Let's go to war or not: Iran Edition

[aurelius]

Yeah, @DoctorWho your joke failed the “is it funny?” test for acceptability of racial/ethnic/religious/protected-class humor. Didn’t quite hit the right note. You’ll get em next time, champ.

i think a lot of comics need to read this comment. Some comics complain they can’t say this or that because someone will be offended. Nah bro. You are just not funny.

[DoctorWho]

Yeah, @DoctorWho your joke failed the “is it funny?” test for acceptability of racial/ethnic/religious/protected-class humor. Didn’t quite hit the right note. You’ll get em next time, champ.

I usually don't work with people who are uncomfortable with telling me that I'm wrong. Pretty good chance that I'm wrong a lot and seek out being told so in the offline world. On here, it seems to me that people disagree with others as part of an on-line relationship of related squabbles, which makes taking things personally even more wrongheaded. So you'll understand if I don't care much about your view of what is acceptable.

[DoctorWho]

[quote=DoctorWho post_id=211962 time=1578502218 user_id=171]

I didn't know there was a such a thing as Ibadi. They must not be very good at chopping off heads and blowing themselves up.

(not a criticism!)

Does it take effort on your part to be this obtuse or is it as natural as breathing?

I've heard that there are some people who don't have a sense of humor, but I rarely encounter them.

But maybe I'm being unfair to you. You might just be seeking superficial approval from anonymous people on the internet so much that it just appears to be brittleness and lack of humor.

I always laugh when I hang with Gillman, and I've never heard him be racist or bigoted, or brittle, fucker is a cube lately.
Please tell me more about how being insulting, dismissive and myopic equates to "no sense of humor" "can't you take a joke"

I never charged him with bigotry or racism, or being dismissive or myopic.

that was more your qualifier. How you can be all of those things but hey, it's ok if you say it's a "joke" and people don't get it cause they are the brittle ones.
Though explaining that to you seems absurd.

Before this goes totally south, thank you for the info about running windows on a chromebook -- it's not for me right now but could really be useful in the future.

Now, since this is all about unsupported mind-reading, my hunch is that your friend is motivated by a personal dislike for me (more accurately, online me here), and he doesn't really care about my joke about sectarian violence in the ME. But if he, and you, want to conclude that I'm a bad person for a joke, I'm not stopping you.

And of the things in my comment, the thing that seems most objectively accurate is that he was easily offended, which is the meaning of "brittle" in this context. That just doesn't seem the right thing to pick out.

Wow that's a lot of text. Can't you take a joke? Don't be so touchy feely and sensitive.

Time for a quick recap:
1. Joke.
2. Gillman calls me obtuse.
3. I say or imply he's easily offended and lacks sense of humor.
4. You take offense (too easily, IMO) and then charge me with taking offense and having no sense of humor.

Irony overload.

In the spirit of reconcilliation, here is a joke:
How many gillmans & idlehands does it take to screw in a light bulb?

SpoilerShow

Gillman and Idlehands answer: Hey, that's not funny.

Just to be clear, you are saying having compassion and being touchy feely and understanding emotions and other peoples' point of view is bad?

...a couple more <REPLY TO QUOTE>s here I'm pretty sure we're gonna break the forum software.

But seriously, far be it from me to be any kind of PC-moral-compus or whatever...but Dr.Who, your original comment comes across as, "but yer one na gud ones".
[/quote]

I see your point and appreciate your level-headed explanation of the interpretation. There are two interpretations: I'm comparing the religious group to another religious group or I'm comparing it (favorably) to ISIS or like terrorists. Where there are two interpretations (of one sentence!), jumping to one because of internal framing is overly rigid thinking (or really not-thinking) -- especially when everything depends on knowing the intent of the speaker. Anyway, that's how I see it. (if you've read this far, maybe we can start the pop-psychology aspect of this. I know what my intent was, but a reader who can only comprehend the opposite interpretation has his own issues.)

[BostonRugger]

Yeah, @DoctorWho your joke failed the “is it funny?” test for acceptability of racial/ethnic/religious/protected-class humor. Didn’t quite hit the right note. You’ll get em next time, champ.

I usually don't work with people who are uncomfortable with telling me that I'm wrong. Pretty good chance that I'm wrong a lot and seek out being told so in the offline world.

Ok. Would you have told that joke at work? Would your colleagues have been alright with it or would it have made one or more of them uncomfortable?

On here, it seems to me that people disagree with others as part of an on-line relationship of related squabbles, which makes taking things personally even more wrongheaded.

I'm not sure I understand your meaning here.

So you'll understand if I don't care much about your view of what is acceptable.

