the most important factor: You are talking like a jerk, not just in the original post, but in every response to every comment about this I’ve read. You seem completely unable to comprehend (or possibly just to admit) that your opinions shouldn’t be taken as the obvious word of god that they are, and think anyone questioning your assertions is doing it out of idiocy or spite. Even if tone is not a legitimate way to evaluate truth value of statements (though I think it tends contain a lot of evidence), it’s definitely one of the big factors that influences downvotes.
yes, well. this kind of unexpectedly evolved into exercise that everybody failed. if you don’t like it perhaps you can start a petition. fucking rofl...
… This page is now the top Google hit for Young Cryonicists Gathering scholarship. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to think that not everybody knows what you are talking about.
I don’t think this is a misuse of “literally.” “Nuts” as a noun may denote hard shelled seeds, but as an adjective it denotes craziness as a literal meaning. So in context, “literally nuts” means “actually, not figuratively or hyperbolically, crazy.”
That said, the overuse of “lol” is enough to make me consider downvoting all on its own.
Yes, in this particular situation, specifically her callousness in how severe a sentence she was imposing, without giving any specific advance notice about her criteria, and how coldly she rejected my pleas to have mercy on them. That’s pretty clearly over the line, which is what I meant by “literally nuts” instead of just “nuts”. The quite considerable concession she later made to reduce their punishment seemed, yes, more humanizing. So I’m not just trying to universally bash her, I know some people are friends with her and everything. Also I don’t know that this exhibits a persistent personality trait, for example I was told they are making the rules more explicit in the contract, so I don’t want to be seen as committing a fundamental attribution error. Also, I was using “lol” to defuse the warning just a little bit, since people who are already financially committed may be liable to freak out just a little bit too much and I didn’t want to be sending the wrong signal… Ok, enough said.
Also, I was using “lol” to defuse the warning just a little bit, since people who are already financially committed may be liable to freak out just a little bit too much and I didn’t want to be sending the wrong signal… Ok, enough said.
If you want to know how I reacted to it, go through you your post and substitute every instance of “lol” with “hahaha.” Ask yourself “is this an appropriate point in a speech to laugh?”
If a person giving a speech laughs after they say things that are liable to give offense, it will sound either insensitive, or awkward and inappropriate, like they’re nervous and don’t know a better way to diffuse the tension.
Oh come on, it’s a figure of speech, this isn’t a freakin scholarly article, it’s just an email I sent to someone that I put here because I genuinely want to help others… point taken about context, I guess that really is a serious issue here, in terms of karma at least. I wasn’t venting, but this was a first-hand experience, so I guess I just really relate well to the situation (lol) and feel free to stick in those barbs
Emails don’t have to be scholarly articles, but blog posts are neither, and still have to be blog posts. They’re all different kinds of writing and place different burdens on you as a writer.
Well, if I understand your post, you’re accusing an Cryonicist (Note I think her name is Cairn Idun) of being literally crazy for being strict with free money, but you’re not doing it very seriously, “(lol)” being used several times.
If she really has gone insane, then you should take it more seriously. If she hasn’t actually gone crazy, then this is pointless dramatics.
Actually this makes sense, in a twisted way. I guess I’ll have to take the karma hit to make sure this isn’t noticed by people who don’t actually care :P
Genuine question: why is this getting down voted?
Edit: Ok, not enough context, and questions of legitimacy. I at least added a disclaimer at the top now...
Edit 2: And nobody cares apparently. That’s just sad.
the most important factor: You are talking like a jerk, not just in the original post, but in every response to every comment about this I’ve read. You seem completely unable to comprehend (or possibly just to admit) that your opinions shouldn’t be taken as the obvious word of god that they are, and think anyone questioning your assertions is doing it out of idiocy or spite. Even if tone is not a legitimate way to evaluate truth value of statements (though I think it tends contain a lot of evidence), it’s definitely one of the big factors that influences downvotes.
yes, well. this kind of unexpectedly evolved into exercise that everybody failed. if you don’t like it perhaps you can start a petition. fucking rofl...
… This page is now the top Google hit for Young Cryonicists Gathering scholarship. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to think that not everybody knows what you are talking about.
Misuse of ‘literally’; lack of enough context to understand what you are saying, and you come off like you are venting.
I don’t think this is a misuse of “literally.” “Nuts” as a noun may denote hard shelled seeds, but as an adjective it denotes craziness as a literal meaning. So in context, “literally nuts” means “actually, not figuratively or hyperbolically, crazy.”
That said, the overuse of “lol” is enough to make me consider downvoting all on its own.
Yes, in this particular situation, specifically her callousness in how severe a sentence she was imposing, without giving any specific advance notice about her criteria, and how coldly she rejected my pleas to have mercy on them. That’s pretty clearly over the line, which is what I meant by “literally nuts” instead of just “nuts”. The quite considerable concession she later made to reduce their punishment seemed, yes, more humanizing. So I’m not just trying to universally bash her, I know some people are friends with her and everything. Also I don’t know that this exhibits a persistent personality trait, for example I was told they are making the rules more explicit in the contract, so I don’t want to be seen as committing a fundamental attribution error. Also, I was using “lol” to defuse the warning just a little bit, since people who are already financially committed may be liable to freak out just a little bit too much and I didn’t want to be sending the wrong signal… Ok, enough said.
If you want to know how I reacted to it, go through you your post and substitute every instance of “lol” with “hahaha.” Ask yourself “is this an appropriate point in a speech to laugh?”
If a person giving a speech laughs after they say things that are liable to give offense, it will sound either insensitive, or awkward and inappropriate, like they’re nervous and don’t know a better way to diffuse the tension.
Lol isn’t a punctuation mark, after all.
Oh come on, it’s a figure of speech, this isn’t a freakin scholarly article, it’s just an email I sent to someone that I put here because I genuinely want to help others… point taken about context, I guess that really is a serious issue here, in terms of karma at least. I wasn’t venting, but this was a first-hand experience, so I guess I just really relate well to the situation (lol) and feel free to stick in those barbs
Don’t ask a question if you don’t want an answer.
I never said I don’t want an answer. Actually I think I explicitly asked for one.
Emails don’t have to be scholarly articles, but blog posts are neither, and still have to be blog posts. They’re all different kinds of writing and place different burdens on you as a writer.
This is neither a blog post nor an article.
Well, if I understand your post, you’re accusing an Cryonicist (Note I think her name is Cairn Idun) of being literally crazy for being strict with free money, but you’re not doing it very seriously, “(lol)” being used several times.
If she really has gone insane, then you should take it more seriously. If she hasn’t actually gone crazy, then this is pointless dramatics.
Also, a quick search for her indicates this isn’t the first time she/young cyronicists has received criticism. But that criticism doesn’t seem very convincing to me: https://sites.google.com/site/cryonicsfactsheet/scam-4---the-young-cryonicists
Hey Bob, if you read this, I think I left the keys to the truck on top of the TV, could you pick them up for me on the way out? Thanks!
Actually this makes sense, in a twisted way. I guess I’ll have to take the karma hit to make sure this isn’t noticed by people who don’t actually care :P