4 ms·

> If there is a legit distinction between speech and conversations, you didn't make it or I missed it. Ok, lets try again: Money: something generally accepted

> If there is a legit distinction between speech and conversations, you didn't make it or I missed it. Ok, lets try again: Money: something generally accepted as a medium of exchange, a measure of value, or a means of payment. Speech: the communication or expression of thoughts in spoken words Is that clear? Listen, I love these conversations but you already convinced me that you're not in good faith, which makes this a waste of time. Stay cool.

jakeogh 9y ago
I even gave the mechanism, you can use money to generate speech. I don't think you are commenting in bad faith, and I don't think talking to you is a waste of time.
- tdehnel 9y ago
  You can use wood to generate heat but no one would plant a tree and call it a campfire.
  - fwdpropaganda 9y ago
    I knew there was a one-liner in here somewhere but you worded that just perfect :-)
    - jakeogh 9y ago
      Why? It's a nonsense analogy. Speech is to conversation as wood is to fire? Does two people talking somehow make it conceptually different than speech?
rectang 9y ago
> you already convinced me that you're not in good faith We're irreconcilably opposed, but I have no doubt that everyone on this thread is advocating their true thoughts. Please reconsider this mode of argumentation in the future.
- fwdpropaganda 9y ago
  > We're irreconcilably opposed, but I have no doubt that everyone on this thread is advocating their true thoughts. Please reconsider this mode of argumentation in the future. When I say "I think you're not in good faith", obviously that's not an argument for anything. Take it as a justification of why I'm convinced that continuing won't get us anywhere and therefore not worth the effort. And by the way... when I said that I was referring to someone else; I haven't been following what you've been saying.
  - rectang 9y ago
    Clumsy phrasing on my part. I meant that collectively, the participants in this thread are irreconcilably opposed. You and I seem to be roughly aligned. I'm horrified by jakeogh and the unfettering of corporate monsters to gobble up little people; I expect he would be similarly horrified by me for contemplating having the state rein them in. I'd like to think there's a middle ground where we all deplore and distrust the concentration of power in either public OR private hands, but past experience in debates like this leads me to believe that's unlikely.
    - jakeogh 9y ago
      Accurate, I appreciate the levelness of your thought. I'll leave it here, just noticed dang gave me another warning above. It's not an easy job, I know.

jakeogh 9y ago

I even gave the mechanism, you can use money to generate speech. I don't think you are commenting in bad faith, and I don't think talking to you is a waste of time.

tdehnel 9y ago
You can use wood to generate heat but no one would plant a tree and call it a campfire.
- fwdpropaganda 9y ago
  I knew there was a one-liner in here somewhere but you worded that just perfect :-)
  - jakeogh 9y ago
    Why? It's a nonsense analogy. Speech is to conversation as wood is to fire? Does two people talking somehow make it conceptually different than speech?

rectang 9y ago

> you already convinced me that you're not in good faith We're irreconcilably opposed, but I have no doubt that everyone on this thread is advocating their true thoughts. Please reconsider this mode of argumentation in the future.

fwdpropaganda 9y ago
> We're irreconcilably opposed, but I have no doubt that everyone on this thread is advocating their true thoughts. Please reconsider this mode of argumentation in the future. When I say "I think you're not in good faith", obviously that's not an argument for anything. Take it as a justification of why I'm convinced that continuing won't get us anywhere and therefore not worth the effort. And by the way... when I said that I was referring to someone else; I haven't been following what you've been saying.
- rectang 9y ago
  Clumsy phrasing on my part. I meant that collectively, the participants in this thread are irreconcilably opposed. You and I seem to be roughly aligned. I'm horrified by jakeogh and the unfettering of corporate monsters to gobble up little people; I expect he would be similarly horrified by me for contemplating having the state rein them in. I'd like to think there's a middle ground where we all deplore and distrust the concentration of power in either public OR private hands, but past experience in debates like this leads me to believe that's unlikely.
  - jakeogh 9y ago
    Accurate, I appreciate the levelness of your thought. I'll leave it here, just noticed dang gave me another warning above. It's not an easy job, I know.