Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Pete Svarrior

Pages: < Back  1 ... 333 334 [335] 336 337 ... 349  Next >
6681
Pizza, this site is essentially a clone of the other site.
I prefer to think of it as a continuation, but sure. We were never intending to start a new society, just to move to a better forum (only later on we decided to reform the way the society is governed). That's exactly what we did, which is why it looks like that.

The logo here just looks like a refresh of the original logo.
Each to their own. I think it looks very different. The one and only similarity is that they both depict an image of a flat Earth.

Even most of the tired, old arguments are the same here.
Does that surprise you? You're discussing the same topics with the same people. The discussions are quite obviously going to be similar.

I haven't really looked to closely, but I'm guessing that the wiki hasn't changed much since it was copied from the other site either.
There have been some changes, but nothing enormous, no.

Face it, other than a few subtle (and much appreciated) improvements to the forum software, there is hardly any distinction at all between this site and the other.
And I'm very happy to do more. I just don't think a name change is the right step. I do not oppose making changes in general, I just dislike this particular idea for a change.

This is why I was fairly enthusiastic about ZC. I was really hoping to see some media interaction. This is also why this discussion annoys me - the ZC put off doing useful stuff until this is concluded.

6682
With all due respect, can the logo really be held up as a distinctive feature? I don't think a casual observer would even notice the difference unless they were to have both forums open at the same time.
I'd think they would, but I have no data to back it up. Personally, I pay lots of attention to logos, but it's very possible that that's just me being weird.

That is why a change like "The Independent Flat Earth Society" would be so ideal. It doesn't take away anything; it only adds a new element particular to this society[...]
I'm a bit worried that this would carry an impression of us being the other FES. It feels extremely similar to, for example, the Oxford Brookes University. Y'know, that second university in Oxford that everyone is talking about... not. They're not even a bad university, but the name acts as a detractor and provides opportunity for mockery.

Also, if individual members are to be financing ads, I think the rest of us should at least be told and provided a means to donate. Surely such things ought to be paid via a fund established by the Council on behalf of the whole society, not by private initiative behind the scenes, no?
When we set this site up, we made it clear we wouldn't monetise it. We still have no intention of doing so. The decisions of individual members to advertise the society are their own. If you want to assist, why not print out some leaflets and drop them around a local library, or something?

Also, we can't wait for the council to make decisions. We're still waiting for that press release (and a blog post announcing the formation of ZC, which we've been promised would be ready days after the elections - at this point it doesn't even make sense to post it, because it's so out of date), and it's being procrastinated due to decisions like the name change, which I personally view as petty and pointless. Instead of discussing which adjective we should squeeze in between which two words of "Flat Earth Society", we should focus on building up this site. We can rename at any point in time. Meanwhile, we have a community to expand, and it should not have to wait.

As I see it, the Flat Earth Academy of Sciences would still be part of the Flat Earth Society. It's a sister organization. We will present ourselves to the world as being part of the Flat Earth Society. This is simply our research branch.
Given that we're nowhere near to reaching our hosting capacity (and likely will never be), we can always set up a sister site, assuming there are people willing to work on it.

6683
Still, something to differentiate us from the other group may not necessarily negate all that.
I don't think that "something" has to be the name. We already have our own logo and our social media (well, Facebook at least) are on the rise, while the other site is stagnant. I think our identity is quite secure. A new motto could be an interesting idea. I'm quite attached to the name. It acknowledges our history and ties to past societies (including the other site).

6684
Given that we're already getting publicity as the FES, and that some money has gone into advertising, I am strongly opposed to the idea of renaming. It'd simply invalidate our past efforts.

6685
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Amanda Knox guilty again.
« on: February 03, 2014, 07:16:18 AM »
However, as far as we can tell rehabilitative models are the best for society as a whole, so that's what we should do.
Another contradiction. You say rehabilitative models are the best for society, and yet you firmly stand behind the American system. I'm starting to think you're trying to waste our time here.

6686
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Amanda Knox guilty again.
« on: February 02, 2014, 09:31:17 PM »
Absolutely. I support such models 100%. The criminal themself is irrelevant, in my opinion.
These two sentences directly contradict one another. You cannot "support 100%" a model that focuses all its attention on the criminal and simultaneously claim that the criminal is irrelevant. Like with your previous claims, the problem here is lack of consistency. You are welcome to dislike it all you want, but self-contradictory claims do not take a sophisticated debate to dispute.

Does anyone here support rehabilitative models of criminal justice?
Sure. The human mind can be shaped in essentially any way, although with obviously varying results. Generally speaking, it's always worth a try.

6687
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Amanda Knox guilty again.
« on: February 02, 2014, 06:48:59 AM »
Don't give me truisms, I'm asking for actual logic.
You're asking for logic to dispute your claim that the justice system should do something else than what it was designed to do. The fact that it can be dismissed with a truism is a problem with your argument, not my response to it. If you'd like to discuss something where logic is involved, make an argument that doesn't disprove itself.

6688
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Amanda Knox guilty again.
« on: February 02, 2014, 03:26:48 AM »
Why? That's a pretty broad generalization.
Because justice systems are designed to exact justice, not revenge.

