All it's going to take is one fuckup to strap home made explosives to one of these and most of you kids will be alive to see all civilian RC devices become instantly illegal (around the same time gun ownership in the United States becomes criminal after imbeciles decide the 2nd amendment means all manner of bullshit under a revised document resembling some arcane time when people needed every last man and their guns to squash the real criminals).

Nah, not really offended. Just disagree. Seeya!
>> ^RhesusMonk:

Well, we're not going to get anywhere. Clearly I've offended your well-honed psychological sensibilities by challenging your post that stated severe electroshock therapy is the ONLY treatment in some situations, written in the context of a news story where no justification whatsoever was given.
My brush painted as broadly as the words: "when aversive conditioning is used in the developmental setting, it is as a last resort and the aversive stimulus is sparing and lenient;" words with which you seem to agree. The side-effects to be avoided were mentioned in both our posts, and I should have used the word "or" where I used "and." What a semantic boner!
I don't know what your background is (?), but aversive punishment may be a way of referring to a practice in some fields, but in the context of ASDs and behavioral analysis, I have never heard the term used. Also, when autistics injure themselves, they do so when exhibiting self-stimulaing behaviors. I have been highly discouraged from using the term self-injuriious, as it is an outcome-based term that draws the focus away from the behavior's motivators.
As to the ad hom, if you took offense to my statement on the lack of creativity or my reference to Nurse Ratched, be assured I was referring to all those who upvoted your comment as well. Electroshock therapy is arcane and unimaginative in the educational context.

>> ^berticus:
>> ^RhesusMonk:
... "self-injurious" behavior (which is actually called self-stimulating behavior). ...
This is simply not true.

Well, we're not going to get anywhere. Clearly I've offended your well-honed psychological sensibilities by challenging your post that stated severe electroshock therapy is the ONLY treatment in some situations, written in the context of a news story where no justification whatsoever was given.

My brush painted as broadly as the words: "when aversive conditioning is used in the developmental setting, it is as a last resort and the aversive stimulus is sparing and lenient;" words with which you seem to agree. The side-effects to be avoided were mentioned in both our posts, and I should have used the word "or" where I used "and." What a semantic boner!

I don't know what your background is (?), but aversive punishment may be a way of referring to a practice in some fields, but in the context of ASDs and behavioral analysis, I have never heard the term used. Also, when autistics injure themselves, they do so when exhibiting self-stimulaing behaviors. I have been highly discouraged from using the term self-injuriious, as it is an outcome-based term that draws the focus away from the behavior's motivators.

As to the ad hom, if you took offense to my statement on the lack of creativity or my reference to Nurse Ratched, be assured I was referring to all those who upvoted your comment as well. Electroshock therapy is arcane and unimaginative in the educational context.



>> ^berticus:

>> ^RhesusMonk:
... "self-injurious" behavior (which is actually called self-stimulating behavior). ...
This is simply not true.

I agree and disagree with Louis on this.

The supporting the local stores over the small difference in price on goods, but when it comes to the larger chains actually giving you the service you want over the older stores not, then we diverge.

I'm not going to have a worse experience and continue to support a local store purely on the basis of them being a local store, when I could be getting what I want (the latest release movie when I actually want to watch it) from a chain.

Now, the video store is becoming an arcane example, because who the hell actually uses them anymore, but the thought behind it remains. You don't get worse service, lower quality goods, or not the goods you want purely to support a local store.

What local stores have to have is a point of difference, and when he starts talking about book stores, there's a perfect example. The big chain stores have all the 'latest' and 'popular' books, but they don't have a depth of range. Have a store that specializes in a genre (childrens/education, fantasy/sci fi, literature) and then overlay on that a wonderful experience (great feel to the store, reading areas, friendly staff) and you may have to weather an initial drop in sales when the big store comes into town, but I bet it'll come back again when people get over the excitement of the new store and realize that they can't find the books they really want in it. (I know that this 'weathering' time is quite possibly not realistic financially for a lot of stores, and that's a horrible thing).

Supporting a store purely based on it being local is ridiculous. Supporting a store because they provide you with things you can't get at another store (even if that other thing is a 'Hi Bob' when you come into the store) is why you go to shops.

Now, stories like his coffee story make me sad. Because there is a business with a point of difference that didn't make it.

That shits me, people going 'meh, Starbucks is good enough, I'll go there instead of crossing the street'.

Starbucks is shit coffee, they closed most of the stores they opened here in Australia because we like our f*cking coffee (Especially here in Melbourne... man, we sell espresso coffee everywhere, hardware stores, plant nurseries, book shops, clothing stores) and it didn't take that long for most of the Starbucks to close up and die because people realised their coffee was shit. So having a good coffee place closed down by Starbucks definitely speaks to me of consumers who are dumbass shits who will just put up with any old crap over quality just to save a few cents or avoid crossing a street.

Well, fuck them, they deserve the shit they get.

That would solve a lot of religious hatred. But most people in turbans and those thumping bibles wouldn't be as grownup as you.

>> ^Shepppard:
>> ^blankfist:
I was raised not to hit women. In my core I think it's wrong, though I think it's a terribly biased and arcane belief. Once in high school during a breakup my ex-girlfriend started wailing on me and trying desperately to kick me in the nuts. I wanted to defend myself, but felt I couldn't outside trying to catch her arms before they hit me.
I think in the deep recesses of my mind, I watch this and feel some sense of perverted justice for all the times a girl was violent against me and I felt I couldn't retaliate.
Also, how many times has a woman put your ass in danger by mouthing off to some dude? And all of a sudden you have to fight to defend her honor or some crazy archaic primal bullshit like that.

I was raised the same way, but whenever something like that happened to me, I found the best possible way to resolve the situation (And I actually mean this in all seriousness)
Was a hug.
After a few seconds of taking a hit or two, I'd grab an arm, spin them so their back was to me and hold their arms in a "Hug" type of stance.
It was almost an instant de-escalator. They're either forced to talk about why they were taking swings at me in the first place, or too embarrassed to keep going because they got beat by a hug.
In this situation mind you, I don't think the hug would go so well.

>> ^Psychologic:

>> ^Darkhand:
>> ^Psychologic:
If the customer can't read the listed specs himself then he probably won't do much better at an online store.

The point is when you ask someone for advice your expecting them to NOT have to read the specs.

They should have the specs of every laptop they sale memorized? Would that include benchmark numbers and compatibility issues as well?
Edit: Realistically though, if the employee can't glance at the specs for 2 seconds and then answer the question then they shouldn't be working there.


I think you're missing the point Psychologic the humor is flying over your head or you're taking everything very literally I'm not sure.

When I went to home depot a few weeks ago I was buying a lawn mower. There was an "Expert" in my isle (Just like in Best Buy if you ask someone who works in the cellphone section to sell you a computer they will say you have to get someone in the computer section).

I asked him if he could tell me the difference between two mores. He proceeded to read to me, verbatim, what was written on the little cards they put in front of boxes on the racks.

When someone comes to me and says "What's the difference between these two" and you have to read off the cards, and then you can't formulate an opinion of your own such as the gentle ginger pictures in this video, it's obvious you have no business selling anything in that department.

If he has to read the specs that intently then he obviously is going to look at you and say "Well this one has more gigabytes then the other" Wow great fucking insight Sherlock like I couldn't figure that out by myself when I READ THE STICKER. Like these "sales people" posses some sort of Arcane Knowledge about the English Language that enables them to find some sort of Davinci Code within the Best Buy Sticker.

Plain and simple if you can only tell me the difference by checking what's on each sticker and then NOTHING MORE you're doing a BAD JOB.

There are all sorts of arcane rules and rituals that go with being in the armed forces. They take them seriously, for good and ill.

Read the contract before you sign -- caveat emptor, if ever there was a time for an emptor to caveat, it is when signing your life over to the military.


>> ^handmethekeysyou:

Wait, wait, wait.
This guy is discharged. Then, after he's out of the armed forces, he does something or other to piss off the military. So they waste god knows how much government money to hold a trial to retroactively change what they call the conditions of his discharge?

Apparently Oncor has yet to master that piece of arcane technology known as the circuit breaker?

You've done your homework like a good little boy. Yea, I always thought of a real satanist as somebody that is their own god and that one should live as one wishes as long as they're willing to deal with the consequences involved.

You even used the word "myriad" correctly.
>> ^quantumushroom:
Can't speak for all "denominations", but I can tell you with authority that the COS is made up of atheists who do not believe in a literal Devil or Hell. Satan is a symbol and representative of man's animal nature. Where it might differ from non-Satanic atheists is the idea that "magic" aka force of will, exists. A spell or 'destruction ritual' serves mainly as a psychological purging for the "magician". Obviously the targeted "victim" doesn't always fall prey to destruction a la The Omen.

Anton LaVey (plagiarist extraordinaire) realized that man has an eternal need for ritual and spectacle and capitalized on it. His observations about human nature are spot on, though many of them are lifted without credit from myriad sources.
No, I am not a Satanist, despite my dark and arcane knowledge. <IMG class=smiley src="http://cdn.videosift.com/cdm/emoticon/smileopen.gif"> The irony of the Church of Satan and Satanists in general is that one obviously need not believe in anything to feel lust, rage, envy, hate, etc. Hypocrisy is the greatest luxury among all humans.
>> ^Sagemind:
It's not the opposite of Christianity, it's more of the same - based on the same mythology and dogma that encompasses the christian faith. These are people who believe in God and the Devil and are picking a side.
People who call themselves atheists believe in neither - that they are just figments of the imagination and creations of man for use in control over the masses - and apparently it works very well on the weak minded.

