I Arrive

[Ptah]

^

 

[Jennywocky]

Wow. A god walks among us.

kill it!

 

[Ptah]

A deity. There's a difference.

 

[Jennywocky]

INTPc's still down, isn't it?

("Valhalla, closed for Lent". Time to move to Olympus.)

 

[Ptah]

Yup. Still down. So this place gets a chance.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxYjG4a41j4
part two: www.youtube.com/watch?v=67Lx5C_8cu4

 

[Reluctantly]

Hello sir,

I can't help but notice that your chin has a cute little hat. One might wonder, how does a person get it to stick like that?

 

[Ptah]

The dried tears of mortals, such as those who die in blue face paint.

 

[snafupants]

That was the laziest opener I have ever encountered.

 

[Ptah]

What you call lazy I call efficient.

 

[snafupants]

What you call lazy I call efficient.

Typically an opener guides the thread, and in the case of an intro thread, informs the person. I suppose we already have some information on you based on your posts though. We can perhaps agree on efficiently lazy.

 

[Ptah]

efficiently lazy. lazily efficient.

Story of my life.

 

[snafupants]

Story of my life.

The verdict depends on whether what you produce is worthwhile. In this instance, I would argue it is not. Lazily efficient is an oxymoron, generally, and misapplied in this case because there's nothing conventionally efficient about being a dick and only putting one character in your intro. If your intent, however, was to be a dick then you succeeded quite nicely but if your intent was to tell us about yourself, as most intro threads essay, then your attempt is an unflavored abortion. To be efficient, you must achieve your aim with little squandered time or effort; the second part of that was swaggeringly accomplished, but your aim was pathetic given the parameters of most intro threads.

 

[Reluctantly]

WEAK-WILLED INTPs!

 

[Ptah]

@snafu: Funny, seems we're each giving all these reasons not to like each other. And who is getting that done faster, and with less, I ask?

 

[snafupants]

@snafu: Funny, seems we're each giving all these reasons not to like each other. And who is getting that done faster, and with less, I ask?

Yes, but I have a decent reason.

You lack of substantive points just underscores my previous post.

 

[Ptah]

So, let me get this straight. Someone other than the OP is getting butthurt in an intro thread?

Awesome.

Heh. Relax. I'm an INTPc native, checking this place out. Read my other posts hither, you'll get the picture.

 

[snafupants]

So, let me get this straight. Someone other than the OP is getting butthurt in an intro thread?

Awesome.

Heh. Relax. I'm an INTPc native, checking this place out. Read my other posts hither, you'll get the picture.

After looking up butthurt on urban dictionary I can report feeling none of the emotions outlined in the description. I just nitpick and argue for fun.

 

[Ptah]

I just nitpick and argue for fun.

Gotcha. I choose my battles (and fonts) differently, I guess. Otherwise, I think we're on the same page.

 

[EditorOne]

I believe shirts are required, though.

 

[Ptah]

Chicks can gratuitously suck face ... but I need a shirt?

 

[Deleted member 1424]

It's interesting what a simple avatar can do to someone's personality.
Or perhaps it merely prefaces Snafu's statements.
Or maybe I just never read his posts before.

Snafu, BAP, EyeSeeCold
It's striking how much you all post, and how little of it has struck me.
My mental pictures of you three are blank, excepting this commonality.

I suppose, this is mean.
I'm sorry.



I must admit I always preferred Ra, Sekhmet, Atum, and Set personally.
Greetings and welcome Ptah.

 

[crippli]

I must admit I always preferred Ra, Sekhmet, Atum, and Set personally.
Greetings and welcome Ptah.

Well.. Sekhmet is his wife. If I am to guess, Atum and Set will be the children. Not sure where Ra fits into the family.

I agree with the others. Kind of a lame intro. In any case. Welcome. Disappointed the site was only down. I would have thought you had managed to get yourself banned by now.

 

[Ptah]

I agree with the others. Kind of a lame intro.

Would you have preferred :

<

In any case. Welcome. Disappointed the site was only down. I would have thought you had managed to get yourself banned by now.

Me? Banned from INTPc? For what?

 

[crippli]

Would you have preferred :

<

Much better. It's redundant to read again what I just read.

Me? Banned from INTPc? For what?

Not what, but who. With that error it's strange you are still operational.

Enjoy your stay. Fresh air should do you good.

 

[snafupants]

It's interesting what a simple avatar can do to someone's personality.
Or perhaps it merely prefaces Snafu's statements.
Or maybe I just never read his posts before.

