[Rolling Bones]

BWA-HAHA-HAHA-HA!

http://www.10news.com/news/5116099/d...&qs=1;bp=t

[mikulla]

I am trying hard to understand why you think this is funny.

Is it because you dislike the idea of someone owning and suv?

[Railroader]

I'll never understand those who find humor in another person's suffering.

[Cubeoid]

Originally Posted by Rolling Bones

BWA-HAHA-HAHA-HA!

[screamingFit]

Yeah, so someone's expensive toys got partially eaten by a sinkhole. I'm sure they were insured so it's not really ALL that amusing.

But, saying that people are laughing at their "suffering"? Please. With toys like these, I doubt they're "suffering".

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by screamingFit

Yeah, so someone's expensive toys got partially eaten by a sinkhole. I'm sure they were insured so it's not really ALL that amusing.

But, saying that people are laughing at their "suffering"? Please. With toys like these, I doubt they're "suffering".

You're making out like the guy needs to be rich to have those "toys". Average SUV. Cheap boat. What if he saved all his life for them? What if the boat was an heirloom that he'd just finished restoring and used to work on with his now dead dad?

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Doofy

You're making out like the guy needs to be rich to have those "toys". Average SUV. Cheap boat. What if he saved all his life for them? What if the boat was an heirloom that he'd just finished restoring and used to work on with his now dead dad?

It's still just a boat. It is still just a material possession regardless of the emotional associations someone might have with it.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

It's still just a boat. It is still just a material possession regardless of the emotional associations someone might have with it.

You commies make me barf.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Doofy

You commies make me barf.

You materialists make me barf.




See, isn't this fun? I can make vapid, sensationalist, personal criticisms just like you.
Now it's your turn to come up with a witty derogatory remark in response to my response.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

It's still just a boat. It is still just a material possession regardless of the emotional associations someone might have with it.

So if like, someone stole your mac from you, you wouldn't be upset?

Sure.

And if you posted a thread about it in here, and someone laughed at you for getting it stolen, you'd probably think that person was a jerk right? Probably.

I know I would.

[screamingFit]

Stole? I think most people would be upset if someone stole something from them.

But, if my Mac was damaged in a fire or earthquake or something, it would be an "Oh, well".

And, BTW Doofy, if your "commie" reference was directed also at me, I take offense at that. I'm a socialist.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by screamingFit

And, BTW Doofy, if your "commie" reference was directed also at me, I take offense at that. I'm a socialist.

Same thing.

Commie = person of below average intelligence who hates everyone who isn't poor.
Socialist = person of below average intelligence who hates everyone who isn't poor.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

See, isn't this fun? I can make vapid, sensationalist, personal criticisms just like you.
Now it's your turn to come up with a witty derogatory remark in response to my response.

I wasn't making a witty derogatory remark. I was stating a fact.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Kevin

So if like, someone stole your mac from you, you wouldn't be upset?

Sure.

And if you posted a thread about it in here, and someone laughed at you for getting it stolen, you'd probably think that person was a jerk right? Probably.

I know I would.

Let's see here, Zimphy. I think there is a comparison in here somewhere.

Someone stealing my Mac is a result of deliberate human action.
Someone losing thier boat and SUV in a sinkhole is a result of accidental geologic forces.

Nope. Looks like you are comparing Apples (HA! HA!) to oranges.

My reaction to one experience is different from my reaction to another. Granted, both examples involve material possessions but the nature of the reaction to them would be different because of the perceived intentionality of the agent of the action (person versus geology). Or would you argue that people do, or should, react the same to an experience of loss regardless of the context for said loss?

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

Let's see here, Zimphy. I think there is a comparison in here somewhere.

Someone stealing my Mac is a result of deliberate human action.
Someone losing thier boat and SUV in a sinkhole is a result of accidental geologic forces.

Nope. Looks like you are comparing Apples (HA! HA!) to oranges.

My reaction to one experience is different from my reaction to another. Granted, both examples involve material possessions but the nature of the reaction to them would be different because of the perceived intentionality of the agent of the action (person versus geology). Or would you argue that people do, or should, react the same to an experience of loss regardless of the context for said loss?

