "Fine I'll blow my nose so hard or blow my brains out -- oh shit, I also can't do that".
You are taking advantage of poor English to weasel your way out of it. See http://en.wiki
Yeah, I could expect that, I don't know the price of meth or crack -- perhaps you do, that would explain your extremely poor reasoning skills.
I would neither get shot or raped, because I would ask first like any sensible person would... but then again, if you're demeaning your intellectual claims to druggies and drug abusers... you REALLY are desperate, and all the more wrong because English is an aristocratic language -- thus meaning it needs to be as precise as possible to express meaning properly. Otherwise, there is ambiguity and much like you, a failure.
2011-10-28 [Sicarius]: ...using wikipedia as a source...my English instructors would be most displeased...*
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: @[Nekko fox]: at least your erotically involved friend is attempting to argue... you are just failing altogether at every possible level. You pulled out the christmas lights line WAY before the sodomized penguin did.
Schlach??? You DON'T want that LOL... at least find out what it means before using it.
I am not A... I am THE. I am unique. And my extensive discourse of unique ideas proves that.
I can contribute at least ONE unique idea to the world, you could NEVER do the same.
Wow... speaking of assumptions... do you really portray me as the one banging my head against the wall? I would have gave up a long time ago if it had any emotional implication. It is so amusing to see people argue nonsense. On the other hand, I don't think your penguin is faring too well, he may be choking up some trauma (hopefully not, because then he would probably be more quiet after that)... who's penguin is it anyways???
I'm not even trying really... if I needed to end this argument, I would have done it in a few lines (at most 10). This is like stealing candy from... no not even a baby, it's just LYING there I don't even have to steal it. What customers? Your pervs and pedos? They're probably scared shitless of logic... not my fault. Blame Zarathustra. The only vomit I see is yours because it is senseless. In fact if you don't have anything intelligent to say (like to help your erotic penguin out) then best be quiet.
2011-10-28 [Sicarius]: ...and he breaks out a Nietzsche reference...*k
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: @[Sicarius]: So then penguins will go extinct then for sure... "Would you like to donate a dollar to save the penguins today?
Well unless you have absolute truth, everything to some large extent is a lie anyways. Just picking and choosing your sin is better than letting someone else do it for you.
Ok ok ok... but could you safely say that you have a very healthy family line? That could be a factor you know... people don't think about these things beforehand.
So you also are mortally afraid of violent women?
Fire away!!! Let the boring ROAR and ECHO madly against the walls of the diner!!! Leave no ear virgin of it!
Do you REALLY think if I linked PDFs to academic papers that they would even click the links?
Besides, I also am wanting to argue from the democratic definition -- which is the lowest possible sensible form to argue from (because logic is not defined by the masses) -- to Schlach beyond any doubt any hope anyone has that the penguin stands a blasted chance lol.
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: @[Sicarius]: oooh, so we have of knower of the German philosophers..
2011-10-28 [Sicarius]: ...so...what do you consider to be absolute truth? Truth, after all, is quite subjective...a
No, not really...just cautious...awa
Quite frankly, I doubt it...I sincerely doubt they would care (let us ponder the possibility of this being apathy, having a good laugh at how much work you put into this rather trivial (and some might say one-sided) debate, or something else entirely)...and regardless what doubts anyone may have, one cannot doubt your enthusiasm...*
Yes, I know a small portion of philosophy, philosophers and what it is about...I would like to take a few courses, but my current schedule will not allow it...unfortuna
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: @[Sicarius]: my findings on truth are VERY powerful I believe. But I am not going to divulge them on this wiki -- it wouldn't suffice to comprehend the concept anyways. Truth actually cannot be subjective... what you are referring to is relative truth. Absolute truth exists regardless of us... unfortunately, sentience gets in the way of finding it.
Statistically speaking... yes. Most people are born lucky. Others not so... but it is always someones fault. If something doesn't go as expected, you can bet there is a cause.
Why not just plan to avoid them o.0' *whispers* like me
It doesn't take much effort from me to cough up this sense. I have already thought about all the logical perspectives in this case. Its the illogical ones that interest me now. Yes, enthusiasm... erm the impression of it... is not lacking.
