2010-10-02, 03:16 PM
If that were the case, you clearly posted this thread in the wrong forum. If all you want to do is share, then you should have placed this in the Speakeasy, not the Rubik's Cube. The only plausible reason for you to do otherwise is that you crave attention, and since fewer people post in the Rubik's Cube than in the Speakeasy, you realized that placing this article in the Rubik's Cube would net you the most attention.
The only other explanation for posting this here is that you genuinely don't know. I find it difficult to believe that someone studying at USC, one of the best universities in the nation, can lack the ability to distinguish between two subforums whose definitions are engraved right below their names. Furthermore, it really amuses me that the article you agree with condescends on people who have an impaired ability to judge, yet you yourself are guilty of this crime.
You really didn't care what kind of attention you received, positive or negative, as long as you were showered with it. Perhaps you were under the delusion that you would seem knowledgeable when you post the words of a work that you didn't even compose. All three of your replies to this thread are irrelevant to the argument the author makes in his article, and I actually bothered to read this article twice.
I'm deeply disappointed with the hypocrisy that reeks this thread. The irony is that you prove the underlying argument of the title, and Swerve angered you by attempting to help you realize your own faults. The worst part is that you attempt to defend yourself by stating that you were merely a sheep following other people who are equally as incapable of judgment as you are. Perhaps Google is the culprit of this sheer stupidity.
The only other explanation for posting this here is that you genuinely don't know. I find it difficult to believe that someone studying at USC, one of the best universities in the nation, can lack the ability to distinguish between two subforums whose definitions are engraved right below their names. Furthermore, it really amuses me that the article you agree with condescends on people who have an impaired ability to judge, yet you yourself are guilty of this crime.
You really didn't care what kind of attention you received, positive or negative, as long as you were showered with it. Perhaps you were under the delusion that you would seem knowledgeable when you post the words of a work that you didn't even compose. All three of your replies to this thread are irrelevant to the argument the author makes in his article, and I actually bothered to read this article twice.
I'm deeply disappointed with the hypocrisy that reeks this thread. The irony is that you prove the underlying argument of the title, and Swerve angered you by attempting to help you realize your own faults. The worst part is that you attempt to defend yourself by stating that you were merely a sheep following other people who are equally as incapable of judgment as you are. Perhaps Google is the culprit of this sheer stupidity.