So you were laughing at all those folks in New Orleans then?

[screamingFit]

Originally Posted by Doofy

Same thing.

Commie = person of below average intelligence who hates everyone who isn't poor.
Socialist = person of below average intelligence who hates everyone who isn't poor.

Sorry, dude. I'm a MENSA member.

And as a general rule, I hate EVERYONE. Not just rich, white folk.

dmacdaddy, you're right on the mark with your explanation.

[screamingFit]

Originally Posted by Doofy

So you were laughing at all those folks in New Orleans then?

Oh, come on!

If all that was damaged in N.O. was a dude's boat and SUV...

oh, what's the point...

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Doofy

So you were laughing at all those folks in New Orleans then?

You're still now making any sense, Sherwin.

What point are you trying to make by drawing parallels to the experience of those in New Orleans?

Are you trying to talk about agency--human versus geologic--or personal responsibility--those who did leave ahead of time versus those who didn't--or do you know of someone in New Orleans who lost a boat and SUV in a sinkhole due to the flooding.

If you want to argue with me I am going to need you to be more clear and precise with your logical arguments. I don't have time to guess the argument you are trying to put forht AND formualte a coherent answer myself.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

Someone stealing my Mac is a result of deliberate human action.
Someone losing thier boat and SUV in a sinkhole is a result of accidental geologic forces.

Nope. Looks like you are comparing Apples (HA! HA!) to oranges.

Actually I am not. What happened to said material possession is irrelevent. You said nothing about the cause. This new arguement is a diversion.

It is still just a material possession regardless of the emotional associations someone might have with it. Just as you said.

Leave teh straw-men at the door.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

You're still now making any sense, Sherwin.

What point are you trying to make by drawing parallels to the experience of those in New Orleans?

Were you not arguing that the difference between getting your Mac nicked and having your SUV fall down a hole was one of "human action" vs "natural action", thus suggesting that it was OK to laugh at the "natural action"?

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by screamingFit

Sorry, dude. I'm a MENSA member.

Isn't everybody?

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Actually I am not. What happened to said material possession is irrelevent. You said nothing about the cause. This new arguement is a diversion.

It is still just a material possession regardless of the emotional associations someone might have with it. Just as you said.

Leave teh straw-men at the door.

This is no straw-man argument, Zimphy. What he have been debating all along is the reactions people have to an experience of loss, not the nature of the loss itself. Remember, it was Doofy who criticized me and ScreamingFit for our criticism of the response to the loss of the boat, not to the nature of the loss itself.

Maybe you should have quoted the rest of my post as well, Zimphy.

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

My reaction to one experience is different from my reaction to another. Granted, both examples involve material possessions but the nature of the reaction to them would be different because of the perceived intentionality of the agent of the action (person versus geology). Or would you argue that people do, or should, react the same to an experience of loss regardless of the context for said loss?

And you are correct--though I never argued otherwise--that the causes are the same but what we have been debating is the reactions. My point about loss due to theft versus loss due to sinkhole is that people react differently to an experience of loss. Or, are you trying to put forth the argument that people react the same to the experience of loss regardless of how the loss occurred?

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Doofy

Were you not arguing that the difference between getting your Mac nicked and having your SUV fall down a hole was one of "human action" vs "natural action", thus suggesting that it was OK to laugh at the "natural action"?

Absolutely. I think it is OK to laugh at the "natural action" as I have little or no possibility of control (read: agency) in regards to the occurrence of the action. So yes, I do respond differently to different experiences of loss. And an experience of loss due to "natural action" is much more likely for me to respond with humor than with anger.

Now, it's time for me to turn the tables on you. By referencing New Orleans in your response to my post about agency (human versus meteorologic) were you trying to imply that those who suffered in New Orleans were suffering due to human agency?

Or were you trying to point out that the people in New Orleans were equally victims of impersonal environmental agency and as such they should not be recipients of our sympathy bur rather our laughter?

What point IS it you are trying to make by drawing a vague parallel to New Orleans?

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

Or were you trying to point out that the people in New Orleans were equally victims of impersonal environmental agency and as such they should not be recipients of your sympathy bur rather your laughter?

