quote:

ORIGINAL: angelikaJ

Are you being a silly man intentionally?
If so, you are on target. [8D]

What you have entirely forgotten, is that when you joined this website, there was a place where you had to indicate that you agreed to follow the TOS. There is not an exception in the event that you do not understand English. You voluntarily agreed.

Of course, you did always have the option of clicking on the little French flag in the upper right-hand corner. Personally, I don't really think that could help you much, but have included the link just in case that works for you.

Edit: clarity

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bunnicula

Your message is confused and open to interpretation on many different levels.

If you cannot write with clarity then be prepared for people to infer something that you did not expect.

quote:

ORIGINAL: alpha499

then the Mods are violating the TOS. English is not my language so expletive words in my opinion are just abstract words without any substantial meaning, and when I use them, they dont really carry along with them the effective intended meaning. TOS are written in English, not in my language, and Mr Mod is judging me on an illegitimate presumtion that I can read and understand the TOS. how ridiculous is that

quote:

ORIGINAL: Excerpts from CollarSpace Tos

1.4. Consideration - Consideration for Your acquiescence to all of the provisions in this Agreement has been provided to You in the form of allowing You to use Our Website and Our Services. You agree that such Consideration is both adequate, and that it is received upon Your viewing or downloading any portion of Our Website.

1.5. Our first condition is that you must agree to all of the conditions in this set of Terms and Conditions of use. You do not need to use our Website, therefore if you do not wish to be bound by each and every provision in this Agreement, then you are not welcome to use this Website and should leave and use another service.

1.6. You may not unilaterally disregard any portion of this Agreement. However, if there is a particular portion of this Agreement that You wish to avoid, You may contact Us to negotiate a separate agreement BEFORE You use the Website. We do not guarantee that such negotiations will be successful. Nevertheless, if you wish to discuss your own personalized Agreement, please contact us or have your attorney do so.

1.7. If you do not understand all of the terms in this Website, then you should consult with a lawyer before using the Website.

1.8. This Website is for adults only. If You are under the age of eighteen (18), You are not to use this Website at all.

2. Acceptance and Affirmation

2.1. You must agree to all of the terms in this Agreement before using the Website or Our services.

2.2. How You can and will demonstrate Your affirmative acceptance of all of the terms in this Agreement:

2.2.1. If You click any link, button, or other device, provided to You in any part of Our Website's interface, then You have legally agreed to all of these T&C's; or

2.2.2. By using any of Our services in any manner, You understand and agree that We will consider any use of Our Website as Your affirmation of Your complete and unconditional acceptance of all of the terms in this Agreement.

7. Restrictions on Use of Website

7.2. Without Our express prior written authorization, You may not:

7.2.5. Circumvent any encryption or other security tools used anywhere on the Website (including the theft of user names and passwords or using another person's user name and password in order to gain access to a restricted area of the Website);

7.3. Acceptable Use Policy: You agree and understand that Our Website permits You to use Our services in order to post content and to communicate with other Users. We are entitled to investigate and terminate Your membership if You have misused the Website, or behaved in a way which could be regarded as inappropriate, unlawful, or illegal. The following is a partial, but not exhaustive, list of the types of actions that are illegal or prohibited under this Agreement.

7.3.1. Unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, invasive of another's privacy or right to publicity, or harmful to minors in any way, shape, or form;

quote:

ORIGINAL: Faldegast

Well actually it matters the TOS is a contract which is only legally binding if it was mutually agreed upon in informed consent. If someone for some reason doesn't read the contract before signing it, then it's not valid. In some jurisdictions such as most of the US signing implies informed consent. But I think it's safe to assume that the person raising this didn't sign the TOS in the US.

Also from a non-legal barrier one must consider the cultural barrier a TOS and it's interpretation can apply. It is hard enough to use a foreign language to communicate. The further adaption to anglo saxian etiquette creates an additional barrier. In french culture name calling isn't necessarily considered a personal insult, but a mere expression of emotions. Where anglo saxian etiquette frowns upon emotional expression in debates, french culture consider it important to express emotions.

