In light of recent drama (pop on over to and then this post in kristen's LJ if you want to read some of it, it's hilarious) I just have to show a little genuine RHCP appreciation
( Read more... )
saying you know the entirety of the cast and crew from seeing a few shows is like saying you can fly a Boeing 737 after taking a trip to Japan. Didn't say I knew everyone 100%. I know pretty much who everyone IS, and I know a number of people more than that, although it's been a while since I've spent time with anyone from the Rocky cast, since I've been avoiding that whole scene. And your metaphor implies that I said I saw the show once and then claimed to know everyone... a better analogy would be to say that if I drove around the parking lot a few times, I could then make it to Canada. Although I still diasgree with you because, for as much as I don't know you, you don't know my connections to anyone I used to be friends with in Rocky, so neither of us can really make a fair comparison on that.
After reading many of your posts I have come to the conclusion that you know extremely little about who we are. "Who we are?" The cult thing again. Sorry, I never received your brochure.
your sweeping generalization of us only solidified my beliefs. That tends to be how belief systems work... if someone questions your beliefs, you hold onto them for dear life, regardless of what the beliefs even are.
you cannot classify so many people with such little information. Wrong! You can classify anything. I can lay a red ball, a dog, and a knife on a table and classify them all as "things." Bam.
really, you must see that you cant possibly know the slightest thing about most of us. Was that your closing statement? Didn't you ever take a high school English class? Not that convincing. Next time, have someone else write up your argument for you.
"a better analogy would be to say that if I drove around the parking lot a few times, I could then make it to Canada."
but that analogy is false. are you just giving me a better example or was that some kind of pathetic rebuttal?
"'Who we are?' The cult thing again. Sorry, I never received your brochure."
The point I was trying to make is this: you basically said 'rocky people are [GENERALIZATION]'
I use the collective we not because I speak for all the FBC, but because YOU have decided that we are a group. YOU know nothing about US because if you did you would not make the mistake of referring to us collectively or branding us as collectively distasteful.
" 'your sweeping generalization of us only solidified my beliefs.' That tends to be how belief systems work... if someone questions your beliefs, you hold onto them for dear life, regardless of what the beliefs even are."
THINK about what you are saying, for gods sake. the belief I was referring to was this: "this woman knows nothing of who we are" (inferred from reading multiple postings). I then saw the post we are currently commenting on and my beliefs were reinforced. Where, if you please, did you QUESTION me belief between A: beginning to think you were full of shit B: reading you lg post. Nowhere. think before you argue. Second, this had really nothing to do with the central argument. what are you trying to prove?
"'you cannot classify so many people with such little information.' Wrong! You can classify anything. I can lay a red ball, a dog, and a knife on a table and classify them all as "things." Bam."
Another moronic argument. You beat me on a purely semantic level, but the point remains that you cannot accurately classify things with limited information. Example: a group of 50 objects. all are green. One of said objects is a head of lettuce. It does not follow that all the objects are vegetables. You could say that if you wanted but you would probably be WRONG.
"'really, you must see that you cant possibly know the slightest thing about most of us.' Was that your closing statement? Didn't you ever take a high school English class? Not that convincing. Next time, have someone else write up your argument for you."
ive always been a big fan of common sense. if we're going for style and form, i'll flower things up a little por vous.
funny that you mention the Revere house, or more appropriately named the Revere duo, since there's two of them. in case you haven't noticed, they haven't posted a damn thing here, for or against. you've got Framingham and Winchester representing here.
Rocky is a group of social inepts and misfits. Some people have enough in thier makeup that they leave. Other stay with the rabble. Apparently you are the rabble.
for now, i'm too lazy to respond to that, so i'm just going to reply to my favorite part:
['you cannot classify so many people with such little information.' Wrong! You can classify anything. I can lay a red ball, a dog, and a knife on a table and classify them all as "things." Bam.]
Another moronic argument. You beat me on a purely semantic level, but the point remains that you cannot accurately classify things with limited information. Example: a group of 50 objects. all are green. One of said objects is a head of lettuce. It does not follow that all the objects are vegetables. You could say that if you wanted but you would probably be WRONG.