Philosophy and history are being cut from academic curriculums. You'd be VERY lucky to still have an arts or math department in modern school systems... its part of the brainwashing procedures modern politics are introducing. Your only resort is to not forget... and to not forget is to read those that think. Well, I am trying to keep my German and other languages... so I need people to discourse with *hints*
2011-10-28 [Morgoth]: Alright, let's try simplifying this then.
'and/or' is the English language equivalent of the mathematical 'or'.
'or' is typically the English language equivalent of the mathematical 'exor'.
'or', in mathematical terms, means that the contents of the sack can be an orange or an apple. It also means that it can be an orange and an apple. But we don't use the mathematical definition for 'or' when speaking in plain English. In English, it means 'either or' or 'exor'.
As you can see in the diagram there, there are two circles that represent two different objects or ideas. Separated, you would say, "that one or that one". Combined, you would say, "that one and that one". But, since it's in a state in between complete separation and combination, we say, "that one and/or that one" because both 'and' and 'or' apply here, at least in terms of the English language. If we're speaking mathematically
Granted, this doesn't mean the grammatical 'or' is never equal to the mathematical 'or'. I'm just explaining the typical nature of 'or'. It really all boils down to context and the intention of the person saying it. The 'or' can either be exclusive (making it 'exor') or inclusive (making it 'or'). In my experience, it is overwhelmingly used in the exclusive sense. So yes, you're correct in saying, "pedos or pervs", but you would have been more correct in saying, "pedos and/or pervs".
'or' could be easily misconstrued. People could become confused and aroused and enraged, in which they would attack one another and riots would break out over a misunderstandi
So, I'll concede that you are correct... but I'm still more correct.
2011-10-28 [Morgoth]: Aw, shucks. Now I feel left out of the other, more interesting argument. :(
2011-10-28 [Sicarius]: *looks up from book*...*grins
...Indeed...ev
I cannot help it...on my maternal grandfather's side there is Irish blood from the clan of Milligan (spelled Millican due to a split in the clan)...the motto of that clan is "Attend Well" (sounds scads better in Latin or Gaelic)...I would be doing myself a great disservice if I did not heed that advice...
Theoretically though, if one has thought of the logical views, does that not mean they have (at some point) given some thought to that which presents itself as illogical?
My grandmother and mother instilled in me a love of history and learning about it...the philosophy came later, as did psychology, sociology, and (though I've not taken a course) Anthropology (Cultural, to be more specific)...as far as politics, well I do not care for such things...I have my reasons (valid or invalid, they are still mine). As far as forgetting goes, well, unfortunately my memory is quite fallible...tho
*pats the Mort...after putting on gloves (I don't know where you've been :P)* There there, it'll be okay...
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: Do you even proof read your nonsense? 'either or' or 'exor'... by the way 'or' can be 'exor' in certain cases by definition... so as I can PLAINLY see, it is better to be exact when you mean 'exor' and 'or' can be kept for the vague situations. The Venn diagram has no purpose here and you have completely misinterpreted it. It is A union B -- now we're getting into set theory which is something you don't have the mind for I'm afraid... better stick with the basics.
So in short, you are implying grammar does not make any sense?
You are not more correct... more correct would require an 'exor' as you have clearly argued. At least remain consistent with yourself... then we'll talk about being consistent with me lol.
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: @[Morgoth]: and the other argument would be...? Better pick another thing to argue, this one is a dead end.
2011-10-28 [Sicarius]: ...I'm afraid I haven't the mind for set theory myself...grant
2011-10-28 [Morgoth]: Yes, like you just said, "it is better to be exact." 'and/or' is an exact term that leaves no room for debate. 'or', while also correct, isn't as exact as 'and/or', because it could also be the exclusive form of 'or'.
'and/or' is always correct for this situation. 'or' is only sometimes correct.
I'm not saying grammar is incorrect at all. Just your skewed version of it.
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: @[Sicarius]: those people are hard to find. I have been looking for them for a LONG time... and I am desperate enough to hope that I might find one here. Someone who has thought about the nature of truth and false (which is entirely man-made) will realize how precious the conclusion can be...
Yes, I am a strong believer in that... we may not know the reason, but that does not mean it is not there. Besides, no point of being sentient if there is no reason to things.
Ouch... no offense but Northern Europe is NOT a well varied gene pool. I can't say I have a rich gene pool either... in fact I'm very worried about mine; just kind of lucky I guess. Any idea why the clan split?
