|
Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Students and Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
JZer
Joined: 16 Jan 2005 Posts: 3898 Location: Pittsburgh
|
Posted: Tue May 03, 2005 11:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| And more than anything, she is mature at 33. |
Maybe she should be giving you advice. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
moonraven
Joined: 24 Mar 2004 Posts: 3094
|
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 1:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| She's old enough to be your mother, at any rate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ElNota

Joined: 28 Mar 2005 Posts: 123 Location: Buenos Aires
|
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 1:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
I did not see included all the trolls that attack other posters for issues completely unrelated to the light bulb changing topic....and who then proceed to send other posters obscene PMs involving light bulbs and bodily orifices.
If we are going to laugh, fine. But let's realize that the population group I just described is not funny--they are verbally violent, abusive folks getting their jollies by preventing acceptable communication. |
Moonraven is the worst kind of troll. She takes little jabs and makes snide comments until someone opens up and unleashes on her. Then she complains that they are abusive.
If they prove her wrong (as I had the pleasure of doing one time), she gets the thread locked. She's constantly pestering the forum moderators who should have figured out by now that she is the one provoking most of the abuse. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
moonraven
Joined: 24 Mar 2004 Posts: 3094
|
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 1:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
You did not prove me wrong. You presented what was supposedly a quote from Menchu's autobiography without providing a link or anything else to verify that you didn't doctor it. And refused to back up your bogus assertions with any facts. You only proved that you think you can propagandize when you don't know anything, and that other people will knuckle under to you. This bird didn't, so your wounded "machismo" is calling out for revenge. You won't get it in this lifetime.
I did not "get the thread locked", either.
And I do not "pester the moderators".
As for my "provoking most of the abuse"--I suppose you believe that women who wear miniskirts in public are asking to be abused, too?
You clearly recognized yourself in the troll description that I posted--and therefore popped up from under your bridge. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
matttheboy

Joined: 01 Jul 2003 Posts: 854 Location: Valparaiso, Chile
|
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 1:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| moonraven wrote: |
You did not prove me wrong. You presented what was supposedly a quote from Menchu's autobiography without providing a link or anything else to verify that you didn't doctor it. And refused to back up your bogus assertions with any facts. You only proved that you think you can propagandize when you don't know anything, and that other people will knuckle under to you...
.....You clearly recognized yourself in the troll description that I posted--and therefore popped up from under your bridge.
AND QUOTE MOONRAVEN (FROM A RECENT POST)
"Since this is a betting situation, it's up to YOU to show that those figures are off base, and that a middle class actually exists.
No outdated figures, please--in 1994 the poverty quotient was 39 point somthing percent. It has increased substantially since then due to many governments having adopted neo-liberal policies (aka The Consensus of Washington).
If you know about the Gini coefficient, you might have a small chance at understanding how poverty and wealth distribution are measured.
Start by doing an Internet search." END QUOTE |
Hypocrite. One rule for you and another for everybody else, eh? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
moonraven
Joined: 24 Mar 2004 Posts: 3094
|
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 2:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Not different rules--because it's not the same situation at all. The poster in question made a defamatory statement about a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, and when questioned on it he backed water, threw up sand and finally posted a completely bogus "proof" and then said he wouldn't answer my questions until I read the autobiography. My reading the autobiography was not going to make him either right or wrong. It was just a caper because he had nothing to back up his defamatory assertions.
I challenged the other posters to prove the existence of a substantial Latin American middle class by showing my figures to be wrong. Why would I challenge you to do that, and then do it for you? I am not stupid.
By the way, nobody has done it. A couple of you at least took the trouble to do a quick and dirty Internet search about the country you are working in--not a global search for wealth distribution Latin America. (Now, I have given you the search topic; either go for it or keep your opinions unsupported by facts and information to yourself.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
matttheboy

Joined: 01 Jul 2003 Posts: 854 Location: Valparaiso, Chile
|
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 2:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| moonraven wrote: |
Not different rules--because it's not the same situation at all. The poster in question made a defamatory statement about a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, and when questioned on it he backed water, threw up sand and finally posted a completely bogus "proof" and then said he wouldn't answer my questions until I read the autobiography. My reading the autobiography was not going to make him either right or wrong. It was just a caper because he had nothing to back up his defamatory assertions.
I challenged the other posters to prove the existence of a substantial Latin American middle class by showing my figures to be wrong. Why would I challenge you to do that, and then do it for you? I am not stupid.
By the way, nobody has done it. A couple of you at least took the trouble to do a quick and dirty Internet search about the country you are working in--not a global search for wealth distribution Latin America. (Now, I have given you the search topic; either go for it or keep your opinions unsupported by facts and information to yourself.) |
No Moonraven: YOU keep your opinions unsupported by facts and information to YOURself. Your hypocrisy is, once again, outdone only by your arrogance. You can't demand 'evidence' from one poster and then refuse to furnish evidence when asked of you. If you post information, have the guts to back it up with facts and figures, particularly when asked to. Refusing to do so simply discredits any argument you may have had. And please, do grow up. You are supposed to be a 60 year old woman yet your behaviour and pathetic attempts to impress us all with your CV, your experience, your knowledge and, just recently, your daughter's 'intuition' mirrors that of an attention seeking infant who is being ignored by her mummy. We're not interested in any of these things, just simple facts and figures to back up whatever point you may wish to make (assuming the post is not an opinion post). Thank you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ElNota