Alrighty then. So next time, I'll be sure not to say something entirely too specific for you... instead of saying "People at Rocky have either cheated on their girlfriend/boyfriends, slashed each other's tires, turns on their 'friends,' been total whores, or done some combination of those things," I'll just say "I try to avoid that group because they do things that I find wrong." Green, not lettuce. And like I said, any number of things referred to as a collective whole is a "group," and I am referring to all of you as a collective whole. Besides, didn't one of your own say you were "a family unit?" Sounds like a self-proclaimed group to me...
[Alrighty then. So next time, I'll be sure not to say something entirely too specific for you... instead of saying "People at Rocky have either cheated on their girlfriend/boyfriends, slashed each other's tires, turns on their 'friends,' been total whores, or done some combination of those things," I'll just say "I try to avoid that group because they do things that I find wrong." Green, not lettuce. And like I said, any number of things referred to as a collective whole is a "group," and I am referring to all of you as a collective whole. Besides, didn't one of your own say you were "a family unit?" Sounds like a self-proclaimed group to me...]
I do have a problem with this, as a matter of fact. You cant say the group is ANYTHING or attribute any common adjectives to us unless you know all of us intimately (please don’t make the obvious joke here or I will weep tears of sorrow). From reading your posts (admittedly not exactly an infallible way of gathering information) you don’t know more than a hand-full of us. I never said every person every in the FBC were angels; maybe some of those people have done shitty things. I’m sorry but that is hardly a basis on which to assume that all of the FBC are unsavory characters; that we are sexual predators or treat people badly (or what else have you). I don’t, I know many of my rocky-going compatriots don’t. Nor do most of us approve of such behavior. You can say "The people I’ve met from rocky are...." you can say "my [limited] experience with rocky people has been..." and I cant possibly object. But when you speak so offhandedly and unfavorably of us, as if you have met us all and know us well is something I feel the need to take issue with. In my own defense and the defense of my aforementioned rocky friends who are not the morally bereft or social deviants/misfits you speak of. All I ask of you is to acknowledge that you in fact do NOT know all of us, in many cases at all, and there for cannot pass any judgment based solely on your limited/dated/(and I believe)biased interactions with the cast (though I find your judgment of those you have met to be rather harsh, that’s not something I can effectively argue). Do you understand where I’m coming from and why I don’t let this rest?
And to Chris.. I chose not to respond to you insults because I honestly don’t think your drivel and baseless attacks are worth responding to. my points rather than being met with counterpoints and valid argument would be met with insults on my person/friends.
ahhhh, that is so loooong, my brain hurts. i'm so tired of this. i'm not going to waste any more time on you and your friends... we'll just say that you're all WONDERFUL people and i am BITTER AND MEAN AND WRONG and i will just neveeeeer eeeveeer get it blah blah blah.
...
oh, and i knew your mom... intimately... LAST NIGHT!!!!! woo!!!!
Didn't say I knew everyone 100%. I know pretty much who everyone IS, and I know a number of people more than that, although it's been a while since I've spent time with anyone from the Rocky cast, since I've been avoiding that whole scene. And your metaphor implies that I said I saw the show once and then claimed to know everyone... a better analogy would be to say that if I drove around the parking lot a few times, I could then make it to Canada. Although I still diasgree with you because, for as much as I don't know you, you don't know my connections to anyone I used to be friends with in Rocky, so neither of us can really make a fair comparison on that.
After reading many of your posts I have come to the conclusion that you know extremely little about who we are.
"Who we are?" The cult thing again. Sorry, I never received your brochure.
your sweeping generalization of us only solidified my beliefs.
That tends to be how belief systems work... if someone questions your beliefs, you hold onto them for dear life, regardless of what the beliefs even are.
you cannot classify so many people with such little information.
Wrong! You can classify anything. I can lay a red ball, a dog, and a knife on a table and classify them all as "things." Bam.
really, you must see that you cant possibly know the slightest thing about most of us.
Was that your closing statement? Didn't you ever take a high school English class? Not that convincing. Next time, have someone else write up your argument for you.
Reply
"a better analogy would be to say that if I drove around the parking lot a few times, I could then make it to Canada."
but that analogy is false. are you just giving me a better example or was that some kind of pathetic rebuttal?
"'Who we are?' The cult thing again. Sorry, I never received your brochure."