Snafu, BAP, EyeSeeCold
It's striking how much you all post, and how little of it has struck me.
My mental pictures of you three are blank, excepting this commonality.

I suppose, this is mean.
I'm sorry.



I must admit I always preferred Ra, Sekhmet, Atum, and Set personally.
Greetings and welcome Ptah.

What a perfectly expendable post you have here.

Mean? We were never that close for your preferences to have any barbs, or meaning. Your impetus for singling out various members for attempted denigration/humiliation is curious. Mostly I find it sad and unnecessary.

I deleted your post from my wall and I have no clue what your problem is. Thanks for airing your opinions though: the forum really benefited from that.

I could care less whether you read my posts, thanks for playing.

 

[Deleted member 1424]

I just find the attribute rather curious.

You certainly take things that don't bother you rather hard.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

Snafu, BAP, EyeSeeCold
It's striking how much you all post, and how little of it has struck me.
My mental pictures of you three are blank, excepting this commonality.

I suppose, this is mean.
I'm sorry.

Don't worry, these days I don't think you are really missing out on anything, of me.


I'm familiar with your name at least, you don't seem to get involved in much of the threads here though.

There is nothing to be sorry about.

 

[AlisaD]

@Ptah - You're just a big old meanie, aren't you?
*scratches behind ears*
Purr for me, kitten, purr.

 

[Minuend]

I'm familiar with your name at least, you don't seem to get involved in much of the threads here though.

I would think it's because they aren't as intellectually stimulating anymore. People used to put more thought into their posts (myself included) but that doesn't seem too normal these days.

Or maybe it's just that we are growing up and have heard all these topics before so we don't really learn anything new from them, or see them as mentally challenging.

Also, we are all curious to know what Adaire wrote to snafu. If we are not intellectually stimulated, perhaps we could have some entertainment, at least.

 

[The Gopher]

While my posts have never been about great interlect < case in point I have been lacking in actual meaning in my posts

^ case in point

However my not so original writing style has also gone possibly down a drain.

case in point v

Now you maybe wondering why (or now[or to be honest when{or in what state of mind<that I am in right now>}]) that I posted this it was more a test to judge responces

case out of point I LOVE OSIRIS.

 

[Melllvar]

Meh, if you decide a forum sucks you will likely act so as to confirm your prejudices.

The problem isn't with the forum, or anyone else joining, it's with you. The only poison here are the older members intent on dragging the place down with them because they aren't happy with how it turned out. Fuck off.

 

[kantor1003]

Even though one might say the intro was rather..hmm.. bare to the bone so to speak, I can't help but mention that it has had some fascinating turns.

Welcome

 

[snafupants]

I just find the attribute rather curious.

You certainly take things that don't bother you rather hard.

I struggle to suffer ignoramuses, especially boisterous ones.

 

[Words]

Meh, if you decide a forum sucks you will likely act so as to confirm your prejudices.

The problem isn't with the forum, or anyone else joining, it's with you. The only poison here are the older members intent on dragging the place down with them because they aren't happy with how it turned out. Fuck off.

true dat.

Lazy is subjective, Efficiency isn't. Your judge on which is better is subjective.

 

[snafupants]

true dat.

Lazy is subjective, Efficiency isn't. Your judge on which is better is subjective.

I would contend that someone who squanders their entire life, in spite of ample opportunity to amend their situation, is basically lazy.

Of course this is going to spur some niggling and discussion on philosophical relativism but, if one subscribes to these terms, I feel this analysis is balanced.

To categorically suggest that efficiency could never be subjective is absurd. Efficiency is somewhat subjective to the degree that it molds to a set of criterion.

Setting the bar in the first place is arbitrary, human and subjective.

 

[snafupants]

Meh, if you decide a forum sucks you will likely act so as to confirm your prejudices.

The problem isn't with the forum, or anyone else joining, it's with you. The only poison here are the older members intent on dragging the place down with them because they aren't happy with how it turned out. Fuck off.

Who exactly are you referring to? Who are these older members? I want names!

Are you now or have you ever been a member of the elder party of the INTP forum?

 

[Words]

I would contend that someone who squanders their entire life, in spite of ample opportunity to amend their situation, is basically lazy.

"Squanders" and "Amend" are relative.

To categorically suggest that efficiency could never be subjective is absurd. Efficiency is somewhat subjective to the degree that it molds to a set of criterion.

Setting the bar in the first place is arbitrary, human and subjective.[/FONT]

Quite, but, unlike laziness, efficiency makes its relativity obvious through focus. It is objective in that sense, where laziness is not.

