Just wanted to say that I'm REALLY glad you started this......and now that I am out of steam from blabbing away in "The Locked Topic" (is that a new mystery novel??), I need 3 cups of Espresso to get revved up again. AND some other people's posts to respond to also.
You might thank "cateyes" for starting this, although that did inspire me to start this thread topic.
Since it isn't my intention to unintentionally 'sway' opinions regarding these questions.....
Well of course it isn't, you big silly! If you sway other's opinions, who the heck will you have to debate?
Interestingly, stated that sometimes engenders the opposite effect, (not that anyone is 'swayed' but, some often become even more determined not to be swayed ... that's probably just human nature, for some humans).
As to the 'locked thread'.......I accept the apology of the OP who 'paged' me.......while offering my apology for any unintended emotional duress caused by my posts.
VERRRY nice! Spoken like a gentleman!
Funny how (I think) we all tend to be the same in this area....."one side" makes an apology, which in turn makes the "other side" feel kind of bad too, and then of course....
we just GOTTA apologize too!
I'm aware I'm making an assumption on this that includes you, falcon9......but I bet it fits you too, you BIG MEANY!! (JK....as I'm sure you know)
In this particular instance, I didn't offer an apology because the OP did it first. As I said, I read this morning's comments to the locked thread referred to and considered my actual intentions, (rather any that may have been imputed to my posts there). After a ponder, (roughly 3.33 nanoseconds
), it was concluded that some people may be constitutionally-unsuited to the logic of debate and are likely to be unaware of what doctor's, (for instance), are taught about being "emotionally-detached" lest it influence what they are trying to accomplish. The same concept applies generally to debate, (and other situations), in that debate is essentially the exchange of opposing viewpoints done in either a logical, illogical, (emotional), or mixture of both manner. Since it isn't possible to know in advance which of these a proponent of an opposing viewpoint may be coming from, (sans prior experience with a particular opponent), one usually ends up finding out after the raft is down-river and in the rapids.
For all of my apparent "fans", 'anti-fans', 'secret admirers', (ya'll outed yourselfs and we're on to you now *chuckle*), 'anti-groupies',.....
GEE! Can I PLEASE be ALL of those?? PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE?
Wouldn't 'fan' and 'anti-fan' be mutually contradictive if you chose both?
So, in a rare moment of potential indiscretion....
You're not tacitly implying that those aren't so rare or momentary, are you? *chuckle*
Either way, you are getting no biscuits. Bad dog.
*crickets STILL chirping*
No more crickets since at least four others have chimed-in on this thread. Actually, that was added because no replies were expected until later in the day/evening. Apparently, I was in error about that. <-- save that quote, you anti-fans!
*Just one QUICK off-topic question for you, falcon9: Any chuckles at the "Burning you at the stake" cartoons???
OK I PROMISE not to post ANY MORE stupid humor here from this point forward. (You KNOW how hard that's going to be for me......being the wise cracking "class clown" at heart that I am (read SMART-A**/WISE-A**)
Not only did I see your cartoon attachments on you post, I laughed and shamelessly swiped 'em for my own personal gain, (well, maybe not gain but, to "annoy" other people elsewhere with). If that's not cool, I'll consider trying to determine how to give them back.