The point I was trying to make is this: you basically said 'rocky people are [GENERALIZATION]'
I use the collective we not because I speak for all the FBC, but because YOU have decided that we are a group. YOU know nothing about US because if you did you would not make the mistake of referring to us collectively or branding us as collectively distasteful.
" 'your sweeping generalization of us only solidified my beliefs.'
That tends to be how belief systems work... if someone questions your beliefs, you hold onto them for dear life, regardless of what the beliefs even are."
THINK about what you are saying, for gods sake. the belief I was referring to was this: "this woman knows nothing of who we are" (inferred from reading multiple postings). I then saw the post we are currently commenting on and my beliefs were reinforced. Where, if you please, did you QUESTION me belief between A: beginning to think you were full of shit B: reading you lg post. Nowhere. think before you argue. Second, this had really nothing to do with the central argument. what are you trying to prove?
"'you cannot classify so many people with such little information.'
Wrong! You can classify anything. I can lay a red ball, a dog, and a knife on a table and classify them all as "things." Bam."
Another moronic argument. You beat me on a purely semantic level, but the point remains that you cannot accurately classify things with limited information. Example: a group of 50 objects. all are green. One of said objects is a head of lettuce. It does not follow that all the objects are vegetables. You could say that if you wanted but you would probably be WRONG.
"'really, you must see that you cant possibly know the slightest thing about most of us.'
Was that your closing statement? Didn't you ever take a high school English class? Not that convincing. Next time, have someone else write up your argument for you."
ive always been a big fan of common sense. if we're going for style and form, i'll flower things up a little por vous.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
*gangsta pose*
*'fuck off' glare*
"WINCHESTA, REPISENT!"
Hrm. I'll give that a no.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
['you cannot classify so many people with such little information.'
Wrong! You can classify anything. I can lay a red ball, a dog, and a knife on a table and classify them all as "things." Bam.]
Another moronic argument. You beat me on a purely semantic level, but the point remains that you cannot accurately classify things with limited information. Example: a group of 50 objects. all are green. One of said objects is a head of lettuce. It does not follow that all the objects are vegetables. You could say that if you wanted but you would probably be WRONG.
Alrighty then. So next time, I'll be sure not to say something entirely too specific for you... instead of saying "People at Rocky have either cheated on their girlfriend/boyfriends, slashed each other's tires, turns on their 'friends,' been total whores, or done some combination of those things," I'll just say "I try to avoid that group because they do things that I find wrong." Green, not lettuce. And like I said, any number of things referred to as a collective whole is a "group," and I am referring to all of you as a collective whole. Besides, didn't one of your own say you were "a family unit?" Sounds like a self-proclaimed group to me...
Reply
I do have a problem with this, as a matter of fact. You cant say the group is ANYTHING or attribute any common adjectives to us unless you know all of us intimately (please don’t make the obvious joke here or I will weep tears of sorrow). From reading your posts (admittedly not exactly an infallible way of gathering information) you don’t know more than a hand-full of us. I never said every person every in the FBC were angels; maybe some of those people have done shitty things. I’m sorry but that is hardly a basis on which to assume that all of the FBC are unsavory characters; that we are sexual predators or treat people badly (or what else have you). I don’t, I know many of my rocky-going compatriots don’t. Nor do most of us approve of such behavior. You can say "The people I’ve met from rocky are...." you can say "my [limited] experience with rocky people has been..." and I cant possibly object. But when you speak so offhandedly and unfavorably of us, as if you have met us all and know us well is something I feel the need to take issue with. In my own defense and the defense of my aforementioned rocky friends who are not the morally bereft or social deviants/misfits you speak of. All I ask of you is to acknowledge that you in fact do NOT know all of us, in many cases at all, and there for cannot pass any judgment based solely on your limited/dated/(and I believe)biased interactions with the cast (though I find your judgment of those you have met to be rather harsh, that’s not something I can effectively argue). Do you understand where I’m coming from and why I don’t let this rest?
And to Chris.. I chose not to respond to you insults because I honestly don’t think your drivel and baseless attacks are worth responding to. my points rather than being met with counterpoints and valid argument would be met with insults on my person/friends.
-T/S/
Reply
...
oh, and i knew your mom... intimately... LAST NIGHT!!!!! woo!!!!
Reply
and im blubbering like a school girl.
Reply
Leave a comment