As Luke said in ESB: "You'll find I'm full of surprises." Then he got his hand cut off...

Thanks!

>> ^Duckman33:

>> ^quantumushroom:
Can't speak for all "denominations", but I can tell you with authority that the COS is made up of atheists who do not believe in a literal Devil or Hell. Satan is a symbol and representative of man's animal nature. Where it might differ from non-Satanic atheists is the idea that "magic" aka force of will, exists. A spell or 'destruction ritual' serves mainly as a psychological purging for the "magician". Obviously the targeted "victim" doesn't always fall prey to destruction a la The Omen.

Anton LaVey (plagiarist extraordinaire) realized that man has an eternal need for ritual and spectacle and capitalized on it. His observations about human nature are spot on, though many of them are lifted without credit from myriad sources.
No, I am not a Satanist, despite my dark and arcane knowledge. The irony of the Church of Satan and Satanists in general is that one obviously need not believe in anything to feel lust, rage, envy, hate, etc. Hypocrisy is the greatest luxury among all humans.

>> ^Sagemind:
It's not the opposite of Christianity, it's more of the same - based on the same mythology and dogma that encompasses the christian faith. These are people who believe in God and the Devil and are picking a side.
People who call themselves atheists believe in neither - that they are just figments of the imagination and creations of man for use in control over the masses - and apparently it works very well on the weak minded.


Every once in a while you surprise me Q. Well said.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Can't speak for all "denominations", but I can tell you with authority that the COS is made up of atheists who do not believe in a literal Devil or Hell. Satan is a symbol and representative of man's animal nature. Where it might differ from non-Satanic atheists is the idea that "magic" aka force of will, exists. A spell or 'destruction ritual' serves mainly as a psychological purging for the "magician". Obviously the targeted "victim" doesn't always fall prey to destruction a la The Omen.

Anton LaVey (plagiarist extraordinaire) realized that man has an eternal need for ritual and spectacle and capitalized on it. His observations about human nature are spot on, though many of them are lifted without credit from myriad sources.
No, I am not a Satanist, despite my dark and arcane knowledge. The irony of the Church of Satan and Satanists in general is that one obviously need not believe in anything to feel lust, rage, envy, hate, etc. Hypocrisy is the greatest luxury among all humans.

>> ^Sagemind:
It's not the opposite of Christianity, it's more of the same - based on the same mythology and dogma that encompasses the christian faith. These are people who believe in God and the Devil and are picking a side.
People who call themselves atheists believe in neither - that they are just figments of the imagination and creations of man for use in control over the masses - and apparently it works very well on the weak minded.



Every once in a while you surprise me Q. Well said.

Can't speak for all "denominations", but I can tell you with authority that the COS is made up of atheists who do not believe in a literal Devil or Hell. Satan is a symbol and representative of man's animal nature. Where it might differ from non-Satanic atheists is the idea that "magic" aka force of will, exists. A spell or 'destruction ritual' serves mainly as a psychological purging for the "magician". Obviously the targeted "victim" doesn't always fall prey to destruction a la The Omen.

Anton LaVey (plagiarist extraordinaire) realized that man has an eternal need for ritual and spectacle and capitalized on it. His observations about human nature are spot on, though many of them are lifted without credit from myriad sources.

No, I am not a Satanist, despite my dark and arcane knowledge. The irony of the Church of Satan and Satanists in general is that one obviously need not believe in anything to feel lust, rage, envy, hate, etc. Hypocrisy is the greatest luxury among all humans.


>> ^Sagemind:

It's not the opposite of Christianity, it's more of the same - based on the same mythology and dogma that encompasses the christian faith. These are people who believe in God and the Devil and are picking a side.
People who call themselves atheists believe in neither - that they are just figments of the imagination and creations of man for use in control over the masses - and apparently it works very well on the weak minded.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Dag says that when these kinds of things are explicitly brought to my attention, I'm bound to act on them.

Sorry @rasch187. *discard.

>> ^Sagemind:

It really just comes down to:
If we have the rule - do we keep it?
Do we enforce it?
Again, what is the point of having rules if we never have to follow them?
If the rule is arcane and outdated, then remove the rule, otherwise enforce it.
What say ye @dag

It really just comes down to:
If we have the rule - do we keep it?
Do we enforce it?

Again, what is the point of having rules if we never have to follow them?
If the rule is arcane and outdated, then remove the rule, otherwise enforce it.

What say ye @dag

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I couldn't agree more. After using the Minecraft Wiki extensively, I've realized that it's the perfect medium for documenting arcane but important rules and keeping them up to date. it would be nice to have it on a subdomain- and tie in our user authentication- we'll need to investigate this.