This I 100% understand. Your joke still wasn't funny.

[Idlehands]

Yeah, @DoctorWho your joke failed the “is it funny?” test for acceptability of racial/ethnic/religious/protected-class humor. Didn’t quite hit the right note. You’ll get em next time, champ.

I usually don't work with people who are uncomfortable with telling me that I'm wrong. Pretty good chance that I'm wrong a lot and seek out being told so in the offline world.

Ok. Would you have told that joke at work? Would your colleagues have been alright with it or would it have made one or more of them uncomfortable?

On here, it seems to me that people disagree with others as part of an on-line relationship of related squabbles, which makes taking things personally even more wrongheaded.

I'm not sure I understand your meaning here.

So you'll understand if I don't care much about your view of what is acceptable.

This I 100% understand. Your joke still wasn't funny.

Am I missing something ? He doesn’t work with people who tell him he’s wrong , and doesn’t like online people with more of a propensity to tell him he’s wrong so he dismisses being told he’s wrong in situations where it arises ?

Have to say I love working in a culture where the right to dissent is a core value. Super uncomfortable to be told I’m
Wrong but I also love it. Show me the data and look at it logically and change my view.
What’s wild is this even came up at a workshop this week. One of the discussions was about the aging population and their inflexibility to change their views and how that affects the political climate. Like the age demographics between who was for and against brexit for example.

[BostonRugger]

I see your point and appreciate your level-headed explanation of the interpretation. There are two interpretations: I'm comparing the religious group to another religious group or I'm comparing it (favorably) to ISIS or like terrorists. Where there are two interpretations (of one sentence!), jumping to one because of internal framing is overly rigid thinking (or really not-thinking) -- especially when everything depends on knowing the intent of the speaker. Anyway, that's how I see it. (if you've read this far, maybe we can start the pop-psychology aspect of this. I know what my intent was, but a reader who can only comprehend the opposite interpretation has his own issues.)

This is the original post, presented without comment:

Phil, I'm inferring from your name that you know something about Oman.

Yeah - I lived there for 16 years. Dad was in the oil business.

I've heard it said that bc of fracking the US doesn't have to have the firepower to keep the Strait of Hormuz open, but now only enough to close it.
In other words, for most petroleum products, North America has the supply and refining capacity to make the middle east supply almost irrelevant to the US (except for the huge price shocks that might happen).
Yes?

I think the above is probably overstating it. But... remember the lines for gas and the price shock when Iran blew up 50% of Saudi's production capacity? I can't.

And are Oman and UAE friendly, both diplomatically and on the ground?

Oman tries to be friendly with everybody. They pride themselves in being the Switzerland of the ME. Oman acted as a go-between and neutral site for negotiations between Iran and US. Partially this stems from Oman historically being a sailing/trading/merchant power, and partially that most Omanis are not Sunni, but instead Ibadi (which is neither Sunni nor Shia).

I was in Iran on vacation a few years ago, and was surprised to find that in Shiraz, most of the tourists visiting there were actually from Oman.

I didn't know there was a such a thing as Ibadi. They must not be very good at chopping off heads and blowing themselves up.

(not a criticism!)

[omaniphil]

I see your point and appreciate your level-headed explanation of the interpretation. There are two interpretations: I'm comparing the religious group to another religious group or I'm comparing it (favorably) to ISIS or like terrorists. Where there are two interpretations (of one sentence!), jumping to one because of internal framing is overly rigid thinking (or really not-thinking) -- especially when everything depends on knowing the intent of the speaker. Anyway, that's how I see it. (if you've read this far, maybe we can start the pop-psychology aspect of this. I know what my intent was, but a reader who can only comprehend the opposite interpretation has his own issues.)

This is the original post, presented without comment:

Phil, I'm inferring from your name that you know something about Oman.

Yeah - I lived there for 16 years. Dad was in the oil business.

I've heard it said that bc of fracking the US doesn't have to have the firepower to keep the Strait of Hormuz open, but now only enough to close it.
In other words, for most petroleum products, North America has the supply and refining capacity to make the middle east supply almost irrelevant to the US (except for the huge price shocks that might happen).
Yes?

I think the above is probably overstating it. But... remember the lines for gas and the price shock when Iran blew up 50% of Saudi's production capacity? I can't.

And are Oman and UAE friendly, both diplomatically and on the ground?

Oman tries to be friendly with everybody. They pride themselves in being the Switzerland of the ME. Oman acted as a go-between and neutral site for negotiations between Iran and US. Partially this stems from Oman historically being a sailing/trading/merchant power, and partially that most Omanis are not Sunni, but instead Ibadi (which is neither Sunni nor Shia).

