posted
Orincoro. I can introduce you to a couple of missionaries. If you do let them in, they may seem like they are stalking you, but they won't really be...
Posts: 571 | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:It's also common in Czenglish to substitute the usage of the word "after," or "in" for the usage of "before," when talking about lengths of time, such as "we will have lunch before 2 hours," or "you will get there before 30 minutes." I honestly think this has something to do with the reliability of the Czech transportation system, because SO many people take public transport, and need to arrive places on time, or "before" a certain length of time elapses. A trip can take 15 minutes or 25 minutes, but a person will tell you "before 25 minute," and this is telling you the upper limit.
The actual reason for this is that people are translating literally from Czech (thinking in Czech but using English words). The preposition "do" in time constructions as you described can mean before that time, by that time, until that time and a few others [edit: or within that time, as in your examples], and it is simply easy to mix up for those who don't speak English well. Creative reasoning you came up with though.
I do have to go back and point out that this doesn't *totally* eliminate my explanation as a factor. People could prefer to use "before" rather than the other adverbial phrases because it accomplishes the right meaning (sort of) in English, whereas "within" might sound a bit stilted, and most Czechs aren't familiar or comfortable enough in English to obviate the whole mess and just use the less formal "it will take about 25 minutes," or "it will be around 25 minutes." I have to admit that the Czech habit makes slightly more sense to me than the English alternatives.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Orincoro: I'll admit I haven't see as much in the way of les/bi/gay oriented movies as I would like.. there simply aren't as many of them and they tend to be straight to video classics...
However the kiss-fight-dance, as you put it, seems to be missing as a trope. Which is fortunate because it's one I've always hated.
Posts: 7085 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Possum nation will not tolerate your insults to our sovereignty, WE ARE IN ASCENDANCY! Our time has come!
Posts: 79 | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by katharina: While I can't stop you from speculating, the whole problem arose this time because I do not like, do not appreciate, and consider invasive and rude attempts by strangers on an internet forum to pop-analyze myself.
I ask this in all sincerity: then what was this post of yours to Rabbit on the first page?
quote:I think that when one is used to getting respect for what they have written when they are the expert and have been careful, it becomes natural to believe that what one writes is worthy of respect by default. I think that sometimes you are not careful when you write and you are not always the expert on the topics you talk about, but you still expect that same kind of treatment you get when you do and when you are.
The solution is to either be as careful with posts as with your professional activities, or else not to expect the same kind of reception to your posts as to your professional writing.
posted
I think it's weird that I've mostly been away from hatrack for 6 months, but knew the opening post must be about kat. I think it was a bad thing for the Rabbit to have done.
I like the Rabbit and I like kat, and I also sometimes want to strangle either of them, and I have some indication they feel the same way about me, apart from the liking.
But if a contest is to be decided on this thread, Rabbit lost by starting it, in my just getting back to the fray opinion.
My main opinion for thinking this is how I would feel if someone with whom I had a long standing beef started a thread like this about me. Sort of the Categorical Imperative, though not precisely.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Darn you for linking to tvtropes.org, Orincoro. I had other things I was planning to do tonight. Daaaarn Yooooouuu!
Posts: 6367 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by katharina: While I can't stop you from speculating, the whole problem arose this time because I do not like, do not appreciate, and consider invasive and rude attempts by strangers on an internet forum to pop-analyze myself.
I ask this in all sincerity: then what was this post of yours to Rabbit on the first page?
quote:I think that when one is used to getting respect for what they have written when they are the expert and have been careful, it becomes natural to believe that what one writes is worthy of respect by default. I think that sometimes you are not careful when you write and you are not always the expert on the topics you talk about, but you still expect that same kind of treatment you get when you do and when you are.
The solution is to either be as careful with posts as with your professional activities, or else not to expect the same kind of reception to your posts as to your professional writing.
quote:Originally posted by PSI Teleport: Darn you for linking to tvtropes.org, Orincoro. I had other things I was planning to do tonight. Daaaarn Yooooouuu!
