World's Fish Are In Hot Water

Skwala typed:
"Tim J." wrote in message
...
Skwala typed:
snip

When I'm tempted to get into one of these, I think:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...NINGRETARD.jpg

What a pity you didn't think before posting that.

Wolfgang

Wolfgang, my favorite Troll... Happy New Year Man!

Add me to the list of favorites, then. That link is *WAY* off base,
and that you think it's funny is sad.

Actually, I had no wish to offend any one with disabilities.

The picture is commonly used on usenet for the sort of endless and
pointless exchanges between posters with a whacko agenda and
reasonable and articulate responders that try to inject reason amnd
logic into the trhread.

All sorts of things are commonly said and done, but that doesn't make their
use the right thing to do.

The point being, you cant win an argument or correct the skewed
reasoning of the poster with the agenda, becuase the whole exchange
is; excuse me here - retarded.

There you go again! Other words, like "pointless" or "useless" or "idiotic"
would better suit your point. My guess is that far fewer people would be
offended (well, except for the pointless, useless, idiotic ones.)

But if I did indeed offend any one for any reason, then I most
humbly, and sincerly, apologize.

I didn't think it violated the assumed rules of this newsgroup,
however.

It has nothing to do with any assumed rules, just common decency and respect
for a group of the population that gets precious little of either.
--
HTH,
Tim
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj/

In article ,
lid says...
There you go again! Other words, like "pointless" or "useless" or "idiotic"
would better suit your point. My guess is that far fewer people would be
offended (well, except for the pointless, useless, idiotic ones.)


A perfectly good argument shot right in the ass by an
unfortunate choice of word...

Kevin

--
reply to:
kevin dot vang at minotstatu dot edu

Kevin Vang wrote:
In article ,
lid says...
There you go again! Other words, like "pointless" or "useless" or
"idiotic" would better suit your point. My guess is that far fewer
people would be offended (well, except for the pointless, useless,
idiotic ones.)

A perfectly good argument shot right in the ass by an
unfortunate choice of word...

Hmmm. . . enlighten, please. Maybe my dictionary is acting up again.
--
TL,
Tim
---------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj/

Tim J. typed:
Kevin Vang wrote:
In article ,
lid says...
There you go again! Other words, like "pointless" or "useless" or
"idiotic" would better suit your point. My guess is that far fewer
people would be offended (well, except for the pointless, useless,
idiotic ones.)

A perfectly good argument shot right in the ass by an
unfortunate choice of word...

Hmmm. . . enlighten, please. Maybe my dictionary is acting up again.

Ahhhh. . . why wait (patience was never my long suit.)

You have to drill down pretty deep to get from the word "idiotic" to
"retarded". The word "idiot" hasn't been used in a psychological sense for
around fifty years, while the word "retarded" still has as its main
definition, "Often offensive. Affected with mental retardation." Both of the
newer dictionaries I consulted list "showing foolishness or stupidity" as
the main definition of idiotic. I had to go back to a 1954 copy to find a
main definition that even vaguely referred to mental retardation, and then
only by referring to the word "idiot". Obviously, words morph over time,
exemplified by the fact that the root of the word, "idios", means one's own,
or private person. Also, I didn't hold up a photo of someone afflicted with
Down syndrome and use the word, which would change its context.

We're crossing into the gray area of political correctness, which I abhor.
Man (oops), this freakin' (oops) stuff is idiotic [sic]. Maybe we should
consult the same dictionary together. Wolfgang? ;-)
--
TL,
Tim
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj/

"Tim J." wrote in message
...

....Wolfgang? ;-)

Well, I think maybe Kevin's use of "unfortunate choice of word" referred to
Skwala's, not yours. Hard to say for sure. If I'm wrong, I think you
acquitted yourself nicely. If I'm right, the only thing unfortunate thing
about it (it was, after all, deliberate) is that Skwala revealed a great
deal more about himself than he probably intended. Unfortunate for
him.....not for those who like to know who they are dealing with.

Wolfgang
who firmly believes that usenet serves more than important purpose.

In article , says...
Well, I think maybe Kevin's use of "unfortunate choice of word" referred to
Skwala's, not yours.


No, actually I was referring to Tim's use of the word "idiotic." I
actually agree with Tim's point, I just thought he rather undermined it
by suggesting "idiotic" as a more acceptable word than "retarded", and
you don't have to dig that deep at all to find out why:

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=idiot

Kevin

Kevin Vang typed:
In article , says...
Well, I think maybe Kevin's use of "unfortunate choice of word"
referred to Skwala's, not yours.


No, actually I was referring to Tim's use of the word "idiotic." I
actually agree with Tim's point, I just thought he rather undermined
it by suggesting "idiotic" as a more acceptable word than "retarded",
and you don't have to dig that deep at all to find out why:

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=idiot

The least you could do is refer to the word I used. ;-)

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=idiotic

NOW see how much digging it takes.
--
TL,
Tim
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj/

Tim J. wrote:

You have to drill down pretty deep to get from the word "idiotic" to
"retarded". The word "idiot" hasn't been used in a psychological sense for
around fifty years, while the word "retarded" still has as its main
definition, "Often offensive. Affected with mental retardation."

"Retarded" is the opposite of "advanced." I restrict my use of the word
to ignition timing.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

I think in Kevin's case (and I could be wrong here), it was a perfectly
good argument shot in the ass by replying to the wrong post. I don't
believe he took issue with Tim's post so much as suggesting that Skwala
may have had a valid point about the futility of this particular
thread, but that he chose a very poor vehicle for illustration, thus
distracting from his main argument.

..02,
Joe F.

p.s. Thanks for the etymology anyway.

On Fri, 6 Jan 2006 08:20:42 -0500, "Tim J."
wrote:

...its context.

AHEM...

We're crossing into the gray area of political correctness

Uh, no. "Political correctness" would suggest, nay, DEMAND, that the
word itself is "incorrect," such as would require the changing of photo
captions from their original "negro" to "African-American." Common
sense, being in opposition to "political correctness" would correctly
suggest that the contextual usage in the instant case would be widely
offensive to many/most. If only common sense were a lot more common...

HTH,
R
....now, if he'd posted a link to a "lookee, Ma!" picture of some bozo
holding a trout with 9 other LDR'd flies in its mouth, captioned "some
critters never learn"...