So why not let that post die? You people keep bumping it up...and then
complaining about it!! I didn't know that Buffy in the US was on completely
different season with the rest of the world....*shrugs*...Ooops...my
mistake.... Now get over...let the post die....and move on. There's plently
that HASN'T been spoiled.
That looks less like an apology and more like ignorance of the fact that
other people are kindly trying to clear up your mess.
--
Andrew Cameron
"Got my hand on my heart, I know no better location..."
a) this isn't a html forum populated by 12 year olds, you can't bump up a
post on usenet, it's either there or it's not and all the replies in the
world wont make it any more or less there.
b) your appology sucks. It's like saying "I'm sorry I raped and murdered
your daughter but she should have spoken to me"
Yes, Chris - it's exactly the same as saying that. There is no degree of
difference between spoiling a TV show for someone and raping their daughter.
PS - You're an idiot.
--
Tony Gowland
http://www.planethalflife.com/freakyzoids/
"Remember, I AM NOT LYING!!! This is all official information."
Because this was the first apology we saw.
All we had were the two spoilerific posts from Bolle.
> You people keep bumping it up...and then
> complaining about it!! I didn't know that Buffy in the US was on
> completely different season with the rest of the
> world....*shrugs*...Ooops...my mistake.... Now get over...let the
> post die....and move on. There's plently that HASN'T been spoiled.
And it was a piss poor apology at that.
--
Alex
"We are now up against live, hostile targets"
"So, if Little Red Riding Hood should show up with a bazooka and a bad
attitude, I expect you to chin the bitch! "
He didn't say it was exactly the same, he said it was *like*
>There is no degree of
>difference between spoiling a TV show for someone and raping their daughter.
>
Chris is making a comparison of kind not of degree. I suspect he's even using
the difference in degree deliberately in order to highlight what he means. It's
a perfectly valid arguing technique.
Having said that I'd probably have qualified it with something like "..not that
spoiling is as bad as rape of course" - just to clarify that it was the type of
apology we're comparing not the degree of offence being apologised for.
Even so it's clear from the context what he meant so it's unfair to call him an
idiot for it.
And one that always ends up used to make trifling issues seem much more
serious.
> Having said that I'd probably have qualified it with something like
> "..not that spoiling is as bad as rape of course" - just to clarify
> that it was the type of apology we're comparing not the degree of
> offence being apologised for.
I would have probably used a much lower degree of offence in the analogy.
Something much more comparable to the actual misdemeanour. Because then
there wouldn't be this argument.
> Even so it's clear from the context what he meant so it's unfair to
> call him an idiot for it.
It may be unfair, but he is an idiot. Frankly if you can't make an argument
without resorting to stupid overblown "shock tactics" and such then you
should expect to be insulted.
Nope it`s a wrong one but overly used.
I regret it happened, but I am not going to apologize
because the replies were way to abusive to my taste.