[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by freebeard

But if it is percieved as a sign of weakness?

i before e, except after c, except for exceptions.

I don't recall who I was listening too recently, who said his brother is often apologizing for some slight that was never registered as a slight, and how the apology never accrued to the negative column because it was sincere, and meant to amend the relationship.

My wife humbles me in this regard, because she'll go on a tear, and later apologize. I don't require apology for expressing feelings confrontationally... but she humbles me by showing the pattern of reconciling the relationship, since apology is vary rare in my nature.

I'm agreeing with your point while drawing a distinction. Cherished relationships are maintained by apology and reconciliation, but enemies are bolstered by apology. There are no rules in war. Never apologize to an enemy.

I avoided that one based on the thumbnail.

I haven't got through it yet. The negativity is rough, but I've heard of this individual enough that I should familiarize myself with those points of view.

So far, I'm hearing that folks exploiting loopholes in a system is good.

After hearing myself type that, it seems a fundamental philosophical dichotomy might be between the value of including more individuals into a highly functional system, and maintaining a highly functional system by excluding individuals that might\would make it less functional. I need to think and discuss this idea more... but a well functioning system should include people to maximize their potential, but in a democracy, a majority of idiots can muck it all up...

*My bookmark note sums this up as "inclusion vs integrity", so that might be the most basic distillation of the idea.

**uncanny association- there's a participant that sounds like Spencer Klavan (no relation to his dad, Andrew Klavan), and speaks as intelligently; perfectly indistinguishable.

***Try as I may, I don't understand why anyone would advocate as a wiener.

****The Dude just apologized for using the R-word at 1:25. I would never apologize for that. a. nobody has ever intended that word to demean low functioning individuals, and b. it's not an accurate word to describe low functioning individuals because they aren't simply delayed in learning. Mastering trigonometry isn't just a lack of time issue for those folks. So, the R-word stands as the best way to convey the notion that something isn't well thought out, in the fewest words possible, and anyone that disagrees is that word.

"Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people"

I've only ever heard this from you, and I'll have to think about it more. I'm inclined to agree since that flatters my personality, but nature selects what works, and nature has selected half of people to be women. On that fact alone, it suggests that discussing people has importance.