Not in the least ... :-) RiB On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 20:40, V G wrote: > On Sunday, April 24, 2011, Olin Lathrop wrote= : > > V G wrote: > >> It's funny that everyone ELSE is overreacting to this as if I had > >> committed a serious crime, but Olin has barely reacted. He's the one > >> that should be the MOST offended out of everyone (everyone else > >> shouldn't even react and should get on with their lives), but as I > >> see it, he's the coolest with it. > > > > OK, I think we've spent enough bandwidth on this. > > > > I had never heard of Brendon Cooper before your post, having never > watched > > the TV show in question. I was vaguely aware of the show, but still ha= ve > > little understanding of the character Brendon Cooper and the dynamics o= f > the > > show. That's OK, no need to jump in and try to explain since it doesn'= t > > matter anyway and I really don't care. > > > > When I saw your post, I assumed it was a childish dig. I still don't > > understand what I and others were supposed to think, but again, that > doesn't > > matter. I do think it was inappropriate for the PIClist, but because i= t > was > > so pointless, not because I might get "offended", whatever that really > > means. Some twirp at the other end of the internet making vague > character > > references is a non-event in the scheme of things. My reaction was mil= d > > amusement together with the thought "what a -----". Others will take > > whatever statement you were trying to make as really being about you, n= ot > > me, anyway. Nobody is going to think differently of me because someone > else > > makes a vague character reference. > > > >> I've also noticed that nowadays people are too full of themselves (not > >> saying anyone in particular, but just the general public) and can't > >> take a very light hearted joke. > > > > That's a valid point only if the other person understands it to be a > light > > hearted joke too. As Bob pointed out, jokes require implied context, a= nd > > the less context you have in common with someone, the higher the chance > they > > will not understand the joke as intended. > > > >> Anyway, why is it a BAD thing if even "nodding acquaintances" are > >> called friends? > > > > They are two different terms that have quite different meanings, at lea= st > > when/where I grew up. This is actually one of several reasons I'm not > > likely to ever be on facebook. As I understand it (perhaps wrongly, fr= om > > heresay only), the system uses the word "friend" to describe someone yo= u > > link to, or at least at some linking level. While I might be willing t= o > > link to and give certain priveledges to some set of people, I would fin= d > it > > embarrasing and pretentious to clame many of them my "friends". No > thanks, > > facebook. > > > > > > ******************************************************************** > > Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products > > (978) 742-9014. Gold level PIC consultants since 2000. > > -- > > http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive > > View/change your membership options at > > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist > > > > That's really, really depressing man. > > -- > http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive > View/change your membership options at > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist > --=20 http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .