RockMyAmadeus

Pov is CAL...?

Unfortunately, there are people who are either overly sensitive, or insecure, or both, who think that anyone speaking forthrighlty and firmly is somehow "imposing" what they believe on others, simply because of the confident and self-assured manner in which they write. If you don't put "in my humblest opinion" after everything you post, bowing and groveling so as to not potentially offend someone, you will be accused of things like "you think that by typing something it becomes gospel." This is not a result of any actual attempt to impose your will on others, as this is self-evidently impossible to do in a message board format, but rather the manifestation of the insecurity of the person making such an accusation. If this applies to you, reader, fix it. It's not that hard. Learn that no one can impose anything on anyone in a discussion on a message board, because everyone (including you) has the ability to post.whatever they want, at any time, within the rules of this board. The only way to "impose" anything is to have a superior argument that is more compelling and convincing...and isn't that, after all, the point...? Stop being so weak willed and insecure.

I especially relate to the last "S."

You heard about this? Who told you? :: This is how the Off Topic effluence begins. As was previously brought up, this is a forum for discussing Probation issues. Lets keep it that way.

That's not the argument. The argument is "I lost money because the buyer screwed up returning the item in a timely manner, and by the time it showed up, the iron was cold." BIG difference, and it is very much a valid argument in civil court. There's a difference between putting someone on a list, and determining actual monetary damages. So Rocky, are you volunteering to be the Board Fact Finder and search all of the Civil Court Cases in every state these transactions occur? Because unless someone IS willing to do this, and provide proper citations, that point is moot. You brought up yuour objection (which I am heavenly grateful to see folks readdressing this). But I would hope that folks who bring such specific objections would be willing to supply the needed references.If they are not, then they are stirring the bucket but not willing to filter the contents. (I still love ya!) Well, of course, I reject your assertion that one cannot object to your statement without being willing to do all the legwork of a civil court clerk. Trying to determine monetary damages, and putting someone on a list because they refused to "pay", just opens up a can of worms that cannot work. As an example, I could potentially, for nothing but pure spite, be slapped with some ridiculous "fine" by a "vote" from members, that is far out of line with the facts as presented, and if I disagreed, I could be placed on the HOS...? I mean, for God's sake, there are people who dispute what I say, simply because *I* said it. Not a smart idea.

Well there's 20 minutes I won't get back. A hundred or so posts and Greggy's comment is the most appropriate. And entertaining. I agree Greggy's post is the most appropriate for the off-topic, nothing to do with the Probation Discussion bull. Does anyone have something to add about how to determine justified versus unjustifed expenses being levied by someone bringing an issue to the Probation Discussion? Since this isn't a court of law, determining monetary damages is best left to the injured party to determine. Outside of "he offered to buy the books for $XXX, and never paid", trying to determine damages, particularly punitive, probably isn't in the purview of this board. For example: Dekeuk cost me money by screwing with the time in returning the item, thus resulting in a much lower selling price. But should he owe me the difference? I don't think the board is qualified to make that decision. Others may disagree. I will ask you - you say "I don't think the board is qualified to make that decision." What makes you different form "the board"? Are you not part of the board? Currently the HOS is determined by Board consensus. Will you not vote in the poll since you feel the board is not qualified? They are two separate issues. The person who IS qualified to determine their own damage is the injured party, who is still obviously a part of the board. The board as a whole is not qualified to make monetary damages, for a whole host of reasons, some of them being "personal bias, inexperience, inability to understand the issues, etc." Of course not. It depends on the timing OF THE SELLER. If a seller sells an item timed to a particular event, like a movie, or to take advantage of a low census number, or whatever, and the buyer doesn't return an item within a reasonable amount of time (and three months is NOT a reasonable amount of time), and the iron is then cold, the buyer has caused the seller quantifiable monetary loss. If, during that time, it is advantageous to the seller, and they sell it for MORE, they obviously have no case. Sharon has also experienced this scenario, as she noted. Yet another reason why the board, as a whole, is not qualified to determine monetary damages. However, if you say it IS, then "market value at the time of transaction" IS part of determining monetary damages, absolutely! Answered above. Trying to determine monetary damages exposes the board to a whole host of issues it really has no business being involved in.

That's not the argument. The argument is "I lost money because the buyer screwed up returning the item in a timely manner, and by the time it showed up, the iron was cold." BIG difference, and it is very much a valid argument in civil court. There's a difference between putting someone on a list, and determining actual monetary damages.