To solve a problem, you simply bound it and assume everything outside of the scope of the problem is complete and utter bullshit. You don't even think about it...*gasp* i.e.: "how could you assume a non-spherical cow?! All cows must be spheres for all intents and purposes for this theorem to work! HERETIC!!! DISBELIEVER OF SCIENCE!"... yeah so what, science isn't what it used to be, so I'm challenging to TRUE limits... which may or may not be logical. Everything should make sense at the end of the day, no?
Your grandmother is very clever. If you know your history, you will know better how to solve your modern problems. All the arts float on the same fragile boat... taking one involves taking them all -- its just a matter of time. Politics is actually a poor form of religion... you're better off studying religion instead -- which is also a very heavy weight topic. All avoidance of politics is completely understandeabl
You certainly have memory, it is using it that is a challenge -- for everyone really. Think of your brain as a black box, a creature you need to interact with to live -- it is also the very cause of your death as well and your guide on this strange trip called life. Learn to interact with it, and you can solve all your intellectual problems. Using a maximum of 10% of your brain is a political myth... there is no limit on that... just think, for thinking is your TRUE freedom.
We will continue to foreign language discussions privately :) I don't see why I should bring variety to monotonous and bastardized English to this hick diner. When it steps up intellectually
2011-10-28 [Morgoth]: Hey, feller, we's real intalecshul here, ah reckon! *spits a wad of tobaccy on [Stephen]'s mom*
Just 'cause we ain't gots no fancy high school degree ain't mean we's not am was smart, noway nohow, eeyup! *hitches up his overalls and drives a tractor into the kitchen*
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: @[Morgoth]: "and/or" is identical to "or" we had established that! What other exhaustion is there??? "and" also ties an "if" then clause which you failed to mention... i.e.: "I will propose and marry you" -- the proposal has to come first. You seriously cannot continue to modify your premises... you are confusing yourself in the process.
My "skewed" version is democratically accepted... how much lower do you want to go? Drug dealer English is what you were quoting... how is that English accepted? To quote me, you must be using my logic -- which you disagree to... just get of your boat and accept its nearly sunk, there will be other boats for you to pirate, don't worry...
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: @[Morgoth]: and why are moms being involved again? You think its better if she didn't exist?
Ain't that danday now... oooweee, nao a feller can cook n' plough them feelds at tha saym tyme!
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: @[Sicarius]: something is useful and relevant only if you need or use it. Set theory is limited to the abstract... its helpful in thinking, but generally unnecessary. All one needs is logic. Yes, whatever happened to civil discourse? *keeps a far distance from the lobster tanks*
2011-10-28 [Sicarius]: Indeed they are...
...well, I've not only Irish...I have English, Scottish, Dutch, Filipino, Hawaiian, Chinese and Spanish (from Spain) blood running through these veins of mine...and, unfortunately, I have no idea what caused the clan to split as it did...
I presume, suppose, surmise...neve
Please, don't tell her that...she has a big enough ego already...just joshing...as for your problem solving techniques...w
As you wish...though I will have you know, I -worked- at a "hick" diner...the vast majority of the time, if you really listened, they had quite a lot of relevant things to say...one just had to decipher it...
Mort! What did I tell you about spitting on [Stephen]'s mom? See, she's dripping tabbacco juice all over the floor...we spit on the customers...an
2011-10-28 [Morgoth]: We never establish that 'and/or' was always identical to 'or', only that they sometimes are identical. And I never mentioned an 'if' then clause, because it wasn't necessary for my argument. My premise remains steadfast, unmodified, and unreasonable as always, I assure you.
It doesn't matter who I was quoting, the point still remains. I could have said, "Sir, would you like silver or gold shavings on your diamond studded ice cream?" and it would have been as valid as the druggie example.
My boat may have holes in it, but, try as you like, you'll never sink a boat on land. It could be a mass of splinters and I'd still pilot that sweet baby into the deep blue that is depression. I set sail... on fire. And the dry earthen wit fuels the flames of desire that burns the boat of insani-
The hell am I talking about? Why am I setting my boat on fire...?
Anyway, 'and/or' and/or 'or' or 'and' or even 'or/and' and/or 'even or' and 'and even' could be used, to make this sentence more confusing and cluttered. But, in the original sentence, 'and/or' and/or 'or' could have been used just fine, but they have varying degrees of correctness. 'and/or', of course, being the more correct of the two.
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: @[Sicarius]: There may be none left though...
Oh wow... in minute amounts I'm guessing? So that does create a big gene pool...
It would be very interesting to find out you know... it is after all, your history and heritage.
And why not? Assumptions are needed for axioms. No axioms, no logic. Too many axioms also means no logic too by the way.
How would you go about to get rid of that habit? Are you trying to be a natural skeptic?
I wonder where all the will power for that ego comes from... smells tasty. The problem solving is an art of its own... all experts have their own tricks of the trade. Sometimes, its more blissful to ask others to solve your problems...
I'm wordy because I want to be exact... sounding wise is for the wise guys.
Yes, study, don't apply unless you believe, that is the rule.
Yes, but the diner you worked in was filtered ;) there is no way to verify anyones identity here... or their moral alignments. Not to mention, people in the real world tend to be a lot more wise than on the net -- if the net lacks anything, its wisdom.
One day, he's going to value moms... but that day will be too late.
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: @[Morgoth]: so thats why you changed your definition conveniently once and again to save your face?
'and/or' has NOTHING more to offer to an 'or' where the 'or' in a sentence could be an 'exor' OR an 'or' OR an 'and'... it has a 'don't care' meaning thus taking us back to Occam's Razor: use the shortest form i.e.: 'or'.
Yes, your boat can sink if the water table goes up -- which they are in this case.
Your statements still need polishing as they do not strengthen your very weak starting foundations...
2011-10-28 [Sicarius]: Hope is the thing with feathers that perches in the soul...and then blows up...leaving you with naught but blood, gore and bits of bird fluff...Oh, wait...were you expecting something else?
Actually no...the Hawaiian and Filipino are stronger...Ind
...I am...and failing...quit
I have no idea...and you are quite right...though wasn't it Shakespeare's Queen Gertrude (I believe her name is Gertrude and am a bit too weary to look it up to ensure it is proper) in Hamlet say 'Brevity is the soul of wit'?
...I'm sure he values mothers...he is simply trying to inject a little levity into an otherwise...sh
2011-10-28 [Morgoth]: I never changed my definition. And my face is beautiful and not in need of saving.
Occam's Razor doesn't apply here, because 'or' isn't absolutely always the right choice, because it can be divided into subcategories, whereas 'and/or' is final and irrefutable. 'or' isn't the shortest form by any means. It is the most complicated and it results in wall after wall of text and explanations.
Would you really like the water tables to go up? That would extinguish the flame and I think you'll find that even the ugliest flotsam floats. And floats. And floats, making derelict a fevered dream of a man sick with the flu of flying metaphors, bad puns, and awful alliteration.
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: @[Sicarius]: no, not really... but then again I just claim to hope, I'm a hardcore pessimist deep down.
The sooner, the better... people soon won't be able to tell you much about anything anymore. You probably inherently have a lot of Japanese too then -- which is also not a greatly varied pool. I'm inclined to say Indian as well -- and they're much worst.
Well, the fork in the road is whether or not you choose to go paranoid or take leaps of faith. But why do you claim to be failing? You can't really win here...
I actually am not sure... it sounds right, but I am horribly versed in Shakespeare -- mainly because his works were stolen and I know the works under different names.
Tense? I'm not tense... if he is feeling that way, then I got to him lol. That's not healhty for him...
2011-10-28 [Morgoth]: However, when applying Occam's Razor to this inapplicable situation, it would mean that 'and/or' is the simplest. 'or' raises questions of whether or not the speaker meant to use it inclusively or exclusively or whether or not they should whip up a quick truth table and do some calculations. 'and/or' is precise. You know exactly what is meant by 'and/or'. So, 'and/or' is the choice with the fewest new assumptions.
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: @[Morgoth]: if you were so proud of your face you would have posted it on your profile... so I'm convinced you have a face only a mother can love. Or maybe she can't so that's why you take it out on other peoples mothers...
So now you are denying that you changed the definition? What happened to 'and/or' being identical logically to 'or'?
Occam's Razor applies perfectly here because it was designed for explaining things using LANGUAGE. Do you even know about this philosophical lemma at all??? 'and/or' is the same as saying 'or' provided the context doesn't change... and it can as I have just demonstrated with an 'if'-like statement.
Yes I would. Water is nice. Anything with a hole in the hull cannot float... again, showing off knowledge you don't have. My boat has been floating for ages... cannons poiting at the piece of wood you're hanging on... are you ready to surrender?
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: Why don't you just google Occam's Razor and actually read something from a decently reliable source because right now, your argument is pretty much evolving as you speak... and as a deformed lost and pointless statement thats dying to be a premise or axiom... but just doesn't have the logical framework -- and never will -- to make it.
2011-10-28 [Sicarius]: Mort...your face is not quite beautiful right now...*grabs mirror and reveals his face covered in the gore of exploding birds*
Ah...well, there are two great things about being a pessimist...on
True, true...
...I see...as for why I claim to be failing...well
...Ah, the Bard is one of my favorites...al
I used the word tense simply because I could not think of a more proper word to use...and one might argue that neither is it healthy to continue on in a vein of discussion that could potentially cause illwill or whatever you wish to term it...but, I am tired and am unsure if I'm even typing coherently...S
2011-10-28 [Morgoth]: Okie doke:
"Occam's razor, also known as Ockham's razor, and sometimes expressed in Latin as lex parsimoniae (the law of parsimony, economy or succinctness), is a principle that generally recommends selecting from among competing hypotheses the one that makes the fewest new assumptions."
'or' - this option raises the question of whether the speaker meant it inclusively or exclusively, forcing the reader to make assumptions based on context and the speaker himself.
'and/or' - this option raises no new assumptions, because it allows for either 'and' or 'or' to be true. The assumptions raised by a simple 'or' are no longer raised with 'and/or' because it covers both inclusive and exclusive instances of 'or' as well as a combination of the two items in question.
Therefore, according to Occam's Razor, 'and/or' should be chosen for its simplicity.
2011-10-28 [Morgoth]: I'm going away now. *tags [Schlachter]*
Hey, buddy, you finish debating this guy for me. It's an easy win, yo. Just believe in yourself and/or don't believe in yourself. Either way, I'm sure you'll win. Unless you don't.
2011-10-28 [Nekko fox]: *Pulls some people out of the word-rubble with the aid of tl;dozers*
Wait, since when did I join the relief effort?
*starts pushing people back into the word-rubble*
2011-10-28 [Stephen]: o_o
This place has been active in the last 10 hours. I really don't have time to read all these comments. Sorry. =(
Have fun debating!
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: @[Morgoth]: FEWER new assumptions... aka. less syntax... aka drop the 'and' because it is redundant and unnecessary due to having the same meaning as 'or' in this context. RIP [Morgoth] (a date that I don't really care about)->27-10-2011 :) don't worry, I'll cough up some logic to bring you back to life in another round.
I debate you at MY convenience, not yours. Remember that. It is YOU essentially who wants my approval, not I yours. Your theories don't stand up by themselves. Mine do. So I am in charge, don't forget that. When you will gain reason AND make sense... then we talk about your approval (because for now, it really is meaningless and hopelessly unauthoritativ
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: @[Stephen]: apparently, [Morgoth] ahs a problem with your mother... not sure why... ask him. He didn't have the guts to bring up the topic while you were around.
The debate ended brutally in my favor... not so expected, but then again, the arguments against were VERY poor and repetitive -- not to mention manipulative.
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: @[Sicarius]: Yes, being a pessimist has huge advantages, but you risk losing progress occasionally from taking the wrong perspective. I'm not huge on Confuscianism, but the point made there is to be balanced in everything -- and I find this to be correct of nearly anything.
Personal failures aren't as bad as professional or concept failures. You can pull yourself out of it, no? Or would you like some help?
You like Edgar Allan Poe? Vonnegut... the American? What was his big work again I forgot... I have a penchant for Russian works. No one can be a true pessimist without reading Dostoyevski or Tolstoy or Sechenov.
This was more than a pissing match, it was a test of syntax, communication, coherence and arguability. Though if it reached a personal level with either of us... it is no longer interesting for me. It is not a logical argument if it does anyways... not to mention, I can't insult anyone from a personal perspective unless I am breaking their trust (which I don't have with anyone here -- unless I am unaware of it or it is unjustified).
2011-10-28 [GlassCasket]: I think he is just arguing with himself now xD
2011-10-28 [lex!!~land]: *confusion* why you no make short comments?!