And when it comes to personal insults calling someone a "silly man" are quite over the edge for someone that argue against using that kind of language. In fact it's far worse than "asshole".

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul
How would you feel if some random stranger walked up to you and asked you if you enjoyed licking people's assholes?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bunnicula

I disagree. Clarity is your friend.

You were somehow conflating monetary income with some kind of superiority over others on the messageboards. It's an incredibly weak argument - I have worked with and for some extremely wealthy businesspeople. Some (and only a very few) were nice, the majority are self-obsessed, narcissistic assholes. So in my experience, trying to make yourself seem like a 'better person' by shouting loudly "I have more money than you!" actually has the opposite effect.


If you choose to become upset, then that is indeed your choice, not mine.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi


The effect it had on me was to go look at his profile to see how old he was. I must say it sure explained a lot.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bunnicula

I disagree. Clarity is your friend.

You were somehow conflating monetary income with some kind of superiority over others on the messageboards. It's an incredibly weak argument - I have worked with and for some extremely wealthy businesspeople. Some (and only a very few) were nice, the majority are self-obsessed, narcissistic assholes. So in my experience, trying to make yourself seem like a 'better person' by shouting loudly "I have more money than you!" actually has the opposite effect.


If you choose to become upset, then that is indeed your choice, not mine.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Faldegast

While it's of course useful if everyone always are clear enough for everyone to correctly interpret what they are saying, it cannot be expected of anyone.

Even people that has entire staffs of people clarifying their communication still gets misinterpreted.

Then they need to hire better staff - if they cannot communicate what they want to say, then that's their problem, not the reader's.

And why you have a point that's not that clear cut. Many still believe that "might makes right" and there are good arguments for it.

They can believe what they want - 'stronger and/or richer' just means they are in a better position to bully, it doesn't make them right.

Generally money is a reward for social contribution and there is a point in favouring those that contribute more to society.

So teachers, nurses, fire fighters, armed forces, paramedics, do not contribute as much to society as someone who sells videogames or mansions? Yeah, that makes sense...[8|]

Also there is a strong correlation between income and knowledge, intelligence and skill.

So there aren't people who are intelligent, knowledgeable and highly skilled who chose to 'give back' to society without demanding a high wage? Yeah....no.

Even when the income comes from inherited money. Statistically it is more likely that someone richer than you are right and you are wrong.

That made me LOL! So, where are these 'statistics'?


"Winning" a debate doesn't mean that you are right. The other party may simply have inferior ability to express their knowledge.

Which is a point I was trying to make - if they can't communicate properly then they aren't going to win anything because they lack clarity and precision of thought.

Some rich people may be perceived as self-obsessed narcissistic assholes. However there are contradictions in that statement. Self obsessed people are rarely narcissistic in an entrepreneural sense, that's engaging in social improvement which are the opposite of being self obsessed. Also you imply that being narcissistic assholes are somehow something bad.
We clearly move in very different circles. The 'successful' businesspeople I have worked with across Europe and the US were, on the whole, assholes who only cared about themselves, their career and the money they were making. Sad, really.

Also you imply that being narcissistic assholes are somehow something bad.

Being an asshole is not a good thing. It means you're an asshole. Being a narcissistic asshole is just polishing that particular turd a little.


If you are a smoker intent on continuing habits you will find that a lot of people are narcissistic assholes. You may as well perceive them to be self-obsessed because they interfere with your choices. Does that make them so? Well they are probably partially complaining out of your impact on their own wellbeing. Does that make people self obsessed when complaining at others smoking habits? Partially. Are people narcissistic? Yeah they probably want to control the smoker to the degree that the habit is eliminated. I know I do, sometimes such as in public transportation my imagination carries away into quite hostile thoughts. I never act on them of course but they still are narcissistic. And finally if I point out that someone shouldn't smoke, am i an asshole? Yes. Is it wrong for me to be any of this?

