

(The Sun)   Group thinks they can stop binge drinking by posting videos on YouTube that mock drunk people out in public and shame them into sobriety   (thesun.co.uk) divider line 4
    More: Unlikely, walk of shame, YouTube, Diageo, Captain Morgan, Smirnoff  
•       •       •

4564 clicks; posted to Main » on 14 Jul 2013 at 9:17 AM (51 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2013-07-14 10:48:59 AM
1 votes:
2013-07-14 10:24:57 AM
1 votes:

FrancoFile: edmo: If they're addicted, they won't care. If they're young and had a good time and can't wait until next weekend, they won't care. If they're a politician, they'll issue an oh-so-sorry apology but won't care. If they're a job applicant they'll be confronted by a potential employer enjoying the shaming but who doesn't care. If it's a grand kid, grandpa will chuckle and tell you about that time back in '52 and he still doesn't care.


The sadistic desire to punish others, especially over having had a  good time, is damn strong.

So reckless driving shouldn't be a thing?

This swerving, terse and irrelevent response is a really good example of "proof by by weak best counterargument". User FrancoFile is trying to imply that user edmo approves of reckless driving. However, there is nothing in edmo's comments to suggest this. FrancoFile has taken edmo's comment that seems to support people having a good time, and interpreted it as support for reckless driving. In FrancoFile's mind, he probably thinks that people who do reckless driving are having a good time. Maybe they are. But FF tries to turn that around and assert the converse i.e. that those who have a good time are guilty of reckless driving, and from there he has decided to accuse edmo of supporting reckless driving. There is no support for this position in edmo's comments.

Further, FF has used a short and sarcastic format for his comment, and what appears to be an unnatural colloquialism (i.e. FF would not normally use it if not to get an effect). The affect* FF is trying to achieve is a kind of off-hand casualness. He tries to show that he is not worried about the issue, that it does not occupy his mind, and that he could "take it or leave it" as it were. Obviously, on an internet forum, some effort was made to actually type out the comment itself. And for this reason one should normally be suspicious of those who post while saying (or trying to suggest) that they don't really care. Particularly in the case of "<plonk>" comments, but I digress.

Now the playing down, sarcasm and rhetorical question** all imply some sort of emotional involvement on FF's part. Was a family member flattened by a reckless driver? Was FF once urinated on by a drunk? Certainly, this emotional angle suggest that in actual fact FF really does not know the difference between having a good time and reckless driving. He actually sees the two as synonymous. If we give FF the credit of saying he does not do reckless driving himself, we are forced to conclude, based on his world view inferred from his comment, that he does not have a good time.

He evidently lives a miserable, empty life, devoid of parties and social interaction. His is a live of consuming, bitter envy, expressed in pointless little comments such as the above on forums. A sad man in every way, his impact on the human race is that if a feather, broken and torn and smeared with bird poo.

* yes, affect
** actually no such thing on forums
2013-07-14 10:16:07 AM
1 votes:

mcmnky: namegoeshere: I am consistently glad that the internet was still mostly used for academic purposes, and no one carried phones capable of taking video, when I was in college.


What was this utopian time of which you speak?
2013-07-14 09:30:49 AM
1 votes:

JackalRabbit: nope


it's a JACKAL!!
Displayed 4 of 4 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »