History of human rights

[Tiassa]

AI bots keep coming up. Are they that common?

Obverse: It's a long story.

Reverse: The short form is that your sentence structure, combined with the general absence of more particular detail and insight, makes your posts stand out as unusual. As Dave said↑, a lot of words with very little content. The absolute miss in #20↑, for instance, only reinforces the point.

An actual counterpoint, though, would be that you are, quite simply, overdoing it; in the history of this site, we've seen many stylistic wrecks, and what separates your posts from previous episodes of someone trying too hard really is in your sentence structure. And while you're not achieving zero-voice or voice form nowhere, the effort to remain somehow distal lends to people's perception of artifice.

Many of those who were simply trying too hard were doing so because they didn't want to come right out and say something. In that context, "the splitting hairs and enough is enough mentality" presents a fascinating question: What does that even mean?

And the sentence on "due lamentation" is either weirdly irrelevant, or else there is a publishable book's worth of material in explaining what that two-sentence post means.

Seeking to craft a sort of historical assertion that can never be proven wrong, one is at least as likely to not be correct. If "guess the splitting hairs and enough is enough mentality" stopped the Holocaust, we might wonder what that means, and it is important to observe that leaving the reader to imagine your meaning, to think on your behalf, tends to only complicate and obscure whatever it is you actually mean.

 

[ThazzarBaal]

Obverse: It's a long story.

Reverse: The short form is that your sentence structure, combined with the general absence of more particular detail and insight, makes your posts stand out as unusual. As Dave said↑, a lot of words with very little content. The absolute miss in #20↑, for instance, only reinforces the point.

An actual counterpoint, though, would be that you are, quite simply, overdoing it; in the history of this site, we've seen many stylistic wrecks, and what separates your posts from previous episodes of someone trying too hard really is in your sentence structure. And while you're not achieving zero-voice or voice form nowhere, the effort to remain somehow distal lends to people's perception of artifice.

Many of those who were simply trying too hard were doing so because they didn't want to come right out and say something. In that context, "the splitting hairs and enough is enough mentality" presents a fascinating question: What does that even mean?

And the sentence on "due lamentation" is either weirdly irrelevant, or else there is a publishable book's worth of material in explaining what that two-sentence post means.

Seeking to craft a sort of historical assertion that can never be proven wrong, one is at least as likely to not be correct. If "guess the splitting hairs and enough is enough mentality" stopped the Holocaust, we might wonder what that means, and it is important to observe that leaving the reader to imagine your meaning, to think on your behalf, tends to only complicate and obscure whatever it is you actually mean.

It was a reference geared towards nuclear or atomic explosions . The question was asked what stopped WWII, so I said it in my own way. I figured it would be obvious enough. Splitting of hairs being the "my way reference" to the nuclear explosion . Hiroshima -

 

[Tiassa]

I figured it would be obvious enough. Splitting of hairs being the "my way reference" to the nuclear explosion . Hiroshima -

That was both better and worse than I expected.

It's also wrong.

 

[Seattle]

ThazzarBaal, Tiassa would like for you to be clear and brief. To the one, he isn't brief and to the other, he is rarely clear. The potsherds attest to that and leave a sosobra quality in their wake, both distal and proximal, both observe and reverse.

Yet, he isn't clear what your point is.

 

[ThazzarBaal]

ThazzarBaal, Tiassa would like for you to be clear and brief. To the one, he isn't brief and to the other, he is rarely clear. The potsherds attest to that and leave a sosobra quality in their wake, both distal and proximal, both observe and reverse.

Yet, he isn't clear what your point is.

Reverse means nothing to me for sure .
Observe I do, and although unfamiliar with the posts point, I thought I had made myself clear enough. But, if I had not, I can offer a retort ... Ahem ... I mean an explanation -

I don't like violence, which initiated the question in question of the answer I had given. What ended WWII. If I'm not mistaken, correct me if I'm wrong, it was the dropping of the atomic bomb at Hiroshima Japan. Splitting hairs, although very much different, I figured enough was understood about splitting certain types of atoms to suffice in the splitting hair analogy.

If not, then now you know the premise for the usage.

 

[ThazzarBaal]

To put it plainly: I don't like violence, it was in Hiroshima where the violence ended WWII, and the dropping of the atomic bomb, from what I understand, that motivated the cease of the conflict.

That's the best I know how to articulate what I meant in my more colorful than desired language art tribute to the act and art of expression.

I just re- read the post in question ... The Holocaust was reference . "What ended or stopped the Holocost." was asked. The scope of destruction I would presume.

 

[wegs]

I’m torn between Thazzar being a bot or someone who no longer posts, here. Although that member would have been offended to be accused of being a “bot.” lol

Bots don’t get offended it seems, so they’re not sentient…yet.

