Search results

There have always been offended people. There may appear to be more now because some groups are more comfortable speaking up about it, whereas before the consequences of doing so were more severe. But I also suspect there really aren't more offended people now but rather a bias of perception...

The principle of charity extends not only to appending an implicit IMO, but also to not taking every word literally, unless something makes it clear they are being literal. So yeah, they could have used a different term, but before jumping on them about it, maybe find out, if it's that important.

The idea that this is one of the least toxic sites is not incompatible with the idea that it could still be better, or that some recent mod actions have reduced trust in them. I'm pretty much in agreement with Alzrius on this so now it's two to one I guess? I doubt posting a poll would go well...

That's a good point. Plus reading everything with an implicit IMO (unless there is a specific reason not to) is just an application of the principle of charity, which is a good thing to keep in mind for any discussion.

A reference to a 'general erosion' can't really be read as a reference to a single incident or act. Arguing that an individual act should not be contextualized as being part of a pattern seems bizarre. In that case, we could never discuss any pattern because each observation could be excused as...

double post

Did anyone suggest it's an all-encompassing solution? It's good advice and the more people who take it, the better the discourse.

It doesn't, really. Facts require interpretation to have any meaning. This gives him too much credit since it implies he created the idea from whole cloth, which ignores the role that David Wesely played in it.

This strikes me as tone trolling, where you agree with what someone says but not the way they say it, which all too often is used to assert control on how people choose to express their legitimate feelings on the matter. It's not up to you to determine whether someone has some emotions they...

It's a bad thing to do, yes. I won't say it makes you a bad person, because that's a whole other kettle of fish, but it is certainly a bad thing to do. Assuming we agree on what "bullying" means. I suppose what you're failing to grasp is that what you claim is bullying is not necessarily...

Cool. Who said he didn't? He doesn't have a right to participate in a particular space, of course, because of previous actions that disqualify him from it. That goes for society, as well, since that was mentioned. He's welcome to exist, just away from people who he harms every single day with...

This is a misrepresentation of this thread, and it itself uncool.

What I've always wondered is what ghosts are supposed to be made of. Clearly it's something that is subject to gravity, since the Earth travels at about 370 km/sec through space and ghosts apparently stay right where they are relative to the planet.

Misspellings don't matter. The fact that they would claim a misspelling was not actually a misspelling but an attempt by an enemy to discredit them, does matter.

Simplest answer? Because people have heard that ghosts involve coldness, so when they feel a cold they can't explain, they're more likely to consider it indicative of a ghost, if they are prone to that type of thinking. Based on my understanding of folklore, I would challenge a claim that...

There's an entire literary genre that could be called 'generic fantasy' - it's not a gaming thing. And using an inflammatory term like 'indoctrinated' isn't cool.

In mythology, crows are often seen as an omen of death, as if they know death is coming. The reality is likely that whenever two opposing groups of humans making lots of noise gathered in a field, crows would also gather, not because they were able to predict death but because they're...

Since you asked, the answer is "I don't." If I don't know the answer to something, my response is "I don't know." I don't feel the need to add anything beyond that. I am comfortable with the fact that there are things I will personally never understand, but I don't supose that to mean that they...

Fair enough. To answer your question, no I've never had an experience I would describe as supernatural. Someone would have to first demonstrate that the supernatural is even a possibility before I would believe that.

Do you only want to discuss other peoples' experiences, or would you also be interested in discussing the irrationality of your supernatural beliefs? I'd be happy to explain the flaws in your reasoning here.