BTH Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 ??? You just pulled a PTG - I neevr implied any of that. I used the extremes and you said "I also like how people find it necessary to use absolute extremes to prove their point". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 lol I've become a catch phrase, my life is complete. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsniper Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 By the way, people use extremes because it makes things easier. If you're going to tell me that my singing is worse than a professional singer and than say that I'm dealing with extremes so the example doesn't count, well... your argument isn't making much sense. If you're admitting that pro singers are better than me than you're admitting that there are different levels of musical talent and that even pros can be on different levels. But ah well, I won't listen to what you say anyway, right? So this was all rambling nonsense then? Gotcha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 So this was all rambling nonsense then? Gotcha Nope. What I told you in that last post was that you didn't understand my "rambling nonsense" post that yuo just quoted. Where in that post did I mention you were using extremes? Whatever, you're clearly clueless as to what the argument actually is, so I don't see how you can be so passionate about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsniper Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Jesus christ, I have to do this step by step. 1) You used extremes 2) I questioned extremes 3) Rambling post 4) Examples and tone in post refer to ME using extremes. 5) I point it out 6) You deny it 7) I point that out 8) You resort to name-calling which is never a good sign. Seriously, if you weren't inferring that I was contradicting myself then this If you're going to tell me that my singing is worse than a professional singer and than say that I'm dealing with extremes so the example doesn't count, well... your argument isn't making much sense. If you're admitting that pro singers are better than me than you're admitting that there are different levels of musical talent and that even pros can be on different levels. But ah well, I won't listen to what you say anyway, right? could've been left out. That was the only way I saw that whole section as relevant to the discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Nope, that wasn't what I was saying in that post. You seem to agree with: if Singer X is a better singer than me & that Singer Z is no better than Singer Y because music is all subjective My point: If one singer can be better than another singer then clearly there are different levels of musical talent and that Singer Z and Singer Y cannot both be perfectly even in terms of that talent. And even if they were, it could not be the case 100% of the time. As I already said, people will have their opinions and there will always be someone who prefers the worse singer to the better singer - BUT, that doesn't make the worse singer any better. I like Jan Bulis more than Sydney Crosby but Crosby is definitely the better player (I know you'll tell me sports are completely different and you can't compare so you can save that argument - sports is the same, there are different talent levels and different coaches will want different types of players on their team, for example, Sutter in Calgary. They won't necessarily want the same players.) That's the argument but every time I say it you bring up extremes for no apparent reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsniper Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Nope, that wasn't what I was saying in that post. You seem to agree with: if Singer X is a better singer than me & that Singer Z is no better than Singer Y because music is all subjective Thats hard for me to agree with when what I'm saying is that it's not set in stone one person is better then another. You're talking generally while I'm talking personally so you don't even get what I'm saying. My point: If one singer can be better than another singer then clearly there are different levels of musical talent and that Singer Z and Singer Y cannot both be perfectly even in terms of that talent. And even if they were, it could not be the case 100% of the time. You're countering a point I never made here. As I already said, people will have their opinions and there will always be someone who prefers the worse singer to the better singer - BUT, that doesn't make the worse singer any better. I like Jan Bulis more than Sydney Crosby but Crosby is definitely the better player (I know you'll tell me sports are completely different and you can't compare so you can save that argument - sports is the same, there are different talent levels and different coaches will want different types of players on their team, for example, Sutter in Calgary. They won't necessarily want the same players.) I don't have to, I said that...oh...about an hour ago. It would be stupid because whether something like that is good or bad IS subjective. Any form of media whether it be movie, music or video games can not be stated good or bad and have it as a fact. Some things can have larger fanbases then others but it's not set in stone that something is better then others for every single person in the world. Plus theres a scoresheet that tells differently. Movie reviews can be subjective. A critic can not like a certain scene and dock the movie points while a regular Joe can think it was the most amazing scene ever. Not the same in sports. A goal is a goal, an assist is an assist. The more points you have, the better you're considered. That's the argument but every time I say it you bring up extremes for no apparent reason. I brought it up once for the sake of this argument. If you mean my last post, I abandoned the whole "subjective" argument just because you called me clueless and it pissed me off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Gah. Whatever. The Beatles are better than Simple Plan no matter what way you look at it, no matter how much more you or anyone likes Simple Plan more. You look at musical talent. Quality of the singing, quality of the lyrics, how well each person can play their instrument, how many hits and classics they've released, etc and the result is obvious - that one band is better than the other. What would your argument be for this example? That some people like Simple Plan more than the Beatles? Yes, I'm sure many people do. most of them would be girls younger than I am who listen to whatever's mainstream onlybecause it's mainstream and aren't able to appreciate older music. So they have their reasons, that's great. Give me reasons or arguments as to how a band like Simple Plan can be equal with a band like the Beatles? Or you can use any average mainstream band with any classic band. There's not really any argument you can make except that you, personally, like the sound of their music more - but your opinion doesn't change the quality of their music. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark_faerie87 Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Gah. Whatever. The Beatles are better than Simple Plan no matter what way you look at it, no matter how much more you or anyone likes Simple Plan more. You look at musical talent. Quality of the singing, quality of the lyrics, how well each person can play their instrument, how many hits and classics they've released, etc and the result is obvious - that one band is better than the other. What would your argument be for this example? That some people like Simple Plan more than the Beatles? Yes, I'm sure many people do. most of them would be girls younger than I am who listen to whatever's mainstream onlybecause it's mainstream and aren't able to appreciate older music. So they have their reasons, that's great. Give me reasons or arguments as to how a band like Simple Plan can be equal with a band like the Beatles? Or you can use any average mainstream band with any classic band. There's not really any argument you can make except that you, personally, like the sound of their music more - but your opinion doesn't change the quality of their music. Dude...the Beatles suck! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsniper Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Gah. Whatever. The Beatles are better than Simple Plan no matter what way you look at it, no matter how much more you or anyone likes Simple Plan more. You look at musical talent. Quality of the singing, quality of the lyrics, how well each person can play their instrument, how many hits and classics they've released, etc and the result is obvious - that one band is better than the other. What would your argument be for this example? That some people like Simple Plan more than the Beatles? Yes, I'm sure many people do. most of them would be girls younger than I am who listen to whatever's mainstream onlybecause it's mainstream and aren't able to appreciate older music. So they have their reasons, that's great. Give me reasons or arguments as to how a band like Simple Plan can be equal with a band like the Beatles? Or you can use any average mainstream band with any classic band. There's not really any argument you can make except that you, personally, like the sound of their music more - but your opinion doesn't change the quality of their music. I would except you keep getting angry that I'm repeating myself (you're doing the same). If you don't get what I'm saying after 2 HOURS OF BANTER then you never will. faerie, agreed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Saying they suck proves my point just as well because you're agreeing that some bands suck and others donn't hence there are different levels. But yeah, this is getting old. Atleast we pulled away from PTG in the post-race. PS. even Faerie agrees with me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsniper Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Saying they suck proves my point just as well because you're agreeing that some bands suck and others donn't hence there are different levels. But yeah, this is getting old. Atleast we pulled away from PTG in the post-race. The different levels thing was all your idea. I said whether something's good or not isn't set in stone. One person can like something and not be wrong. Doesn't mean I can't like something more then something else I like. If that was the case, I'd have to think every band, movie and video game in the world was awesome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doktor Kosmos Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 Jesus, get a room you two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsniper Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Jesus, get a room you two. 8 and a half hours after the last post. Nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Went to see At World's End again today with my Mom. It was definitely better the second time since I wasn't constantly trying to decide who was on what side and who was really a double crossing whom. I still didn't care for the multi-Jacks in Davey Jones' locker, but other than that I thought it started to approach to first one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 speaking of multiple jacks. Then why when they left the locker he still had multiple jacks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 speaking of multiple jacks. Then why when they left the locker he still had multiple jacks? I guess they were trying to show he wasn't back to being completely sane. Though, Jack wasn't quite sane to begin with, haha. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 that's the conclusion I came to as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doktor Kosmos Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 8 and a half hours after the last post. Nice. I appologize for living six time zones away. Guess I should have known better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dutch_Habs_Fan Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 that's the conclusion I came to as well. Fanpuck and PTG agreeing on something, call the papers!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 ah there's a lot of things we probably could agree on we just don't bring it up. Take politics out and i bet we could agree on lots of things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Saw V for Vendetta last night, not too bad. I'm gonna try the new spoiler feature here: I thought it would have been better had they not made it so obvious that he was the one who captured her and was interrogating her. That could have been a sweet twist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habitforming Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Saw V for Vendetta last night, not too bad. I'm gonna try the new spoiler feature here: I thought it would have been better had they not made it so obvious that he was the one who captured her and was interrogating her. That could have been a sweet twist. Thats a cool feature. I just wanted to try it here he he. Nothing to say Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sakiqc Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Haha you guys are hilarious I didn't like much what was behind the movie and how anarchism is promoted. I think it's honorable to fight for "Freedom" and "liberty", but those words tend to lose their meaning (especially in those kind of movies) and when misused leads to atrocities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Hah! We have a Spoiler feature now? Awesome! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.