Bingo. What's the difference between your laughing at someone's property falling down a hole and your laughing at someone's property being blown away? None.

Which makes you wrong for laughing at either.

[screamingFit]

Just as a note, the only person who laughed about this entire thing was the original poster of the thread.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by screamingFit

Just as a note, the only person who laughed about this entire thing was the original poster of the thread.

True. A couple of others only implied laughter.

[bad_quote]

You guys are being assholes to each other. Just stating a fact.

[OldManMac]

Ok, children (and I do mean children in every sense of the word), calm down. Laughing at the misfortune of others, just because you don't agree with them owning something, says all we need to know about your maturity.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

This is no straw-man argument, Zimphy. What he have been debating all along is the reactions people have to an experience of loss, not the nature of the loss itself. Remember, it was Doofy who criticized me and ScreamingFit for our criticism of the response to the loss of the boat, not to the nature of the loss itself.

Maybe you should have quoted the rest of my post as well, Zimphy.

No no no.. . And I DID quote the rest of your post.

You just said

"It's still just a boat. It is still just a material possession regardless of the emotional associations someone might have with it."

Nothing else IN your post.

Your rant and the post I replied to was it was a material possession, and that was that.
I had nothing to do with whatever arguement you were having with someone else.

Fact is, if you had lost something, no matter how it was lost, you would be upset.

And anyone in the forum that would laugh at you for it, would probably come off as looking like a jerk to you.

That was my point.

[Cody Dawg]

How's your hand, bad_quote? Along with everything else? Hope you're feeling better.

[Paco500]

Originally Posted by Railroader

I'll never understand those who find humor in another person's suffering.

Other's suffering is pretty much the root of all comedy. One of my favorite quotes of all time?

"Tragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you fall down an open manhole cover and die."
-- Mel Brooks

[Cody Dawg]

Taking pleasure from someone else's misfortune is the basis of much comedy, soap operas, gossip columns, gossip, and, yes, this forum and is known as schadenfreude.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Doofy

Bingo. What's the difference between your laughing at someone's property falling down a hole and your laughing at someone's property being blown away? None.

Which makes you wrong for laughing at either.

FYI: I laughed at both.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Kevin

No no no.. . And I DID quote the rest of your post.

You just said

"It's still just a boat. It is still just a material possession regardless of the emotional associations someone might have with it."

Nothing else IN your post.

Your rant and the post I replied to was it was a material possession, and that was that.
I had nothing to do with whatever arguement you were having with someone else.

Fact is, if you had lost something, no matter how it was lost, you would be upset.

And anyone in the forum that would laugh at you for it, would probably come off as looking like a jerk to you.

That was my point.

Thanks for the clarification. And no, if I lose something, the circumstances of how it is lost do come into play with my reaction to the loss. If I lose something to an impersonal force of nature I would react differently than if my loss was due to the actions of another and I would not be upset about the loss due to acts of nature. But that's just me.

[Bandit240]

Eh it isnt all the bad, the boat probley has a few scratches in the gelcoat and maybe a bent railing. The SUV probley has a few bent panels and maybe some broken glass. Neither are damaged beyond repair.

[ShotgunEd]

I wish this thread would be swallowed by a sink hole.

[tooki]

Sinkholes are a common phenomenon, especially in some regions. This is non-news to me.

tooki

[Rolling Bones]

I realize that this is no big deal...non news.

The reason I posted it was because of the fighting in this forum about SUV's and I thought this was the punch line.

Funny? Yes.

If you don't see the humour you are probably a very dull person...someone like Railroader or Doofus.

[Kevin]

I think people were confused as to WHY you was laughing. That is all.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Rolling Bones

Funny? Yes.

No.
Not. At. All.

Originally Posted by Rolling Bones

If you don't see the humour you are probably a very dull person...someone like Railroader or Doofus.

More likely that your jokes/posts are crap.

[bad_quote]

Nyar lets argue back and forth about why so and so was laughing! That will make me feel high and mighty and better about myself! Nyar!

[Rolling Bones]

Originally Posted by Doofus

Yes.
I. Swallow.



More likely that your jokes/posts are crap.

I love you too.

[Kevin]

[JoshuaZ]

Sink holes suck.

Sink happens.