Smoking is a nice example because most of us know how harmful it is and the smell makes it easy to detect. The impact of other choices you make on the wellbeing on others are less obvious to detect. If someone points it out because they smell the smoke and you don't you may classify their behaviour in another way than you would classify someone that complaints about smoking. That classifies you as a hypocrite.

I couldn't care less if people smoke, as long as they don't do it near me. I don't see them as narcissistic, I see them as addicts. Whether or not they are assholes too is entirely down to the invididual.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Faldegast

Well actually it matters the TOS is a contract which is only legally binding if it was mutually agreed upon in informed consent. If someone for some reason doesn't read the contract before signing it, then it's not valid. In some jurisdictions such as most of the US signing implies informed consent. But I think it's safe to assume that the person raising this didn't sign the TOS in the US.

Also from a non-legal barrier one must consider the cultural barrier a TOS and it's interpretation can apply. It is hard enough to use a foreign language to communicate. The further adaption to anglo saxian etiquette creates an additional barrier. In french culture name calling isn't necessarily considered a personal insult, but a mere expression of emotions. Where anglo saxian etiquette frowns upon emotional expression in debates, french culture consider it important to express emotions.

And when it comes to personal insults calling someone a "silly man" are quite over the edge for someone that argue against using that kind of language. In fact it's far worse than "asshole".

Actually, like most websites, you click to AGREE to the terms before you can become a member and as such, that is accepted (on both sides) as a digital signature of acceptance.
So your first statement is inaccurate.

As for the rest of your myopic diatribe, the ToS on here (and most other websites) specify under which conditions certain things are interpreted and under which specific set(s) of laws they fall under and are judged.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Faldegast

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Faldegast

Well actually it matters the TOS is a contract which is only legally binding if it was mutually agreed upon in informed consent. If someone for some reason doesn't read the contract before signing it, then it's not valid. In some jurisdictions such as most of the US signing implies informed consent. But I think it's safe to assume that the person raising this didn't sign the TOS in the US.

Also from a non-legal barrier one must consider the cultural barrier a TOS and it's interpretation can apply. It is hard enough to use a foreign language to communicate. The further adaption to anglo saxian etiquette creates an additional barrier. In french culture name calling isn't necessarily considered a personal insult, but a mere expression of emotions. Where anglo saxian etiquette frowns upon emotional expression in debates, french culture consider it important to express emotions.

And when it comes to personal insults calling someone a "silly man" are quite over the edge for someone that argue against using that kind of language. In fact it's far worse than "asshole".

Actually, like most websites, you click to AGREE to the terms before you can become a member and as such, that is accepted (on both sides) as a digital signature of acceptance.
So your first statement is inaccurate.

As for the rest of your myopic diatribe, the ToS on here (and most other websites) specify under which conditions certain things are interpreted and under which specific set(s) of laws they fall under and are judged.

Actually no ot is not inaccurate. It would not be accepted and I can refer you to EU supreme court cases if you like it. Contracts doesn't decide what's accepted - courts does. This site is available in EU and therefore subject to EU courts when used by an EU citizen. Doesn't matter what the contract says if french or EU court decides something else.

As for your ad hominem dismissal of other things I brought up that's just not a serious debate language.

quote:


13.1. Governing Law. This Agreement and all matters arising out of, or otherwise relating to, this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the state of California, excluding its conflict of law provisions. The sum of this paragraph is that any and all disputes must be, without exception, brought to court and litigated in Orange County, California.

13.1.1. All parties to this Agreement agree that all actions or proceedings arising in connection with this Agreement or any services or business interactions between the parties that may be subject to this Agreement shall be tried and/or litigated exclusively in the state and federal courts located in Orange County, California.

13.1.2. The parties agree to exclusive jurisdiction in, and only in, Orange County, California.

13.1.3. The parties agree to exclusive venue in, and only in, Orange County, California.