Joined: 28 Mar 2005 Posts: 123 Location: Buenos Aires
|
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 3:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Not different rules--because it's not the same situation at all. The poster in question made a defamatory statement about a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, and when questioned on it he backed water, threw up sand and finally posted a completely bogus "proof" and then said he wouldn't answer my questions until I read the autobiography. My reading the autobiography was not going to make him either right or wrong. It was just a caper because he had nothing to back up his defamatory assertions. |
I think you were brought up to believe that Guerrilla warfare is somehow unethical or immoral. I don't believe that at all. That is what the man wants you to believe. Guerrilla warfare is about the underdog doing whatever is necesarry to overthrow dictatorships, imperialistic or colonial powers, or overzeolous political parties. It's about organization, resistance, and revolution.
I didn't defame Rigoberta Menchu. I have the greatest admiration for her and for her struggle. That is why I read her autobiography, and why I urged you to do the same. I even gave you the chapters to read where she describes many of the methods that I considered to be guerrilla in nature. Here is what I said in the other thread...
| Quote: |
...Focus on Chapters 17-20.... They armed themselves with machetes, clubs, stones, nets, spears, set traps, threw lime salt or boiling water in the faces of soldiers, used secret signals and decoys, catapults, used guns (although they didn't really know how to use them), and pretty much any other "unconventional" warfare tactic that they could get their hands on.
She describes using a pretty young Indian woman as a decoy, then ambushing a soldier, tying him, and beating information out of him. She also describes how she armed a 90 year old woman with an axe, and watched her kill a unsuspecting soldier with a suprise axe blow to the head. |
Why wouldn't you want to read her autobiography? You seem to be a huge admirer of Miss Menchu. Why not have an informed opinion? My only question is... where are you getting your information from? You claim that I am lying. Doesn't that obligate you in some way to at least TRY and prove it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ElNota

Joined: 28 Mar 2005 Posts: 123 Location: Buenos Aires
|
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 3:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Now, I have given you the search topic; either go for it or keep your opinions unsupported by facts and information to yourself. |
Ha ha Moonie. I couldn't have said it better myself! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
snielz
Joined: 05 Apr 2005 Posts: 165 Location: Buenos Aires
|
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 2:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
You did not prove me wrong. You presented what was supposedly a quote from Menchu's autobiography without providing a link or anything else to verify that you didn't doctor it. And refused to back up your bogus assertions with any facts. You only proved that you think you can propagandize when you don't know anything, and that other people will knuckle under to you. This bird didn't, so your wounded "machismo" is calling out for revenge. You won't get it in this lifetime.
I did not "get the thread locked", either.
And I do not "pester the moderators".
As for my "provoking most of the abuse"--I suppose you believe that women who wear miniskirts in public are asking to be abused, too?
You clearly recognized yourself in the troll description that I posted--and therefore popped up from under your bridge. |
You are a caricature of yourself... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
thelmadatter
Joined: 31 Mar 2003 Posts: 1212 Location: in el Distrito Federal x fin!
|
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 3:25 pm Post subject: sigh |
|
|
Well so much for having a little fun.
My "universal axiom" remark was a JOKE. To be honest, I WISH my mother was alive so that I could tell her she was right about somethings.
Now here I go, being depressing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
moonraven
Joined: 24 Mar 2004 Posts: 3094
|
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 3:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Here's something I just received by e-mail to give us a break from the sound of jackals yapping in the desert:
Heard down at the Acropolis--
Keep this philosophy in mind the next time you either hear or are about to repeat a rumor. In ancient Greece (469 - 399 BC), Socrates was widely lauded for his wisdom. One day the great philosopher came upon an acquaintance who ran up to him excitedly and said, "Socrates, do you know what I just heard about one of your students?" Wait a moment," Socrates replied. "Before you tell me I'd like you to pass a little test. It's called the Test of Three."
"Three?"
"That's right," Socrates continued. "Before you talk to me about my student let's take a moment to test what you're going to say. The first test is Truth. Have you made absolutely sure that what you are about to tell me is true?"
No," the man said, "actually I just heard about it." "All right," said Socrates. "So you don't really know if it's true or not. Now let's try the second test, the test of Goodness.
Is what you are about to tell me about my student something good?"
"No, on the contrary..."
"So," Socrates continued, "you want to tell me something bad about him even though you're not certain it's true?" The man shrugged, a little embarrassed. Socrates continued. "You may still pass though, because there is a third test - the filter of Usefulness. Is what you want to tell me about my student going to be useful to me?" "No, not really..." "Well," concluded Socrates, "if what you want to tell me is neither True nor Good nor even Useful, why tell it to me at all?"
The man was defeated and ashamed.
This is the reason Socrates was a great philosopher and held in such high esteem.
It also explains why he never found out that Plato was banging his wife.
(This probably also applies to meanspiritedness and lack of intellectual curiosity...) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ben Round de Bloc
Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Posts: 1946
|
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 4:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks, moonraven. I needed a good laugh today. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
moonraven
Joined: 24 Mar 2004 Posts: 3094
|
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 4:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| De nada. I need one every day. Fortunately, I get it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
JZer
Joined: 16 Jan 2005 Posts: 3898 Location: Pittsburgh
|
Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 5:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| deleted |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling. Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|