2011-10-28 [Stephen]: *amused*
2011-10-28 [GlassCasket]: *slightly irritated by over-confident ass but still amused*
2011-10-28 [Morgoth]: FEWER new assumptions means just that... fewer new assumptions. Not less text. Occum's Razor is all about the simplest answer. While 'or' may be the shortest, it isn't the simplest. And yeah, 'and/or' means the same as 'or', but not all of the time. So, for clarification issues, 'and/or' is better than a simple 'or' in situations like this for reasons I've stated repeatedly. 'or' doesn't always mean simply 'or'. 'and/or' does. Therefore, 'and/or' is the clearer choice and the better one for conveying your message, as well as the choice that raises fewer new assumptions.
2011-10-28 [Morgoth]: Like Occum's Razor states, "when you have two competing theories that make exactly the same predictions, the simpler one is the better."
When presented with 'or', the reader must ask themselves, "Is that an inclusive or exclusive 'or'?" and they then have to make new assumptions about which one it is, based on context. On the other hand, 'and/or' raises no new assumptions, because it covers both the inclusive and exclusive versions of 'or'.
'or' - 1 new assumption
'and/or' - 0 new assumptions
0<1
'and/or' has fewer new assumptions, so it is the simplest of the two.
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: @[Morgoth]: Yes less text. Must I point you to Chomsky grammars and how less text directly results in less complication? Seriously... and you probably meant to spell it Occam... at least DEMONSTRATE that you've read enough about the lemma to get his name right in the second round of trying to misuse his lemma.
BTW 'or' is contained in 'and/or'... by contradiction, you fail... yet again.
To the rest of you, it's not like I was asking for an applause. If you enjoyed the show, great... if not, well, you didn't have to look at it, now did you?
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: @[lex!!~land]: what's wrong with long comments? you're here to read stuff, no? so is it not what you want?
Note: Hah! I found a bug! But I'm not gonna squish it or report for [Hedda] -- he can't code for shit lolz.
2011-10-28 [Nekko fox]: *Yawns*
I remember when the Diner was a place of family fun, not grammar nazism.
*Dozes on the soup*
2011-10-28 [Schlachter]: Family fun??? If y'all weren't pedos or pervs, this argument would not have started...
Though another similar one would have.
2011-10-29 [Nekko fox]: Pedos and/or pervs.
2011-10-29 [GlassCasket]: How are we even having this argument? xD If i say the word OR that means the subject is either this OR that. If i say the word AND then that means the subject is this AND that. So if you put them together that means the subject could be either this OR that or this AND that or any combination of the two. But to be honest why the fuck does it matter anyway? If you understand what the other individual is attempting to get across then why does it matter how they say it? Honestly captain conceded if you can code better than [Hedda] then why don't you go out and make your own website, code it yourself, and we will see how much better it is than EP? Oh i know why because it won't be better. Your just here to troll elfpackers and personally i would have banned you by now if i had the authority. Your here stirring up shit, not bringing anything to the table. Your acting like you are so much more superior than everyone but in reality your not. Everyone is equally amazing and everyone has equal potential, the fact that you can google any of this makes every single point you made here invalid. Aside from that the fact that we aren't in person, with no outside resources to be tapped into makes EVERYONE'S argument invalid. So my point here is this, nut up or shut up.
2011-10-29 [Nekko fox]: Valid and/or invalid.
2011-10-29 [lex!!~land]: i have no actual problem with long reading, its wasting my time i just dont like. a conversation such as this is something i like to jsut skip over. but theres SOOO MUCH. my brain can already feel the pain of focusing too hard XD
nevertheless, dont mistake my comments for those of dislike. i just have an abnormal sense of humor. ^^
2011-10-29 [Stephen]: @GlassCasket
Hey -- you're on the Council. Don't forget to be nice and respectful even if you don't agree with what someone says. :)
@Schlachter
Please don't actually call members pedo's, that's going from debating to insult slinging.
You guys are free to debate to your heart's content, but don't start slinging insults at one another.
@Alexis
I like reading debates, personally. I find it intellectually enjoyable to read in depth debates. I wish I had time to actually read the last few pages. x)
2011-10-29 [lex!!~land]: XD i was attempting to read it, but then thought, "oh hell no. i'll just get sucked in. and lexi no has time to get sucked in!"