 

[snafupants]

"Squanders" and "Amend" are relative.



Quite, but, unlike laziness, efficiency makes its relativity obvious through focus. It is objective in that sense, where laziness is not.

Your use of the words objective and subjective is as wonky as Schopenhauer's use of those terms. Regarding relative terms, I'm not going to engage in a semantic battle with you. There's nothing I could have written which wouldn't have warranted that rote response.

 

[Words]

Your use of the words objective and subjective is as wonky as Schopenhauer's use of those terms. Regarding relative terms, I'm not going to engage in a semantic battle with you. There's nothing I could have written which wouldn't have warranted that rote response.

I dislike referring to rules of logic, but I must point out the fallaciousness of your assertion by mentioning "Bare Assertion": conclusion without presentation of sufficient evidence and logic.

I was expecting that you would point out that "'obvious' is relative" too. I am disappoint.

 

[Ptah]

@Ptah - You're just a big old meanie, aren't you?

To those deserving it, yes. Otherwise: no.

*scratches behind ears*
Purr for me, kitten, purr.

You missed.

 

[perkins]

If your intent, however, was to be a dick then you succeeded quite nicely but if your intent was to tell us about yourself, as most intro threads essay, then your attempt is an unflavored abortion.

Wait. Abortions come in flavors?

 

[snafupants]

I dislike referring to rules of logic, but I must point out the fallaciousness of your assertion by mentioning "Bare Assertion": conclusion without presentation of sufficient evidence and logic.

I was expecting that you would point out that "'obvious' is relative" too. I am disappoint.

He speaks truth!

For someone self-dubbed Words, you sure have a difficult time with our expansive and lovely language.

 

[Melkor]

Deities...

You can't kill them.
You can't screw them.
Most of the time you can't see them.
They're supposedly complex and yet often constrained to a single characteristic, element, or purpose.

And they spend most of their time either doing nothing or doing things which are greatly beneath them.

Deities are boring.

Give me good old, bleeding, flesh and bone, susceptible mortals anytime!

 

[snafupants]

Deities...

You can't kill them.
You can't screw them.
Most of the time you can't see them.
They're supposedly complex and yet often constrained to a single characteristic, element, or purpose.

And they spend most of their time either doing nothing or doing things which are greatly beneath them.

Deities are boring.

Give me good old, bleeding, flesh and bone, susceptible mortals anytime!

Brilliant analysis. Kafka wrote a short story called Poseidon which showed an appallingly humdrum day-in-the-maritime-and-beuocratic-life of the Greek god.

Antiquity gave some gods two or more duties and forums though. The Greeks were real big on love and war, so those are often the poly-gods; now Greece is only good at spending other folks' money.

Notwithstanding, the gods may have been going more for powerful than complex per se though. Mount Olympus was more for hedonists than intellectuals, a lot like the nineteen sixties groovy counterculture in that regard.

 

[Melkor]

That's why I always prefered the Trickster.

Intelligent, allied to none and all, often physically weaker than other Gods but still able to master them.

With no purpose other than their own pleasure.

 

[snafupants]

That's why I always prefered the Trickster.

Intelligent, allied to none and all, often physically weaker than other Gods but still able to master them.

With no purpose other than their own pleasure.

Yeah, he's like the wily Joker genius of Greek mythology.

It's ironic how Prometheus is considered cunning for giving folks fire and light; do the gods crave for humans to be kept benighted? Bastards: that's the way they keep their power!

Wow, this thread has sort of come off the tracks. I don't know that she can take one more hairpin turn like this.

 

[Melllvar]

They're supposedly complex and yet often constrained to a single characteristic, element, or purpose.

Yes, I would say this sums you up quite well.

 

[Minuend]

While my posts have never been about great interlect < case in point I have been lacking in actual meaning in my posts

^ case in point

However my not so original writing style has also gone possibly down a drain.

case in point v

Now you maybe wondering why (or now[or to be honest when{or in what state of mind<that I am in right now>}]) that I posted this it was more a test to judge responces

case out of point I LOVE OSIRIS.

I thought you'd be a crying drunk.

Speaking of Egyptian gods, I always found this song kinda catchy (from 02:45):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3fvr589x9s

 

[Deleted member 1424]

Also, we are all curious to know what Adaire wrote to snafu. If we are not intellectually stimulated, perhaps we could have some entertainment, at least.

Y'know so am I. I have no memory of it.

Damn brain.