 | | Re: Reality == fiction? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | (...) Absolutely not. (...) Of course it would have ruined the "joke." But it isn't fit for the consumption of eight year olds. At least not many of them. (...) I think that people who delight in the graphic representation of infanticide and (...) (24 years ago, 7-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Reality == fiction? —Josh Spaulding
|
| | | | (...) Well, that's an even less tactful way of phrasing it than mine, but I'm afraid you're reading the statement fairly accurately. I'll rephrase: ---...--- A person who is unable to comprehend irony, and requires instances of satire to be labeled (...) (24 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Reality == fiction? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) Fair enough. I agree with the above. Clearly, some 8 year olds (not even mine, smarter than average that he is) don't have that sophistication. I'm sure we'd all agree with that as well. Taking that into account, and taking the relative (...) (24 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Reality == fiction? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | (...) Actually, I do to. But that "re-phrasing" isn't what he implied before. He suggested that "these" (the concepts under discussion) were jr. high level ideas and that we ought to simply agree with his obvious conclusion. That is a horse of a (...) (24 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Reality == fiction? —Josh Spaulding
|
| | | | (...) If you'll go back to my original post (URL) , you'll see that I was reacting to Larry's statement: (...) Since satire and irony are such powerful, long-standing staples of our cultural dialogue, I rejected Larry's statement, and asked him to (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