6689
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Amanda Knox guilty again.
« on: February 02, 2014, 03:16:04 AM »
Yeah. But is revenge really such a bad thing in all cases?
In a justice system, yes.

6690
Technology & Information / Re: Ask Rushy about Bitcoins.
« on: February 02, 2014, 02:59:08 AM »
There's money in WOW's money too...
You do not own WoW money at any point in time, though. You're also not allowed to sell it (partially because you don't own it).

6691
Arts & Entertainment / Re: Now Playing (the Video Game Version)
« on: February 01, 2014, 10:47:51 PM »
I play it, although and very casually.

6692
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Amanda Knox guilty again.
« on: January 31, 2014, 10:10:39 PM »
Yes, that is exactly how it should work.
That will require some backup.

Because in America we are innocent until proven guilty
Yeah, that's how it works here too.

and "if at first you don't succeed, try try again" is kind of a dumb way to go about things when you're talking about people's lives.
It's a good thing that's prohibited by EU regulations, then.

If you are proven not guilty you shouldn't spend the rest of your life looking over your shoulder.
I certainly agree. That's exactly how we do it. It seems to me that the problem here is that the vocal American legal experts of this forum never bothered to read the European Convention on Human Rights and assumed that just because extraordinary cases exist, the rules are completely different for us than they are for you.

That's idiotic. I'd rather a few guilty people get away than a few innocent people be jailed unjustly.
But the European system is better at that. If this is your objective, you should strive to understand other Western legal systems and adopt the good things out of them. Currently, the American judiciary is the laughing stock of the West, what with your ability to just make up a crime when you want to jail someone. Granted, the UK, Australia, Canada, and other Anglosphee countries are guilty of that to some extent, too, but your case is the most extreme. In fact, the very priority of the American system seems to be to put everyone that even looks guilty in jail (or to declare war on them because they're TRRRRRISTS).

6693
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Amanda Knox guilty again.
« on: January 31, 2014, 04:49:51 PM »
(the UK has started to do that now as well unfortunately)
But transparency and accountability.

6694
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Amanda Knox guilty again.
« on: January 31, 2014, 04:20:03 AM »
The principle is sound though
By "the principle" you must mean something completely different from what I described, unless you simultaneously agree and disagree with the idea.

6695
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Amanda Knox guilty again.
« on: January 31, 2014, 04:15:36 AM »
Innocent people don't get convicted in America? Didn't know that one.
Sean's claim seems to be that someone that's found innocent would be called to court again, and again, and again. Of course, we know how rarely that happens, so that argument won't have much sway on us, but imagine how convincing it must sound to someone who only thinks of it as a principle! Then again, with the way the American judiciary works, that probably would happen...

6696
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Amanda Knox guilty again.
« on: January 31, 2014, 03:49:51 AM »
In Murica we operate by the idea that you can only be tried for a law once, and that's how it should be.
And if the judiciary makes a mistake, or new evidence comes into light, we should just go "You may have gotten away this time, but we'll get you yet!". 10/10 best system let's implement immediately.

6697
Technology & Information / Re: C++
« on: January 30, 2014, 08:18:42 AM »
I'll translate it when I get home. It's mostly similar, except that C doesn't pretend to be OOP.
Given that the code posted doesn't even attempt to use objects*, I struggle to think what you're on about.

I'm out of the loop on C++ but ... Pretty sure you need "int main()" if you're going to return an integer.

In fact, take out the 0 in the return and see if that fixes it.
In C++, main() has to be defined as returning an int. Also, if you wanted to define a function that returns nothing, just saying stuff() would be incorrect. What you'd need is void stuff(). Also, you should never advise people for their C(++) programs to do anything else than return 0 (or EXIT_SUCCESS, which is technically better) at the end of their successfully-executed programs.

What would the equivalent code in C look like?
It would use printf() or puts() instead of cout, and scanf() or gets() instead of cin. The code would flow pretty much the same, and Parsifal is just being a massive gays.

* - inb4 Parsifal points out that cin and cout are technically objects.

6698
Technology & Information / Re: Ask Rushy about Bitcoins.
« on: January 29, 2014, 04:55:52 PM »
they'd have to send bonds the other way. I didn't want to make a huge detailed post just to tell Franklin that he is wrong again.
Being wrong is not a good way to tell others they're wrong. It creates a (false?) perception that only legitimises their claims.

6699
Technology & Information / Re: Ask Rushy about Bitcoins.
« on: January 29, 2014, 09:25:15 AM »
They don't need to print the money on to notes. Just type the number into a computer. In that sense US dollars are limitless. They can transfer 1000 trillion dollars into the treasury account if they like. But they won't because it would ruin the seriously good racket they have going right now.
That's not how money works, not even in America.

6700
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Ask a Jew anything.
« on: January 29, 2014, 07:32:56 AM »
Pizza, full Torah Observance is only possible in the days of Messiah.
Why?

Also, I was wondering about you, personally. Would you do it if you saw someone disrespecting the Sabbath?

Pages: < Back  1 ... 333 334 [335] 336 337 ... 349  Next >