Re: a comment on No Worries by Dovina	-=Dark_Angel=-, P.I. 82.39.21.223	3-Apr-05/6:52 AM
Dim, dim, dim. A race of truth-tellers could also easily create confusion, by saying true but irrelevant things. A race of liars simply needs to say the negation of whatever they want to communicate. Dim.
Re: He hit me over the head with a by T. Jonathron Remp	zodiac 212.118.19.51	3-Apr-05/4:25 AM
You misused "whence".
Re: a comment on No Worries by Dovina	-=Dark_Angel=-, P.I. 81.153.196.50	3-Apr-05/4:21 AM
Of course truth can come from an unreliable source. By definition, an unreliable source is one in which there is very little correlation between the fact that the source has asserted a proposition, and the proposition's validity (a race of Liars has perfect negative correlation. A race of Randoms has 0 correlation.) Now your definition of a closed mind is one that asserts all propositions from an unreliable source to be false, apart from those that are obviously true. This is just someone who has confused 0 correlation with negative correlation. About the hypothetical race of Liars. I think it is possible to establish truth from someone who always lies. The test is to see if we could find the answer to any question. As an example, suppose we want to know what the Liar had for breakfast. If we just ask him "What did you have for breakfast?" that wouldn't help because he could just say "I had Ely Cathedral for breakfast" and we've learnt next to nothing useful, because, as you say, there are unlimited possible untruths he could spout. But we can be more cunning than that: suppose I said to him "Consider the shortest possible description of what you had for breakfast. Is the first letter of that description an 'A'?" If he says "No" we know it begins with 'A', and we move on to the second letter of the description. If he says "Yes" we know it must begin with B...Z so we ask him "Is the first letter a B?" and so on. Do you agree I could establish what he had for breakfast by adopting that approach? Clearly it is applicable to other questions.
Re: All About Me by chocolate9009	zodiac 212.118.19.51	3-Apr-05/4:20 AM
Welcome to the world! You must be five years old.
Re: tumbleweed by crooked_smile	zodiac 212.118.19.51	3-Apr-05/4:15 AM
٠وعقة انت؟
Re: late night delirium by not_a_philosopher	zodiac 212.118.19.51	3-Apr-05/4:10 AM
Yeah, we're not likely to understand, especially considering this exact idea has been overdiscussed since Torah times.
Re: a comment on Everything by RION12	zodiac 212.118.19.51	3-Apr-05/4:07 AM
Still boring.
Re: a comment on cacoon by whispern_smoke_wisp	zodiac 212.118.19.51	3-Apr-05/3:58 AM
She misspelled cocoon.
Re: a comment on No Worries by Dovina	zodiac 212.118.19.51	3-Apr-05/3:52 AM
Are you? I'll hazard a guess you're not openminded regarding the proposition that some races, sexes, and religions ARE in fact inferior to others. Q: What evidence would you require to convince you that a race, sex, etc is inferior? Q2: Could such evidence conceivably exist?
Re: a comment on No Worries by Dovina	zodiac 212.118.19.51	3-Apr-05/3:47 AM
I don't believe you'd accept or even consider any information we offered you, despite that you don't know our real races, sexes, or religions. Anyway, you certainly haven't done it before. This conversation is beyond dull. Pointless, too.
Re: a comment on Reasonably Good by Dovina	zodiac 212.118.19.51	3-Apr-05/3:39 AM
Dovina: Two people who agree on something are an incrowd. zodiac: Two people who agree on something are the same person. Dovina: That's not what I actually said. zodiac: Whatever, I was exaggerating. What you actually said is wrong, too.
Re: a comment on The Symbol by Dovina	zodiac 212.118.19.51	3-Apr-05/3:36 AM
I'm going to say, "Did you write this poem for anyone other than yourself?" You're going to say, "No." And I'm going to say, "What a load of crap." I'm tired of this. Can we talk about something else?
Re: a comment on The Symbol by Dovina	zodiac 212.118.19.51	3-Apr-05/3:35 AM
Who are you agreeing with?
Re: a comment on stab in the dark by not_a_philosopher	zodiac 212.118.19.51	3-Apr-05/3:33 AM
I repeat: Spinoza is a goob. Everybody knows about Spinoza.
Re: a comment on stab in the dark by not_a_philosopher	zodiac 212.118.19.51	3-Apr-05/3:32 AM
I believe there is a lot wrong with right-wing fundamentalism. For instance, I believe it made you say "their" instead of "there", and consistently punctuate like an epilept.
Re: The High Hunt by horus8	thepinkbunnyofdoom 4.224.24.176	2-Apr-05/11:52 PM
This has classic written all over it(Damn you and your invisble ink). <3 Jason
Re: tumbleweed by crooked_smile	thepinkbunnyofdoom 4.224.24.176	2-Apr-05/11:46 PM
"in the dust in my brain" please tell you you at least see the bad repetition? I don't see how the first two lines really tie in at all. -7- <3 Jason
Re: cacoon by whispern_smoke_wisp	thepinkbunnyofdoom 4.224.24.176	2-Apr-05/11:31 PM
You have potential. -7-
Re: late night delirium by not_a_philosopher	thepinkbunnyofdoom 4.224.24.176	2-Apr-05/11:25 PM
Spell Check, Please. Verse 1 Line 2. Reread that. Actually, on second thought, reread before you post. Thats what the whole page to review before submission is all about. So that you can take a quick reread and catch the obivious spelling mistakes, i.e. "talkijg". Other than that, this is almost more of a blog post than a poem. Look me in the eye and tell me otherwise if I'm mistaken. "it's nice to think to yourself that either you know something wonderful that all else have missed" Minus the quotation marks, thats how those lines should be broke. <3 Jason
Re: Everything by RION12	thepinkbunnyofdoom 4.224.24.176	2-Apr-05/11:07 PM
You are boring me. V1L2 do you really mean to say, You are my weakness? I know I'm one to talk about cliches, but come one. Here is a rewrite just to give you Ideas. You're my tourniquet You're my medication You make my head spin merry go round dizzy You're everything I want You make my devils turn to dust You make the sky above sing a happy tune You make this cage into a castle You are everything I want The trick to not boring someone to tears is keeping them interested in what you are saying. -4- <3 Jason