Zierro

I wouldn't really say that. You can tell sooooooooooo much from someone just by what they say and how they say it. For instance, I can usually tell which of you are cool and which of you are not. Oh and don't yell at me for trying to get in a debate with you. My last one ended way too quickly... I'm starting to feel the withdrawals already. Oh, the pain... I figured you would understand. :(

Well, at least you're right about one thing. :lol: I just think it's funny when people go into, "No - you're being ridiculous" mode without any support. Anyone can do that, and it makes it a worthless stalemate of a discussion. Just a back and forth of, YES! NO! YES! NO! Kind of implies that you have no good argument, but of course this is just a generalization. PS: We really need to get into debates more often. I don't remember seeing you around.

What did I say about posting cop-outs? Oh yeah, that's right. It makes you look like an idiot. Now are we gonna have a mature debate, like I'm trying to do or are you just gonna keep insulting me? It's okay if you want to insult me - I have no problem with that, but at least make some points about the argument at hand while you're at it, Mr. "Be on topic guys!!!" It's ridiculous to defend yourself from being unfairly generalized? Seriously, I know you conveniently skipped a lot of my questions, but you really need to answer this one.

And how much is this thread worth? Says the man with no counterargument. =D> I have a feeling you probably didn't even read my post. You just looked over it, thought to yourself, "Uh oh, logic... That's scary. I'm not even gonna try. Let's just think of a cop-out to make myself look right anyways. *Posts cop-out*" Really now, the least you could do is not be so obvious. If you have a refutation, give me one. If all you have is a crappy post of you giving up, don't even bother. At least I'm trying to have a discussion, whereas you're not. Quite ironic from the person on his high horse saying, "Stop being off topic guys! Stop getting upset that you're being insulted guys!" Looks like you fell off your high horse hard. There we go, at least something I can work with. But by bringing up this difference you're telling me that it's okay to call someone stupid just because they play a game, but it's all of a sudden a wrong thing to call someone a thief because of the color of their skin. Now be realistic here, are you really telling me that?

It is valid. Like I said, they are both unfair generalizations that people have the right to get upset about. What? The subject that is being generalized is the person who plays Runescape - not stupid people. He is saying that Runescapers are stupid, based on a dumb generalization. My point was about saying black people are thieves, based on a dumb generalization. Why do black people have the right to get angry for being generalized, but people who play RS do not? They're both innocent parties being unfairly generalized - there's no difference here. And I noticed you capitalized little. So, that means that this LITTLE bit is the difference between being allowed to defend yourself and not being allowed to defend yourself? Yeah, and I suspect he'd get more angry if his car was stolen. This is no justification to make generalizations though. There's a reason I brought up race. People always tend to be more sympathetic, even if it means contradicting their own arguments. If you think it's okay to make a generalization based on the actions of a few, then you're saying racism is okay. So now, do you think it's okay to get upset about unfair generalizations, or no? If you don't think it's okay to get upset about generalizations, then I just want to say that you don't have a 99 skill and I met someone with no 99 skills before - they had no idea what they were talking about whatsoever, so obviously since you don't have a 99 skill then you don't know what you're talking about either. ^^Pretty ridiculous, right? That's why we don't do that. There's no racism involved in that one, but yet I still foresee you telling me that it's an invalid comparison too. :lol:

So you're saying it's immature to get offended by racism?

They're both generalizations that innocent people have the right to get upset about.

So if a black man steals my car, it's completely fair for me to say, "Black people are thieves," because it's just 'an expression of frustration' and black people have no right to get upset about this?

If it's not meant to be taken literally then how is it supposed to be taken? You can't blame us for something he said.

8431

There are points in paying for things even if you can get them for free. It's a very prevalent tradition to spend money to get a gift for someone. I mean, you don't see people letting others borrow their flashdrive to download their music as a birthday gift - they buy a CD instead because it makes a more appropriate gift. Another reason is to support your favorite band, game company, or whatever. It might be a more rare thing than gift exchanges, but I've known people who buy things because to them it serves as an example of their appreciation, and they like the feeling of helping support the people who make the stuff that they are interested in.

Ugh, I can't stand watching sports. I mean to each his own, but I'd rather be the one having fun than watching others have fun. I just don't get it. Some sports fanatic can quote me and try to tell me why they enjoy it, but I'm warning you, I'm still not going to understand.

Its not the bands though, its the record labels Bands have been known to sue though. My post wasn't really about the story on this thread specifically, so I'm sorry if it was a bit off topic but I just wanted to make a point. It's something I've been thinking about lately.

If I was in a successful band I wouldn't care if people "stole" my music. It just shows that they really appreciate it that much which is better than a monetary reward if you ask me. Artists are entitled to making a living, but poor teenagers are also entitled to listening to music they enjoy.

I think it's completely justifiable to consider television programs a form of art, but I do think that the other mediums generally have more 'artistic' value attached to them.

You never know if they're gonna pull something slick though. I believe that if someone has the intentions of murdering you, you shouldn't let morality get in the way of protecting your own life at all. The only reason they would be stopping is because they know they wouldn't be successful, but then there is always the future.