2011-10-29 [Morgoth]: @[Stephen]: We are pedos though. And Bob's Diner fully supports slinging insults, yogurt, and/or insulting yogurt. And we prefer council members to speak disrespectfull
@Schlachy: "'or' is contained in 'and/or'... by contradiction, you fail"
That's true (not the contradicting or failing part, the other part). Just like in 30/10=3, '10' is a part of the equation, but without it, the whole thing falls apart. The 'or' doesn't create a contradiction, because it's only a part of the whole. Without the 'and', you have to make an extra assumption and it becomes more complex.
And yes, family fun. Pedos have families too! Cute, supple, young families...
But, yeah... sometimes [Hedda]'s code is lacking. But, to be fair, he's Swedish. You know how them Swedes are.
@[GlassCasket]: What point would there be in making a new website just because someone can do better? There already exists a website that suits his needs and has plenty of members and activity, even if it isn't perfect. It would be pointless to waste time, energy, and money creating a slightly better version of an already existing website (that's not doing that well anyway, mind you).
Just because you can come up with a better web crawling algorithm than the one Google uses, doesn't mean you should create your own website to implement it. Because Google will find you. And they'll kill you and/or your family.
Point being, don't mess with Google.
2011-10-29 [Morgoth]: I mean, seriously. If someone went out and made a more advanced version of a website every time they thought they could do better, the internet would have HUNDREDS or, dare I say it, THOUSANDS of different websites! And that's just not feasible.
2011-10-29 [GlassCasket]: :( I hate being nice...But i suppose you have a point there [Stephen]. Being the good guy sucks but someone's gotta do it :P
But honestly Mort, if you had the ability to create something better than what you see you wouldn't? That is baffling to me :\ If i had any code skills whatsoever and i saw something i didn't like and KNEW i could do better, i'd do it. Thats how things get better lol I mean honestly if i could make something better than google i'd do it. If everyone did what you thought we would all still be using TI-82s :/
Point being, you crawl over the corpses of the dead/outdated in order to get better.
2011-10-29 [Schlachter]: @[GlassCasket]: The argument doesn't matter... but the method of argument does. You obviously can't get that point across your thick head.
I have actually coded many sites in 4 different countries across the world and ALL are better than EP -- I've done an admin system for megaupload.com for example (logic serves for many many uses in professional life). EP is just not a big corporation like FB or MS so has a more personal feel to it along with the fact that there is tons more privacy and a guarantee your employer cannot look you up -- that's why people come here.
Besides, are you gonna pay me? Didn't think so... so no code. I found a bug, so I have the right to make the statement I did.
2011-10-29 [Morgoth]: @[ClassGasket]: Only if you're STUPID and you have a STUPID FACE. *slams down his stone mammoth hunting knife in anger*
What happens when those TI-82's turn into T-1000's? Huh? I'll tell you what happens... PEOPLE START MARRYING MACHINES. The sanctity of marriage has already been tarnished enough with all those gays and Mormons and gay Mormons and Mexicans and gay Mormon Mexicans. We don't need people marrying machines next. That's just unnatural. Right, baby? *the vacuum cleaner says nothing*
2011-10-29 [Schlachter]: @[lex!!~land]: the point is not to look at the topic, but how the arguing is done. But then again, maybe its something you don't care so much about.
@[Stephen]: I didn't insult anyone directly. I can't help it if people feel insulted... that's just them. Only the truth is insulting; if it's not true, no offense can possibly be done -- it would be speaking @[Morgoth]-ish which I do not speak at all.
Also, remember to back up your claims; I do not pay any attention to a claim that has no grounds.
2011-10-29 [Stephen]: I could see Mort hooking up with a vacuum. =P
2011-10-29 [GlassCasket]: it's plausible :D
2011-10-29 [Morgoth]: No, you're a popsicle.
2011-10-29 [GlassCasket]: Only for you ;D
2011-10-29 [Morgoth]: GET IN MY MOUTH.
...oh, wait...
2011-10-29 [GlassCasket]: Only because you asked so nicely! *places spider on Mort's tongue*
2011-10-29 [Stephen]: Oh my.
2011-10-29 [Schlachter]: @[Morgoth]: You are comparing math syntax to English grammar... you even stated the disparity between the formalisms yourself. Can you pick something else that is a little more epic to argue about while we still have the spotlight here? You kind of epically lost the last one...