 

[Beer w/Straw]

I believe, and probably 99% of people do, that WWII ended with:

America saying it would bomb a city of Japan again and again (empty threat cause they only had two nuclear bombs in total) after the second bombing.

The Japanese Emperor surveying the damage and thinking This is F*cked!

 

[ThazzarBaal]

I believe, and probably 99% of people do, that WWII ended with:

America saying it would bomb a city of Japan again and again (empty threat cause they only had two nuclear bombs in total) after the second bombing.

The Japanese Emperor surveying the damage and thinking This is F*cked!

We all have what we've learned over the years as a resource.

 

[Beer w/Straw]

We all have what we've learned over the years as a resource.

Are you implying that it was something else?

 

[foghorn]

My question was:

What stopped the Holocaust in ww2?

In reply to this:

Is fighting ever worth anything. Does violence ever produce anything but victims? More questions I know, but I don't like violence and maybe some things are over rated.

Holocaust was in Europe, the war in Europe ended 8 May 1945.
Nuclear bomb dropped 6th Aug 1945.
Here's a question:

 

[Seattle]

Deleted

I'm assuming that Tiassa is a bot. I could be wrong. I look for superfluous words to identify a bot so...

 

[foghorn]

I'm assuming that Tiassa is a bot. I could be wrong.

Let's put it to the test:

 

[ThazzarBaal]

Are you implying that it was something else?

I'm implying that my learning was more to the tune of my personal implication of what played out. I suggested the same was true for you.

 

[Tiassa]

Reverse means nothing to me for sure .
Observe I do …

It's the numismatical heads and tails of it all.

I mean, literally: The obverse is the "heads" side of a coin, and the reverse is the "tails" side.

That is, in re "AI bots keep coming up": Heads, it's a long story; tails, it's you.

• • •​

Let's put it to the test:
View attachment 5254

Spoiler

​

 

[gmilam]

Reverse means nothing to me for sure .
Observe I do, and although unfamiliar with the posts point, I thought I had made myself clear enough. But, if I had not, I can offer a retort ... Ahem ... I mean an explanation -

I have to assume he's NOT a bot. A (good) bot would know the difference between observe and obverse

 

[ThazzarBaal]

Obverse: It's a long story.

Reverse: The short form is that your sentence structure, combined with the general absence of more particular detail and insight, makes your posts stand out as unusual. As Dave said↑, a lot of words with very little content. The absolute miss in #20↑, for instance, only reinforces the point.

An actual counterpoint, though, would be that you are, quite simply, overdoing it; in the history of this site, we've seen many stylistic wrecks, and what separates your posts from previous episodes of someone trying too hard really is in your sentence structure. And while you're not achieving zero-voice or voice form nowhere, the effort to remain somehow distal lends to people's perception of artifice.

Many of those who were simply trying too hard were doing so because they didn't want to come right out and say something. In that context, "the splitting hairs and enough is enough mentality" presents a fascinating question: What does that even mean?

And the sentence on "due lamentation" is either weirdly irrelevant, or else there is a publishable book's worth of material in explaining what that two-sentence post means.

Seeking to craft a sort of historical assertion that can never be proven wrong, one is at least as likely to not be correct. If "guess the splitting hairs and enough is enough mentality" stopped the Holocaust, we might wonder what that means, and it is important to observe that leaving the reader to imagine your meaning, to think on your behalf, tends to only complicate and obscure whatever it is you actually mean.

#1 I don't like violence
#2 Holocaust was brought up. "What do you think stopped the Holocaust?"
#3 I suggested an enough is enough mentality, which I assume was motivated from the destruction or fallout from an atomic bomb being dropped on Hiroshima, hence my "due lamentation" statement. I have a conscience and don't like violence.
#4 The difference between splitting hairs, which seems to be what we're doing now, and a nuclear atom being split is obvious, but I'll agree that I was being vague.

I'm begining to acknowledge that a direct approach to conversation is preferred here. Typically, that's saved for debate areas, but I'll follow along just the same.

You're right of course. Better articulation is required to create a coherent sentence, but even moreso than a coherent sentence, a personal stance, whatever the subject might be.

 

[ThazzarBaal]

I have to assume he's NOT a bot. A (good) bot would know the difference between observe and obverse

That term keeps coming up. Human error - I'm sure. Go figure ... I noticed a pineal type eye posted. Horus I think the reference, but I'm uncertain intent, so I'm unable to do so with any authority. Spoiler? I doubt it, but then I view life as an endless type of awe inspiring journey, which I have been given an opportunity to witness as a person. Hmm, go figure ... I almost feel as if I need to defend my humanity in here.