Lost and found

[loCAtek]

claque
 
2.
a group of sycophants.

[Andrew D]

That definition does not appear to be appropriate to the present circumstances.

[Sean]

I had already read your previous posting, Sean. It is an example of what I wrote: The matter would have been concluded, except that you refused to let it die. If my horse seems high to you, perhaps that is an indication of your vantage point.

You really have no idea do you...

[loCAtek]

Which does nothing to answer my question; where/how in my post did I err? Not personally, but factually?

German/Hun are the same, and it would be more courteous to call them by thier names, such as 'Hans', is it not?

[Andrew D]

You really have no idea do you...[?]

I described the situation accurately. That evidently bothers you.

[Sean]

Evidently.

[Lord Jim]

Well I have to say that in my view, that I certainly see the point where if someone offers to drop a back and forth with another poster but includes a parting zinger in the same post with the offer, it is certainly fair game for the other party to make one more response. (I've faced this situation myself on a number of occasions.."Let's just agree to disagree, you chuckleheaded welk brain" just doesn't cut it....)

(Oh damn, now I'm going to get kicked out of the clique/claque; do I have to rip up my membership card and return my secret decoder ring?)

If at that point the person who said they would stop participating in the discussion doesn't post again, then that should be the end of it. If after their one response the person who received the parting zinger continues to badger on the point without being replied to, then they are in the wrong.

A politer, more eloquent and more honest request would have been to say nothing.

I must apologize. I had wanted to respond to the idea of rubato lecturing anyone on the topics of politeness, eloquence and honesty but first I'm going to need to get a mop and a fresh pair of trousers....I think I finally passed that kidney stone...

[BoSoxGal]

rubato is not universally despised, sorry.

I try to be very selective about for whom to hold that degree of poisonous emotion.

I feel sorry for a few people on this board (and IRL), but I don't hate them.

I save hatred for mass murdering tyrants.

Language matters.

[Lord Jim]

rubato is not universally despised, sorry.

BSG, though that remark appears immediately after my post, I must assume it is referring to something someone else has said, since I have never said anything like that.

I have never used words like "despise" or "hate" in reference to rubato...(frankly I don't have enough respect for him, nor does he loom largely enough in my life, for me to have that level of negative emotional investment in him...If I step in a pile of dog crap on the sidewalk, I don't "despise" the dog crap...)

Nor have I ever said that he was "universally" anything around here. I recently pointed out that he had earned "the enmity of many" here; and that of course is quite correct, and I stand by it. But I'm well aware that he also has a tiny contingent of apologists and excuse makers on this board; in fact I've commented on that a number of times.

ETA:

BTW, you may have noticed that he has absolutely no more regard for people who have been supportive towards him than he does for anyone else. That's just how he rolls....

[Crackpot]

Gob used the phrase on the previous page.

[Lord Jim]

Thanks CP.

[PMS Princess]

Thanks BSG for your latest posts. I feel that you have been a great help in keeping things in perspective lately.

[Gob]

rubato is not universally despised, sorry.

No, you're right, it was a piece of exaggerated hyperbole on my part, (and I should have clarified that by "universally" I meant universally, not just here. )

[Gob]

Time was, Sunday drivers could drop cash in an ''honesty box'' and help themselves to farm produce from fruit and flowers to eggs and fowl manure at small properties around the country.

Not any more. The farmers have learnt over the years this unpalatable modern ''truth'' about dishonesty - everyone is capable of cheating.

We all constantly seek the sweet spot where we can benefit from it without damaging our self-image as reasonably honest individuals.

Best-selling US author and psychology professor Dan Ariely calls it ''the fudge factor''.

Poultry farmers Jenny Clarke and her husband Andrew have experienced this kind of deceit all too often. For 10 years, they've been selling chook poo, now $2.50 a bag, at their Central Mangrove farm gate, north of Sydney.

Once Mrs Clarke stood and chatted with someone who'd loaded 20 or so bags into a car and told her the money was in the box. She discovered their lie only after they'd driven off.

People have deposited bottle tops and metal washers instead of coins, because ''they think someone is watching so it looks like they have put something in''. Someone ''paid'' with a pair of homemade earrings.

More commonly, says Mrs Clarke, people pay, but less than the full amount: ''They might pay for five bags but take six or seven.''

With an exhaustive series of experiments, the author explores our amazing capacity for ''moral flexibility'' and the myriad ways we justify dishonest acts.

People are more likely to cheat if they think no-one is watching, Professor Ariely writes. Even a drawing of a watchful eye at the place of temptation can deter. And dishonesty can be catching, maybe even from your clothes. People wearing counterfeit labels cheated more than those attired authentically, and were more likely to assume others were behaving unethically.

People cheat more if they can put ''psychological distance'' between themselves and the action: for example surveyed golfers say it's much less morally troubling to cheat by moving the ball with a club than by hand.

We also cheat less if we have to sign up to a pledge of honour, Professor Ariely found.

Finally, bean counters take note: workers are less likely to fudge their expenses if they have to sign their names at the top of the form instead of (or as well as) at the end.

[The Hen]

I have never ripped off an honesty box.

It is a sad indictment of our times that so many do.

I once was selling chocolates in the kitchen of my work place. Not only did people not paid for goods taken, some also removed money.

This behaviours was from well paid public servants, not people who may have been done on their luck.

To say I was disgusted is an under-statement.

[Sean]

We used to have a great fresh fruit and veg stand with an honesty box about a mile away from home. It was dead handy as the nearest fruit and veg shop is half an hour's drive away. It closed down about a year ago due to thieving bastards.

SMF baked some muffins and put them in the break room where she works some time ago. All the money was for some cause or other and this was clearly written on the tin next to them. All the muffins went but not much money was raised...

People can be real twats.