@[GlassCasket]: [Morgoth] makes a point. Sometimes it is useless to recode something, especially when you have NO clientele or guarantee of a clientele...
I'll tell you what... you find me 1000 users, I'll put together a system billions of times better then EP with a MUCH more powerful toolset and "PseudoHTML" (which really is still HTML... wouldn't you folk rather drag-n-drop?) AND I'll connect it to some Russian and German localized web servers so you can chat with VERY culturally different people who have a much more interesting POV on everything.
No it won't take a lot of work, I already have most of the code.
2011-10-29 [Sicarius]: ...Mort, for the last time, take off your hat! *lobs tennis ball bomb in direction of the penguin*...*go
2011-10-29 [Schlachter]: @[Morgoth]: You are comparing math syntax to English grammar... you even stated the disparity between the formalisms yourself. Can you pick something else that is a little more epic to argue about while we still have the spotlight here?
@[GlassCasket]: [Morgoth] makes a point. Sometimes it is useless to recode something, especially when you have NO clientele or guarantee of a clientele...
I'll tell you what... you find me 1000 users, I'll put together a system billions of times better then EP with a MUCH more powerful toolset and "PseudoHTML" (which really is still HTML... wouldn't you folk rather drag-n-drop?) AND I'll connect it to some Russian and German localized web servers so you can chat with VERY culturally different people who have a much more interesting POV on everything.
No it won't take a lot of work, I already have most of the code.
2011-10-29 [Stephen]: Sidenote: I really dislike the Hedda html.
Still, even if I don't like everything, I hold a degree of respect for Hedda since he does program and host all this with no corporate backing, and he's not trying to make money off us. I don't remember if there's ads on Elfpack, but if there are, there's not many.
2011-10-29 [Sicarius]: ...*glances up from page*...*goes back to reading*
2011-10-29 [Schlachter]: @[Stephen]: I do as well... I admire him because he likely didn't make much money off this site... but only for that much. Unfortunately, that doesn't make him a good coder.
Though DO notice the google crap on the EP pages and the ads... he is making SOME money off clicks. His hosting is likely in his basement in Linkoping still XD -- last I checked anyways (ages ago)
2011-10-29 [Morgoth]: I'll concede you computer knowledge, Schlachy. I couldn't find a bug in a two-star restaurant to save my life. I barely even know how to turn a computer on. But, if it's anything like a woman, you have to stroke it just right. But if you do it wrong, you'll get electrocuted.
My mathematical example can be compared to 'and/or' because I'm only using it to illustrate and describe pieces of a whole, not necessarily mathematical/g
2011-10-29 [Stephen]: The poor hooker. :(
2011-10-29 [Schlachter]: @[Morgoth]: ok, that was kind of funny and impartially true... seeing as you can make a computer do whatever you want -- you just need to speak its language lol. I guess that's why you prefer vacuum cleaners?
Oh how convenient... well, if you wanna play the math game, you gotta take everything that comes with it AHAHAHAHAHA. Go and cough me up a proof for the reduction of English grammar to math syntax (AND vice versa). You are effectively comparing apples with oranges. If you can't do it, take another route then since you think you can cough up another one.
2011-10-29 [Stephen]: Apples and oranges both tend to taste good. :3
Unrelated I know, but I rarely say anything of value..
2011-10-29 [Sicarius]: ...depends on the apple...and the orange...*goes back to book*
2011-10-29 [Morgoth]: I'll have you know I cough stuff up all the time! Mom says it's because I keep licking the cats though...
Speaking of apples and oranges, I see you changed your vote from orange juice to apple juice in that poll on Elftown, Steve. A wise decision.
2011-10-29 [Nekko fox]: Apples and/or oranges.
2011-10-29 [Master Sifu]: Alf licks cat's too. Do you squeeze them for juice too?
2011-10-29 [Stephen]: Cats are so difficult to not lick. >_>;
You're a stalker. ;; I didn't even say I voted on it.
2011-10-29 [Sicarius]: He's not a stalker...he's got a clipboard...*p
2011-10-29 [Schlachter]: @[Stephen]: the WHOLE premise of this debate was pointless lol
feel free to throw in any 2 cents you want hahaha
@[Nekko fox]: you mean "Apples or oranges."
2011-10-29 [Morgoth]: Yup. *holds up a morning star with a piece of face still stuck to it*
Number of comments: 1875
| Show these comments on your site |