I was in Iran on vacation a few years ago, and was surprised to find that in Shiraz, most of the tourists visiting there were actually from Oman.

I didn't know there was a such a thing as Ibadi. They must not be very good at chopping off heads and blowing themselves up.

(not a criticism!)

For what it's worth, I thought that Who's comment was funny. Also true.

[BostonRugger]

I see your point and appreciate your level-headed explanation of the interpretation. There are two interpretations: I'm comparing the religious group to another religious group or I'm comparing it (favorably) to ISIS or like terrorists. Where there are two interpretations (of one sentence!), jumping to one because of internal framing is overly rigid thinking (or really not-thinking) -- especially when everything depends on knowing the intent of the speaker. Anyway, that's how I see it. (if you've read this far, maybe we can start the pop-psychology aspect of this. I know what my intent was, but a reader who can only comprehend the opposite interpretation has his own issues.)

This is the original post, presented without comment:

Phil, I'm inferring from your name that you know something about Oman.

Yeah - I lived there for 16 years. Dad was in the oil business.

I've heard it said that bc of fracking the US doesn't have to have the firepower to keep the Strait of Hormuz open, but now only enough to close it.
In other words, for most petroleum products, North America has the supply and refining capacity to make the middle east supply almost irrelevant to the US (except for the huge price shocks that might happen).
Yes?

I think the above is probably overstating it. But... remember the lines for gas and the price shock when Iran blew up 50% of Saudi's production capacity? I can't.

And are Oman and UAE friendly, both diplomatically and on the ground?

Oman tries to be friendly with everybody. They pride themselves in being the Switzerland of the ME. Oman acted as a go-between and neutral site for negotiations between Iran and US. Partially this stems from Oman historically being a sailing/trading/merchant power, and partially that most Omanis are not Sunni, but instead Ibadi (which is neither Sunni nor Shia).

I was in Iran on vacation a few years ago, and was surprised to find that in Shiraz, most of the tourists visiting there were actually from Oman.

I didn't know there was a such a thing as Ibadi. They must not be very good at chopping off heads and blowing themselves up.

(not a criticism!)

For what it's worth, I thought that Who's comment was funny. Also true.

I did think of this discussion while I was watching Joker last night.

“All of you, the system that knows so much: you decide what's right or wrong the same way you decide what's funny or not.“

[DoctorWho]

Yeah, @DoctorWho your joke failed the “is it funny?” test for acceptability of racial/ethnic/religious/protected-class humor. Didn’t quite hit the right note. You’ll get em next time, champ.

I usually don't work with people who are uncomfortable with telling me that I'm wrong. Pretty good chance that I'm wrong a lot and seek out being told so in the offline world.

Ok. Would you have told that joke at work? Would your colleagues have been alright with it or would it have made one or more of them uncomfortable?

On here, it seems to me that people disagree with others as part of an on-line relationship of related squabbles, which makes taking things personally even more wrongheaded.

I'm not sure I understand your meaning here.

So you'll understand if I don't care much about your view of what is acceptable.

This I 100% understand. Your joke still wasn't funny.

Am I missing something ? He doesn’t work with people who tell him he’s wrong , and doesn’t like online people with more of a propensity to tell him he’s wrong so he dismisses being told he’s wrong in situations where it arises ?

A tells B he is wrong and bad. A's view depends on knowing the heart and mind of B. Should A's views be taken seriously?

[aurelius]

Wow guys. This is an E&P epic bitch fest. And somehow I'm not involved. This board is not the most productive use of our time but this is epic level time wasted. I feel like this has at least 2 more pages of material to be written.

[DoctorWho]

Wow guys. This is an E&P epic bitch fest. And somehow I'm not involved. This board is not the most productive use of our time but this is epic level time wasted. I feel like this has at least 2 more pages of material to be written.

Your gif is right on the money. I should stay away from McD fries and this thread, but I keep coming back.

But when a prolific poster (like Aur) tells me I'm posting too much, I take it seriously!

[Idlehands]

Yeah, @DoctorWho your joke failed the “is it funny?” test for acceptability of racial/ethnic/religious/protected-class humor. Didn’t quite hit the right note. You’ll get em next time, champ.

I usually don't work with people who are uncomfortable with telling me that I'm wrong. Pretty good chance that I'm wrong a lot and seek out being told so in the offline world.

Ok. Would you have told that joke at work? Would your colleagues have been alright with it or would it have made one or more of them uncomfortable?

On here, it seems to me that people disagree with others as part of an on-line relationship of related squabbles, which makes taking things personally even more wrongheaded.