Someone did that to me about 6 months ago (I think it was Puffy Treat) and I lost 5 hours.
Posts: 1080 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
There's tar babies, there's serious tar babies, and then there's tvtropes. Nothing you do gets you less entangled. You click on a link. You read it. You lol. You see several other links you like, such as 'badass decay.' You click on badass decay, intending to go back and check the other six links too. You read badass decay. You see thirteen links you need to check. Repeat ad infinitum.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by pooka: I think it's weird that I've mostly been away from hatrack for 6 months, but knew the opening post must be about kat. I think it was a bad thing for the Rabbit to have done.
I like the Rabbit and I like kat, and I also sometimes want to strangle either of them, and I have some indication they feel the same way about me, apart from the liking.
But if a contest is to be decided on this thread, Rabbit lost by starting it, in my just getting back to the fray opinion.
My main opinion for thinking this is how I would feel if someone with whom I had a long standing beef started a thread like this about me. Sort of the Categorical Imperative, though not precisely.
Pooka, No matter how it may appear, that was not my intent in starting this thread. I was sincerely looking to find if people other than kat found my posting style generally offensive. I've gotten some excellent feedback that I think will help me project the tone I'm really feeling more accurately.
I'm sorry I gave in to the temptation to engage kat when she showed the poor judgement to post here despite our on going dispute. I'm always sorry when I choose to engage kat and will try to avoid it in future.
I'm sorry if you get the impression I dislike you or that I am even irritated by you. I disagree with you quite a bit but i've never found you to be disagreeable.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:I'm sorry I gave in to the temptation to engage kat when she showed the poor judgement to post here despite our on going dispute.
See this sentence? If you want to avoid confrontation, sentences like this one -- and particularly "apologies" like this one -- are how you don't do it.
Seriously, if you don't understand why this sentence is problematic, let me know. If you do, I think you might want to ponder -- at least for a little while -- your reasons for writing it.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wasn't apologizing to kat, I was apologizing to pooka and other members of the forum for my indecorous behavior.
And yes, I understand why this sentence is problematic, but at least its honest.
I have a pretty good idea why I wrote that sentence. I am sincerely sorry that my actions have contributed to the deterioration of this thread. It was not my intent to engage kat in this thread and I am ashamed of myself for doing it.
My point in posting that sentence was pretty straight forward. I am willing to take my share of the responsibility for the fight. I am not willing to say its all my fault.
I hope you can grasp that distinction.
[ January 15, 2009, 08:23 AM: Message edited by: The Rabbit ]
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
Part of the truce is to avoid talking about me. That includes not making disparaging comments. Are you breaking the truce?
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think Tom's point is that in taking the high road, you decided to fling a bit of poo down. I certainly understand your not wanting to take blame for other's actions, but you don't need to continue to point out the fact that someone else is at fault too.
This, of course, coming from one who NEVER takes the high road and enjoys flinging the poo around...
Posts: 571 | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Vividly. I'd be perfectly happy if Rabbit pretended I didn't exist, but even that lasted less than, what, eight hours? Ten?
What is it, Rabbit? Do you want to stay mad and pretend the other doesn't exist, or do you want to work out a real truce?
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:I am willing to take my share of the responsibility for the fight. I am not willing to say its all my fault.
Another way to say this: "I posted this thread to work some things out for myself. I wasn't thinking at the time about how Kat might feel about what I had to say, or how I'd feel if she replied to my questions. In retrospect, I should have handled this differently."
By accusing her of "poor judgment" in responding, you're getting a final dig in without acknowledging that this thread invites her response. Moreover, it's completely unnecessary; the quality of her judgment in no way impacts (much less ameliorates) the things you're trying to apologize for, so it doesn't do you any good to opine on it. Heck, following your mutual decision to avoid mentioning or replying to each other, it appears downright tacky.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:I am willing to take my share of the responsibility for the fight. I am not willing to say its all my fault.
