Do you think PC FHOP has become too Angry?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Apr 23 2007, 12:27 PM) [snapback]428443[/snapback]</div>

I've seen this with various players at FHOP, and it just continues in mortal combat. If having a few extreme viewpoints that never stop is not enought, then a few decide to pour their trollish napalm on the discussion for "fun".

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Apr 23 2007, 10:27 AM) [snapback]428443[/snapback]</div>

What's been forgotten or omitted in this "misunderstanding" is the dimension of time - specifically, that laws CHANGE over TIME. The statute that Sufferin' keeps shoving in all our faces became law on Jan 6, 2003, a little more than 4 years ago. Daniel's recollection of what was legal dates back to several years prior to 2003, and what the statutes were BEFORE Jan 6, 2003 could very well have been such that the ONLY legal proceeding that could be taken against someone in the country without some kind of legal instrument (visa, green card, etc.) was detention and deportation, not fine and imprisonment.

In a nutshell, they're BOTH right, even if only one has expressed any graciousness in the exchange.

Mark Baird
Alameda CA

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(desynch @ Apr 20 2007, 01:18 PM) [snapback]426874[/snapback]</div>

I applaud your willingness to think outside the confines of your own dogma.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mystery Squid @ Apr 23 2007, 02:47 PM) [snapback]428646[/snapback]</div>

John didn't say that, Squid. He said that the majority of early buyers were liberals and progressives, motivated more by principle than by personal gain. Note the word "majority." Of course there were conservatives as well. There are even conservative environmentalists. But far more are left-leaning, and there were more liberals than conservatives buying the Prius in the early years. We're talking proportions, not absolutes.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Apr 23 2007, 05:18 PM) [snapback]428736[/snapback]</div>

Daniel, your clarification is spot on. Thanks for reading and interpreting my post as I intended. It looks like the tentacled one is back to gracing us with a fishy interpretation of an otherwise clear post. Grasshopper has learned well from doberman how to obfuscate. It must be one of those skills needed on the race to the bottom of lowered expectations. Kinda like a child jumping into an adult conversation with no regard for what has come before his personal frame of reference, and he mistakenly thinks the meat of the topic has happened in his short lifetime with no other valid historical perspective. Now if someone like Frank Hudson, Htmlspinner or Jayman offered a similar tentacled response it would be worth great consideration and I would have to stand corrected. The same theoretical response to the same post but a different outcome. Why? Respect offered to those who deserve it vs. irreverence for the irrelevant.