We were driving on an icy road, tried to turn, but the car kept going straight and hit a phone pole.

Yep, that's what it boils down to. I wouldn't be arguing if I didn't enjoy it. :) I still think that a lot of those films I've listed are more meaningful than ones like Toy Story and Shrek, but you're right about the rules causing more problems than they'd fix. We shouldn't have specific restrictions but can we make it so that every random suggestion doesn't automatically get put into the list? It's not really a rule, but I think it would be necessary that if someone wants to mention an unheard movie to be put onto this list, they should add a brief little synopsis or something to support why they think it belongs here and then it can be put onto the list.

I think I lost my FFTA too. Damn Gameboy cartridges and their smallness. :evil: I just beat Chaos - most challenging fight my whole time through as of yet. Not being able to use physical attacks... come on, that's just messed up.

Tool - 46 & 2

Foo Fighters - Baker Street Led Zeppelin - Kashmir Terrible post.

The first thing you said to me was, "This thread is about movies - not books." This implies that you acknowledge books to be deep and meaningful, or else you wouldn't have brought them up. Not every book is as deep and meaningful as every other one though. Compare a Dr. Seuss book to a Mark Twain book. Chances are, the Mark Twain book is going to be a more enlightening experience than reading the Dr. Seuss book. Why can't this work the same way with movies? I was talking about how you said people stay up for hours at night thinking about them. I never said that. When I do think about a movie, or song, or book, or piece of art it's usually only for a very brief amount of time but it still makes me think. It's a stimulus and it has an effect on you, no matter how small we're talking. Depending on the stimulus (the type of movie) and the person of course, the effects will vary. For me, I believe the effects are quite strong. Tool - Lateralus (song). After listening to that song, I had a much more optimistic view on life. The Color of Water (book). This book is about the hardships of a Jewish mother and her black son. I thought my life was pretty bad, but this book shows that no matter who you are or what you are, you're going to have your own set of problems. One group of persons doesn't really have it much easier than any other group. Requiem for a Dream (movie). Never do heroin. Cool Hand Luke (movie). You can't break a man's soul unless he lets you. The Butterfly Effect (movie). No matter how bad you think things are right now, they can always get worse. Yes, and for me it's mainly the idea of the story and the dialogue. Meaningfulness is subjective, so why were you arguing against the movies that I deemed meaningful? It's a personal thing just like favorite colors. It's a baseless argument to make a rebuttal when someone tells you what their favorite colors are. To me, they are. Like I said though, my suggestion was purely subjective. I'm not trying to dictate to you guys what is and isn't allowed. If you go back and read my post, I did specify that it would be almost an impossible task to make rules, but if you were to ask me I would suggest more meaningful movies. Just my opinion. But then you started arguing that only books can be deep and meaningful, and the conversation evolved into this. A lot of the time I think the comedy or suspense is forced and uninteresting. You do have a point though - just having a message doesn't make something good, because that message can be crappy. But generally speaking, my favorite movies all contain messages. Ehh, that's much too contrived. And I wouldn't consider myself an intellectual - just a passionate fighter.

Exactly, so why should we have a free for all? Sounds more like you're agreeing with me... I told him the movies I thought were deep and meaningful, and he's telling me they're not. How does that count as him saying it's subjective? Yeah, we'll just see how that works out. Sorry for sounding pessimistic, but don't you think that sort of organization is a bit too hectic unless this was an official poll? And if it was, I don't see them fitting 200-300 options for it.

I like frogs a lot. They eat flies - which I hate. Who's going to be the one to correct me? Let's wait and see.

It's thought invoking, so it isn't as black and white as you're trying to make it out to be. You're right about it having a unique effect on the individual, and yes, even Toy Story can do that to a point but let's be realistic here: At first, you told me that it sounded like I was talking about books with all this "deep and meaningful" hubbub. Well then, we can agree that at least books can be deep and meaningful, right? But Green Eggs and Ham isn't as deep and meaningful as The Grapes of Wrath, right? Now answer me this. Why would you think this applies only to books and not movies? Here we go with the extremes again. You know, we'd get a lot more accomplished if you stopped using strawmen over and over and over again. Just lettin ya know. O:) Movies don't keep me up for hours, but I will say that I was thinking about the movie Cool Hand Luke before I went to bed. It's funny because my dad showed me the movie and he told me that he thought about it when he went to bed, and it happened to me too. So, what do you think a deep and meaningful is? And if your answer is nothing, that would be saying that the concepts of deep and meaningful don't even exist. Movies, songs, and sometimes even art trigger me to think about things and it's a great feeling. I can't help but feel for you if you've never experienced something thought invoking before. Let me get this straight before I start - your argument is that I don't like to have fun? By your logic, killing a fly is the equivalent of mass genocide. No, it doesn't work that way. You're turning something small (one person suggesting a movie) into something much bigger (3 people are going to do all 100 movies on the list) and making it seem like I'm supporting the argument that you yourself fabricated. Come on now. Do you even know what a strawman is? Someone from 2004 should know, since I hear that word like every day here. Really? What do you have against messages?