Houts I would be happy to actually contribute to the article, and now that it is Friday, and I've finished sketching the basic idea behind my Aristotle paper for class, I can lend a good hand for the purposes of your article, which I do hope that people would read intelligently and not dismiss just like 90% said in these boards is dismissed, with no real reasons beyond personal intellectual bigotry and stupidity, which I advise that people keep to themselves, especially if it is them who ask the question! After all, why ask a question when all you can do is disagree, and not only that, but offer no logical suggestion whatsoever as to the reasons behind your disagreement? It's so unbelievably stupid, a new level of stupidity that I have never experienced (not even in a philosophy class!), that it puts a bright smile on my face for many reasons which most would deem "arrogant," if not even "self-serving."
Besides the subtle and hard to spot elitism, there is a rampant epidemic of utter idiocy disguised behind countless layers of self-deception and misunderstanding of the most ingenious order. The unconsious cunning of some of the minds in here, as in elsewhere, is outstanding - it would put the Pope to shame. Yes, I know, I'm free to leave. I don't want to because few people here do make sense, not to mention they're friends.
Other than that, the discussion never really took off. Very few people here actually offered substance, much less, original substance. Everyone else stood around and literarily offered nothing more than "2 cents." And every piece of substance hitherto offered was met with determined opposition, groundless opposition, might I add.
And then, above all, they want the definition of “casual” to be broadened to include them, when they can’t even begin to be casual in a mere discussion, much less, in a game with objectives, solid rules and aims.
There is such treasure load of irony in this thread, and I hope that other people besides myself have got glimpses of it, because it shows really what kind of people are going around calling themselves “casual.” This thread is a shocking, even forbidden, testimony of that...and anyone in the future who asks this question again, which is bound to happen, this thread can serve as many examples: an example of what some people try to say and do, and how it is met with irrationality by noone other than so-called "casual players," how this thread shows what type of people use the term "casual" on themselves and others - it shows clearly in fact - more than it tells. In the process of this thread, people told more about themselves than they really actually said: they told things about their character, their personality, their attitude, their ability to discuss (or their inability), and everything in between.
At a point in time I have said that intelligent discussion is always unfair, in any place, at any time: because it requires a leveled field in which people are at least operating with the same brain capacity and openness. In here, as elsewhere, it wasn't the case. We've had few intelligent comments here and there, and dozens of petty remarks to "balance" them out.
For the record, that's not what a discussion is. This was an exercise in futility right from the beginning and despite all efforts. So, as an advice from a person who is always involved in discussions, I humbly offer this: 1) learn how to read, 2) learn how to think through what was said, 3) consider the possibilities, including far-fetched and extreme possibilities, as long as they have grounds beneath them 4) keep your "gut feelings" to yourself or at least try to add them as a personal touch to an argument, but not as the argument itself - no one cares how you "feel." 5) when you agree say why, and when you disagree say why, otherwise it means nothing at all, 6) if you don't feel like you are good enough to offer any counter-theory or counter-argument, then you have no basis to deconstruct or even as little as disagree with any points, however stupid, given by a theory or an opinion; to counter you must have something to replace it with, whether facts, or opinions, or theories; you can't just disagree "out of nowhere," so to speak.
Hopefully, the next time there is a “discussion,” it will be a real discussion and not simply a show of a bitter audience waiting for someone to speak only to “boo” him.
