o.m.g., it wouldn't be A. A. now? could it? jeez ...
Originally Posted by lxdude
Not at all. First of all I have not called her nasty names, neither trollop, strumpet, nor whore, and here you have clearly erred. I have described her in my opinion as narcissistic, calculating, and shrewd, which is quite a different and altogether fair assessment regarding her uncoerced and willfully purposeful public testimony. If she took money in exchange for sex and I described her as a whore I would not for example in that context be calling her names. She has put herself up in a public way of her own volition, and in doing so, she is completely eligible, therefore my comments are neither capricious nor arbitrary. It doesn't matter that I know her or have known her or not, or if I have calculated the very vectors of the atoms in her body. She has made a very public statement and appearance of her own volition, and I have commented fairly. Any public statement made in so finite a package such as a video that an individual creates for public dissemination must needs be self contained and self supporting, without the need for context or harried forensic work on the part of the recipient, furthermore the actual context in this case is even more wretched and pitiful than I had supposed, and undermines what little credit that might have been ascribed in the first place. I have no idea why you would feel so chivalrous, and I dare say charitable in the face of something so pathetically philistine, but that is of course a kindness on your part, which can be both respected and lamented as naive, simultaneously. I am not inclined to be kind to gold diggers myself, particularly because the supposed anonymity she has given the photographer at comment is completely and calculatingly disingenuous, rumored to be accompanied with a legal spoiler in the fine print to place the name foremost, and it is not unreasonable to suppose some doubt that the media "success" of her anecdote would have been so without the unscrupulous implication, and that it would pass as tasteful only to one who is exceedingly obtuse.
Originally Posted by chriscrawfordphoto
I would also say my original comment is right on the money, so to speak, except I gave her rather too much credit. The fact that your careful research revealed that the video was created directly at the chance for gain, and a wholly miserable, materialistic, and head-bobbingly superficial gain at that quite obviously bears out my earlier assessment, but unfortunately discredits her ambition, it falling to the sub par of pedestrian. She is a typical or perhaps even shining example of generation duh, and I don't feel even the slightest twinge of compassion in calling it out. Indeed, much as I have endured your errantly Christian lectures in regard to my public comment on her obvious dolt-age that was made public by her own hand, so must she endure some certain comments that are ad oculos, and furthermore engendered by her own request, just as these preceding comments are honestly and rightfully at yours.
Apologies for the gutting.
Last edited by JBrunner; 08-06-2010 at 09:01 PM. Click to view previous post history.
That's just, like, my opinion, man...
This BS is not for APUG. The kid should have enough sense to not stay there. Jobs are hard to get I know, but no one should stay or put up with this sort of stuff. Good to report to even us. Get out, now!