Another way to say this: "I posted this thread to work some things out for myself. I wasn't thinking at the time about how Kat might feel about what I had to say, or how I'd feel if she replied to my questions. In retrospect, I should have handled this differently."
Yes that would have been much more tactful. Although I don't think my error was necessarily in starting the thread. I think it could have continued to be reasonably productive civil discussion if I had simply chosen not to comment on kat's posts at all. If I'd ignored them, I think it would have been unlikely for others to jump into that fray.
quote:By accusing her of "poor judgment" in responding, you're getting a final dig in without acknowledging that this thread invites her response.
I can see how people could interpret it that way. You don't have to believe me when I say it wasn't my intent, but it wasn't.
quote:Moreover, it's completely unnecessary; the quality of her judgment in no way impacts (much less ameliorates) the things you're trying to apologize for, so it doesn't do you any good to opine on it. Heck, following your mutual decision to avoid mentioning or replying to each other, it appears downright tacky.
Point taken.
Kat, I'm sorry that I broke the truce. It was thoughtless of me. I simply wasn't thinking about it when I responded to pooka. That was definitely poor judgement and thoughtless on my part.
[ January 15, 2009, 10:14 AM: Message edited by: The Rabbit ]
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tom Davidson answered it for you. To make it more clear, it is different when personal commentary is explicitly requested.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Requesting feed back on my posting style is not the same as requesting an analysis of my personality and speculation about why I post the way I do.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:I can see how people could interpret it that way. You don't have to believe me when I say it wasn't my intent, but it wasn't.
This may be the key point to take away - your intentions when communicating are in many cases irrelevant to the quality of the experience. You have to consider how other may respond, and be particularly aware of those individuals who are more "volatile".
On reflection, there have been a couple instances where you've said something to which I've mentally responded "Oh, that's going piss off <forum member>." These were not things that I thought were necessarily rude or inappropriate in general, but things which could reasonably be assumed to upset certain people.
As kat mentioned earlier, you shouldn't have to work so hard just to converse on a forum, but it seems the only options are either to ignore those people altogether, be more cautious when posting in response to them or in thread in which they participate, or just let them get pissed off and move on.
The wrong choice is to engage in the nasty back and forth. Let them make their snide, sarcastic remarks if that's what they need to do. If you must respond, try not to do so in kind. Address only whatever reasonable content, if any, has been provided, and let the rest just wash off.
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by katharina: Tom Davidson answered it for you. To make it more clear, it is different when personal commentary is explicitly requested.
As Rabbit already pointed out, she didn't request psychoanalysis.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow, if we could actually come to a consensus here that psychoanalyzing people who haven't asked for it is rude, patronizing, and serves no good purpose, I think it could be a huge advance in the level of discourse here at hatrack.
I'd like to go on record as never inviting any psychoanalysis by anyone whatsoever toward me or mine. How delightful is the thought that that request could possibly be honored!
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think the problem is not that people don't agree that its rude but that when most people offer unsolicited psychoanalysis or advice, sling insults, call people names, condescend or engage in other obnoxious behavior they consider themselves and the situation exceptional.
I would be a much better person if I remembered that I am not exceptional.
Oh, and by the way, I recognize the inherent irony of this post. I think it's exceptional because it is a general comment on human nature and not directed at any individual except perhaps myself.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I figure it's probably cheaper to get your psychoanalyzing done here. A good psychiatrist is expensive, so why not welcome an incompetent for free? I volunteer my services to the Psych students at school all the time.
Then again I suppose you wouldn't want to apply that same logical to other professions. Say like an oral surgeon or a pita bread maker.
Posts: 247 | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd happily take free samples from an amateur pita bread maker, but you have a definite point about the oral surgeon.
The advantage of psychoanalysis of any kind, free, paid, solicited, unsolicited, is that you can always ignore it if you think its a heap of steaming excrement.
Its a bit more problematic to ignore bad surgery.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Laugh]](graemlins/laugh.gif)
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