I'm not sure I understand your meaning here.

So you'll understand if I don't care much about your view of what is acceptable.

This I 100% understand. Your joke still wasn't funny.

Am I missing something ? He doesn’t work with people who tell him he’s wrong , and doesn’t like online people with more of a propensity to tell him he’s wrong so he dismisses being told he’s wrong in situations where it arises ?

A tells B he is wrong and <b>bad</b>. A's view depends on knowing the heart and mind of B. Should A's views be taken seriously?

telling right there isn't it. Are you saying you hear you're wrong and think your bad? It's ok man, you have value. I'm sorry you hear bad when people say your wrong. Do you need more hugs?

[JonA]

Should change the thread title:

"Let's go to war or not: Internet Argument Edition"

[Bcharles123]

Wow guys. This is an E&P epic bitch fest. And somehow I'm not involved.

Could you summarize? Then select a panel to arbitrate. That would be a good use of time. I can’t follow it all and feel like I’m missing something good.

[aurelius]

Could you summarize? Then select a panel to arbitrate. That would be a good use of time. I can’t follow it all and feel like I’m missing something good.

I feel like this is the perfect task for a blue ribbon commission to take up. I nominate you to chair the committee.

[Bcharles123]

Could you summarize? Then select a panel to arbitrate. That would be a good use of time. I can’t follow it all and feel like I’m missing something good.

I feel like this is the perfect task for a blue ribbon commission to take up. I nominate you to chair the committee.

Yeah I thought about self nominating. Unfortunately I have lots of down time. We need arbitrators. 3 is a good number. You in? I’ll make it easy. I need one more. Anyone else?

I’ll review the facts and summarize. Each aggrieved party will respond to the facts in a short summary. Then the arbitrators are free to ask questions openly. Say 24hrs.

Then we vote.

[hsilman]

Could you summarize? Then select a panel to arbitrate. That would be a good use of time. I can’t follow it all and feel like I’m missing something good.

I feel like this is the perfect task for a blue ribbon commission to take up. I nominate you to chair the committee.

Yeah I thought about self nominating. Unfortunately I have lots of down time. We need arbitrators. 3 is a good number. You in? I’ll make it easy. I need one more. Anyone else?

I’ll review the facts and summarize. Each aggrieved party will respond to the facts in a short summary. Then the arbitrators are free to ask questions openly. Say 24hrs.

Then we vote.

I can be the third member. Whatever Who is saying is probably not wrong, but he's probably being passive-aggressive and a bit whiny.

I don't know, I only unblock his posts if it's possibly something wrestling related.

(edited because I came out too harsh. my bad)

[mbasic]

On topic:

$3M bounty on Trump?

Just say, what if Trump is assassinated?

WW3? Or just air campaign against Iran?

[aurelius]

Yeah I thought about self nominating. Unfortunately I have lots of down time. We need arbitrators. 3 is a good number. You in? I’ll make it easy. I need one more. Anyone else?

I’ll review the facts and summarize. Each aggrieved party will respond to the facts in a short summary. Then the arbitrators are free to ask questions openly. Say 24hrs.

Then we vote.

If I can't call on witnesses I'm out.

$3M bounty on Trump.

Only $3 million? I mean...maybe $300 million would get somebody to take a shot at it. Maybe...

WW3? Or just air campaign against Iran?

Probably in the span of 24 hours the US, through conventional weaponry, could end Iran. Target every water treatment and sewer treatment plant. Target every power plant. Target every major bridge/transportation infrastructure piece. Then just watch as an Iranian apocalypse happens (plague, famine, war). For global PR reasons, not a great move on the US's part. But the US could end Iran in 24 hours if it decided that it did not care about civilian deaths.

[DoctorWho]

Could you summarize? Then select a panel to arbitrate. That would be a good use of time. I can’t follow it all and feel like I’m missing something good.

I feel like this is the perfect task for a blue ribbon commission to take up. I nominate you to chair the committee.

Yeah I thought about self nominating. Unfortunately I have lots of down time. We need arbitrators. 3 is a good number. You in? I’ll make it easy. I need one more. Anyone else?

I’ll review the facts and summarize. Each aggrieved party will respond to the facts in a short summary. Then the arbitrators are free to ask questions openly. Say 24hrs.

Then we vote.

I can be the third member. Whatever Who is saying is probably not wrong, but he's probably being passive-aggressive and a bit whiny.

I don't know, I only unblock his posts if it's possibly something wrestling related.

(edited because I came out too harsh. my bad)

I would call it sarcastic and direct, not passive or aggressive.