Doesn’t empirically still imply objectivism???
The answer to that question can be found in the off-topic forum.
Or the Oxford dictionary of English
I would put this in my sig if I weren’t so lazy.
it is literally impossible to claim some art is objectively “better” than others.
I don’t think you understand how the word “literally” works.
I think you’re taking my usage of the word “literally” too literally.
Would you prefer I say it is literally impossible to accurately claim that some art is objectively “better” than others? Cause that’s obviously what I meant to all who are not nitpicking douchebags and/or dumbasses.
There are certain times where objectivity does apply to art. If I said that the Mona Lisa depicted a rat being eaten by a living piece of pasta, that would be objectively wrong.
Once again, you mix up the difference between making a value judgment about how good a work an art is, and a factual claim that is objectively right or wrong. Really not that difficult a concept to understand.
Would you prefer I say
No.
This editor uses Markdown syntax, which makes it hard to add in-URL parentheses:
Try doing this:
Markdown supports two style of links: inline and reference. In both styles, the link text is delimited by [square brackets]
[…]
Reference-style links use a second set of square brackets, inside which you place a label of your choosing to identify the link:
This is [an example][id] reference-style link.
You can optionally use a space to separate the sets of brackets:
This is [an example] [id] reference-style link.
Then, anywhere in the document, you define your link label like this, on a line by itself:
[id]: http://example.com/ “Optional Title Here”
That is:
- Square brackets containing the link identifier (optionally
indented from the left margin using up to three spaces);- followed by a colon;
- followed by one or more spaces (or tabs);
- followed by the URL for the link;
- optionally followed by a title attribute for the link, enclosed
in double or single quotes, or enclosed in parentheses.
^ALLOL!!!
^ALLOL!!!
???
Are you asking about the acronym or why I’m using it?
Are you asking about the acronym or why I’m using it?
Both.
Actual Literal Laugh Out Loud: Used when the reader actually laughed out loud, as opposed to the overused LOL where the reader didn’t actually do it.
Reason: Duracell knows how to post here, he was just making an inside forum joke.
Actual Literal Laugh Out Loud: Used when the reader actually laughed out loud, as opposed to the overused LOL where the reader didn’t actually do it.
Reason: Duracell knows how to post here, he was just making an inside forum joke.
I think that’s reasonable. It just seemed like Duracell (he? – Sorry, I don’t like to make assumptions) had a problem and I gave a solution to fix it. Only trying to help.
No worries, spend some time here and you’ll soon learn who needs help, who doesn’t, and who really needs help.
No worries, spend some time here and you’ll soon learn who needs help, who doesn’t, and who really needs help.
I’m mostly a lurker, since I don’t really like to draw attention to myself on an internet forum. Now of course, I’m doing this right now, but nonetheless. . . .
Now we all know about you, yhwx.
Or should I say… John?!
Keep Circulating the Tapes.
END OF LINE
(It hasn’t happened yet)
Now we all know about you, yhwx.
Or should I say… John?!
I think I’m missing the joke here.
Duracell (he? – Sorry, I don’t like to make assumptions)
I am man, hear me meow.
Duracell (he? – Sorry, I don’t like to make assumptions)
I am male. Hear me meow.
Good to know, but I’d like to know how many members of this forum are women and girls. It seems like it is very male-predominant.
Yes, unfortunately most of us here at OT.com seem to be male.
There have been a few female posters in the past – one signed up a couple months ago – but they never seem to stick around.
Now we all know about you, yhwx.
Or should I say… John?!
I think I’m missing the joke here.
Just imagine if your name had actually been John, though.
Duracell (he? – Sorry, I don’t like to make assumptions)
I am male. Hear me meow.
Good to know, but I’d like to know how many members of this forum are women and girls. It seems like it is very male-predominant.
Well, I mean we are in the deeper side of the internet. Here be monsters.
Keep Circulating the Tapes.
END OF LINE
(It hasn’t happened yet)
Now we all know about you, yhwx.
Or should I say… John?!
I think I’m missing the joke here.
Just imagine if your name had actually been John, though.
It’s not. 😉
Although the person I’m quoting in my signature (".sig," if you will) is a guy named John.
Duracell (he? – Sorry, I don’t like to make assumptions)
I am male. Hear me meow.
Good to know, but I’d like to know how many members of this forum are women and girls. It seems like it is very male-predominant.
Well, I mean we are in the deeper side of the internet. Here be monsters.
That’s not an excuse.
There are no women on the internet. They’re smarter than that.
They probably get chased away by creepy PMs.
Keep Circulating the Tapes.
END OF LINE
(It hasn’t happened yet)
More likely, they lose interest when they find out there aren’t any other women present. I know if I were to join a forum where 100.99% of the posters were women, I’d probably lose interest in posting without anyone to talk guy talk with.
More likely, they lose interest when they find out there aren’t any other women present. I know if I were to join a forum where 100.99% of the posters were women, I’d probably lose interest in posting without anyone to talk guy talk with.
Wait do you think you’re talking guy talk here?
I think that we should move this topic to another thread in Off-Topic.
I have done so already:
http://originaltrilogy.com/topic/Improving-the-Diversity-of-This-Forum/id/50482