![]() |
|
|
|||||||
| FlashChat | Actuarial Discussion | Preliminary Exams | CAS/SOA Exams | Cyberchat | Around the World | Suggestions |
D.W. Simpson and Company -- Actuary Salary Surveys |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is it just me, or has Laocoon's arguments really slipped lately? He has been resorting to:
1. Accusing people of racism. 2. Calling people names, such as "worthless excrement". 3. Calling people hypocrites if they refuse to discuss a topic he would like to discuss. 4. In general shows disproportionate disrespect to any poster who he feels does not respect his comments. |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Respect my authori-TAI!
|
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
The over/under is 3.5 hours
|
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ever since Jiminy left him, the Cricket-Master has not been the same. Please, though, threads directed at personalities here seem out of place.
I do wonder, though, how T * H * I * S can be considered "R-rated" but bulls*** and calling people "excrement" and "f***er" and "a$$" etc etc (and these are not directed at or accusations about Lao) - how are these OBVIOUSLY OFFENSIVE and very thinly veiled items allowed? I generally think that the "intent" of the law around here would preclude such items - sure, maybe a 9-year old can't see the words, so they aren't quite R-rated. However, any adult can see them for the vulgar postings that they are, the lack of civility they imply, and the poor image they project. Since the purpose of prohibiting R-rated postings around here is presumably not to protect the innocent child who might wander into this forum (say, some 15 year old hacker) but rather to project a professional image in the event, say, a Canadian professor of Actuarial Science might wander in - then isn't the current policy, as implemented, just a little bit ineffective? I am not criticizing Traci here - I am suggesting that we should all strive for a higher level civility, even when we strongly disagree about highly emotional subjects. Note to Traci - sorry if the above gets past your auto-censor. But then, I will know if you have read the post - in which case I would like to hear your thoughts on this as well. [edited out directly offending content] <font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Master Po on 2001-10-05 12:14 ]</font> |
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Look, Po,
Lao has been the master for millennia of internet time. For you to call him the "cricket-master" implies that I am the "cricket." Keep THAT up and I'll put some whomp on your Shao Lin tush, sir. I direct your attention to the pristine rice paper and the coins that were in your hand. Your post, if I may suggest, also lacks a certain bit of historical understanding. Lao is the Master... baiter. If you continue to demand your variation of the right of return, we can probably accomidate you! |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Time for you to leave.
Enjoy your new master, grasshopper, and all his condescension. |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Not even the Imperial Guard should beat an old blind monk twice for the same offense.
|
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
Po, I suggest that you abandon your pretensions, apologize to EB, and beg him to accept you as a disciple. It is obvious that if you continue to act without guidance you will shortly be without face.
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|