I AM ALL I AM wrote:



You interpreted "convince" as meaning "attempting to make others conform".

oioioi wrote: I didn't receive the minutes of the meeting where that was decided. Was it quorate?
What ratio and timescale was finally adopted?
Who adjourned the meeting?

So many questions ..... so little information.

feather wrote:
Eh?

You told me it halted.

I AM ALL I AM wrote: oioioi wrote:
G'day Oioioi.

NO, that's a bullshit statement. I haven't interpreted anything. The word 'convince' has a standard definition ...

con·vince
Verb:

1. Cause (someone) to believe firmly in the truth of something.
2. Persuade (someone) to do something.

... as does the word 'conform' ...

con·form
Verb:

1. Comply with rules, standards, or laws.
2. (of a person) Behave according to socially acceptable conventions or standards: "the pressure to conform".

... and I simply asked a question in relationship to the manner in which you used the word 'convince'. Funny thing is that you appear to have an issue with someone questioning you about the meaning of what you posted. I state funny because that is something that you yourself do. Go figure huh.

oioioi wrote:
It's no more a cake than I am the Queen Of Sheeba

^ Correct. It's a biscuit that lacks crunch.

In America a cookie is a biscuit and a biscuit is something else and a Jaffa cake is non existent. I am happy with that.

Gilly wrote:
Bollocks to that

I AM ALL I AM wrote:
I've answered you best I can. Not sure what exactly you want. Me to conform to your view?

Calm down iaaia, you're comint across as behaving like a bit of a ........ no wait best not go there


Theres no fucking way a jaffa cake is a biscuit. It goes hard when left out in the air, therefore ot is a cake. Baked product novices tut

In the spirit of being thoroughly antagonistic ( ) I'd just like to say that the consensus thread is already dead in the water.

Not because the comments aren't interesting and entertaining, but because, if you insist on consensus, you must naturally have a 100% vote in favour of it.

It's 50/50 already. And I'll not change my vote from being against it, for the reasons I've already outlined. So if it's debated from now to infinity, you ain't never going to get 100% in favour. You lose.

Gilly wrote:
You don't wish we could find common ground? You prefer a split amongst the community to harmony? You surprise me.

dubmeup wrote:
G'day Dubmeup.

With all due respect mate, fuck off with telling me what to do. I'm completely calm.

Of course, you can continue to judge me as otherwise and freely interpret how you perceive me to be "coming across". Everyone is entitled to expressing their opinion.

oioioi wrote:
Aha! Exactly as I suspected! That's called emotional blackmail. How's about you change your vote, for the exact same reasons you just put forward to me, Mr Oi. For the good of the group.





I'm just making a point btw. You're right - there are subjects which my opinion could be swayed on, truthfully. For example, I'm all for the guest posting thing, BUT, seeing that some people who I think a lot of, would actually be upset by its implementation, I'd rather change my vote than lose their company.

But no, re the consensus, I don't think it's practical to drag every poll out indefinitely, and I do feel certain that that's what would happen, and that a lot of them would just dwindle into forgottenness with nothing having been accomplished.

Gilly wrote:


As dubs pointed out though, consensus isn't reached by polls. It's by give and take. Stubborn bastards generally end up looking like stubborn bastards in the process and tend to compromise as they see being a stubborn, uncompromising bastard helps neither them or the community move forward.

I agree with that statement Oioi. I'm glad we're on the same overall team, even though we may disagree on certain issues.

It's just that if there's an equally strong argument on either side, I could see it remaining unresolved.

oioioi wrote:
G'day Oioioi.

You've avoided answering the questions about who's definition you posted. It appears that you will continue to do so through the use of rhetoric. I don't require a consensus to recognise such, or to have anyone attempt to "convince" me otherwise, it's observable.

I AM ALL I AM wrote:
Who gave iaaia a tetchy biscuit?

I AM ALL I AM wrote:
It appears we're playing the same game by the same rules.

To me to you to me...

Usually I'd bite but I find the overall point of the thread more worthwhile.

I think Gilly is here to sabotage the consensus. Agent perhaps.