<Domdaniel> explained his sentence quite well, as it was borne from (mild- bit stronger) frustrations regarding not only the somewhat gratuite use of the word in online conversation, - and for example on YouTube where you're constantly asked to announce or comfirm your friendship to a person whom you barely know, - but also in Real Life there are many different types of friendships that for many reasons do not work out as one would've wished. The term 'friend' has gotten quite a bit of wear and tear on it. Now with the Facebook and Twitter friendships popping up like wildfire, it's become more of a friend-bombardment these days.

Just thinking, it possibly wouldn't hurt to save, reserve, the word "friend", for a more select group of "close friends", and use another word for the more superficial "contacts" and interactions with people.

Definitions and expectations differ greatly, and can be a source of some frustration, which is what <Dom> essentially pointed out by utilizing the purposefully exaggerated "construction" : <[At this stage,] I'm not sure if I ever want to hear the word 'friend' again.> - conveying that he is serious, but not *that* serious. Right in line in my opnion with what you wrote:

<"yet it has an appeal, of some values that I don't think I are able to understand fully in my limited form of English,"> - I think we know exactly what you are saying here, and "the appeal to values" you mention is very much at the core in this discussion.

I should speak for myself now, and apologies if I slipped somewhat inappropriately on Domda<niels'> chair. [whisper mode] I always wanted to do that, just for once, don't tell! ;)

Next time I'll try to use <less words> - always working on something...

[return to normal speech mode]

<Dom> uses the words 'friend', or 'Old Friend' quite regularly, I can confirm, and no doubt will use it again in the future, so no worries! ;)

But the thing I said about never wanting to hear the word 'friend' again? It's about the *word* - an arbitrary puff of sounds. Air and phonemes. Means nothing.

The concepts embedded behind the word remain important, so there's nothing 'sad' about it.

And I've noticed that use of this word 'friend' -- particularly between people who 'know' each other quite well but haven't met in RL -- can lead to very strange misunderstandings. In the end, it's not a good 'international english' word, because people have so many different understandings of it, and what it means.

I could suggest other words, o my droogs and zapkinder. But you know who you are.

< I hope you can find a point in life where you would not fear the word "friend"> -- I appreciate and am grateful for this thought. But, as it happens, I don't regard fear as invariably negative. It has its uses. One of my *really* favorite songs, by John Cale, is called 'Fear is a Man's Best Friend'.

Ironic, actually. Thanks to this song - I've heard him perform it live about ten times, sometimes with a grand piano - I care very much about hearing the word again. In context.

I make a particular type of bad decision when playing much stronger opponents. In ancient times, I could win or draw occasionally, but now I get crushed.

I've lost 3 games in under 23 moves in the last six years, all against GMs or IMs.

*snip*

Have never lost to a GM before ~ never had a chance to play against a GM, coincidence? lol

Happy Halloween! almost forgot ^^

In recent times, AJ has:

(1) failed to notice the connection (already known to many people) between my username and a player in the database; one, furthermore, with a live link in my profile.

(2) Been - it seems - broadly unaware of the progress of certain mini-narratives within the broad CG one. This can be explained by the huge Ignore list.

(3) On two occasions that I know of, fallen out with people who were trying to help him, and had defended him against others.

(4) Shown some very strange judgements when it came to deciding who was in league with whom, who was a sockpuppet of whom, and who was a member of 'the troop'. To an outside observer, some of his conclusions have been very strange indeed.

I could say more, but I don't want to give AJ the impression that I'm his enemy. I am simply observing phenomena.

Occam's Razor dictates that the best explanation is one that does not multiply entities. In non-medieval talk, that means a minimum of one-off doohickeys invented to 'explain' single events, then woven into a conspiracy theory.

I see no need for such a theory. AJ is simply the kind of person who does not pay attention to nuances. Maybe he was once - cops often need to have this skill - but he's let it fall into disrepair and become more self-centred. His enemies would say that this is the Lifemaster Effect at work; I might counter that it's a reasonable reaction to being attacked. In fact, the reason isn't very important.

What matters is the existence of this trait: a kind of blundering innocence, coupled with low sensitivity as to the consequences of one's actions. Jess's alternative theory - which boils down to a kind of well-informed malevolence - seems much less plausible.

Can you persuade me otherwise? It may not be an either/or thing: the percentage of 'innocence' is unknown. Nobody is completely innocent ... I think.

I'm removing the tweezers ... now.

Such as being blacklisted by large swathes of the entertainment industry.

Still, it's better than just having one version of The Truth.

Just thought that you would like to know.

From the early 70ties to do 90ties I made the most of Europe myself once or twice a year.Mainly Germany,Suisse and France.THE way of travelling in my book.

Must be tiring to update your bio every time a game is uploaded.The trap you fell into in the latest game uploaded is hardly uncommon.Nothing to be embarrassed about.I have fallen into it many times myself in online games.

I had a suspect once, but he denied it, and I believed him.

Same reason as anywhere else: people don't trust strangers.

But if you *live* somewhere rural and remote with no bus service, it's easy to get lifts once people recognize you. I think ... I haven't tried this since sometime in the 1990s.

Have not heard of or read "Breathren" again until this page, in a brother sister family reading like you stated

There are some exceptions, survivals from a time 1000 years ago when English was more obviously a Germanic language (ie, before the Norman French arrived with their posh grammar).

One of these is the archaic plural form <-ren>, now found in very few words. Child, children (never 'childs') is the most obvious case. A few words, including 'brother' and 'sister' have developed a dual plural form, where either method may be used - though with slightly different meanings.

So it's almost always correct to say 'brothers' or 'sisters' when you're talking about family members. 'Brethren' tends to imply a kind of religious or metaphorical brotherhood. (Note how the internal vowel changes from 'o' to 'e' -- compare verbs such as take/took and break/broke...)

The female version, 'sistern', is now so obscure as to be non-existent. If anyone did use it, though, they'd either be joking (pun on 'cistern', or water tank) or implying the same cultish sense as 'brethren'.

I prefer to say 'O my droogs and zapkinder' rather than 'metaphorical brothers and sisters'. Droogs comes from Russian 'drug/a', meaning 'friend', and was borrowed from the novel/film Clockwork Orange.

Zapkinder is a word I made up.