Well there's 20 minutes I won't get back. A hundred or so posts and Greggy's comment is the most appropriate. And entertaining. I agree Greggy's post is the most appropriate for the off-topic, nothing to do with the Probation Discussion bull. Does anyone have something to add about how to determine justified versus unjustifed expenses being levied by someone bringing an issue to the Probation Discussion? Since this isn't a court of law, determining monetary damages is best left to the injured party to determine. Outside of "he offered to buy the books for $XXX, and never paid", trying to determine damages, particularly punitive, probably isn't in the purview of this board. For example: Dekeuk cost me money by screwing with the time in returning the item, thus resulting in a much lower selling price. But should he owe me the difference? I don't think the board is qualified to make that decision. Others may disagree.

Please guys. If you want to continue talking about something that isn't probation related, please go to this thread: Are post counts important to you? Please. I agree. yes, I added a little of my own banter. Mainly to show I wasn't being a stick in the mud about working the PL. 'But this has gone way past the line and it is also damned insulting to the others trying to accomplish something. Yes, me too. I'm terribly sorry for the off-topic posting, even though it grew entirely out of ON-topic posting. Forgive me, forgive me, mea MAXIMA culpa. (I kid. Mostly. I love you GooglyMoogly!)

I have just read through approximately 20 pages in this thread because I wanted to see how the status of the updated PL rules were coming along. In doing so I realized these two mental midgets have been having their "discussion" all afternoon. This is just sad and pathetic. Do they have nothing better to do??? Clearly, no. But I'm glad you think I'm a mental midget....

What does GreatGooglyMoogly start with....? :shrug: GreatGoogaMOOGA starts with a G like Grand. Like Glorious. Like Good. Like Gigantic. Like Grievous. I like GreatGooglyMoogly better....

Now, are you going to honor your statement to "leave it alone", or are you going to prove you're not a man of your word....? And the circle...is complete....

What does GreatGooglyMoogly start with....? :shrug:

NO ONE.

I call dibs on the Netherlands. I had you pegged as North Korea. I'm way more fun, and I am nowhere close to starving. Are you high? No one is more fun than Kim Jong Il. NO ONE.

I see a custom title! For whom....? Someone omnipotent shouldn't need to ask this question. True, but I think the word you are looking for is "omniscient:"... om·nip·o·tent [om-nip-uh-tuhnt] - adjective 1. having unlimited power (thumbs u Gotta argue about everything, dontcha...? Can't resist, can ya? I'm like candy to trolls like you.

I see a custom title! For whom....? Someone omnipotent shouldn't need to ask this question. True, but I think the word you are looking for is "omniscient:"... Wouldn't someone omnipotent be omniscient? Ehhhhhhhh... ...technically, omnipotent is "all powerful", for which the argument can be made that it is a separate concept from "all knowing", but really, it could be used either way, theologically speaking...

I call dibs on the Netherlands. I had you pegged as North Korea. North Korea is just China's blitch.

I see a custom title! For whom....? Someone omnipotent shouldn't need to ask this question. True, but I think the word you are looking for is "omniscient"...

Actually, you didn't. But there ya go again, pointing out your win. Yet the other day I followed your sensible advice and left the topic alone. But then you show your nasty side and bring it up as a fighting point. Your inner demons are so deep, you don't know which end is up. Well, other than to build up to a good fight. Sad. You know, you keep prodding the beast, you're gonna get the horns...you know that, right...?

Soothing unguents for everyone!

Nah, I got you *really* good by bringing up the Primer #6 debacle. I'll let you lick your wounds in peace.

I see a custom title! For whom....?

Oh my my my I'm feeling high My moneys gone I'm all alone The world is turnin' Oh what a day What a day whay a day Peace and blessings manifest with every lesson learn, If your knowledge were your wealth then it will be well earn If we were made in his image then call us by our names Most intellects do not believe in god but they fear us just the same Oh on and on and on and on Whew on and on and on and on I go on and on and on and on Ohh on and on and on and on

I don't purport to be anything different. At least I'm honest with myself. You continue to demonstrate your cluelessness about this board, its inhabitants, or pretty much anything having to do with social interaction. You continue to state things that are false, betraying not only your lack of knowledge, but also your obstinate unwillingness to educate yourself. My prediction stands. Thanks for proving my point in a all encompassing admirably stupendous manner. (thumbs u I'm bored of you. "The lady doth protest too much, methinks.." Hamlet, Act III, scene II Now, are you going to honor your statement to "leave it alone", or are you going to prove you're not a man of your word....? Just for you. <3 Thanks for the new quote in my sigline, by the way. It's deliciously ironic. There's a clue in it, if you're smart enough to figure it out....