|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 300 OF 644 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Dec-15-13
 | | jessicafischerqueen: <H> Yes, and on a rare frivolous note you may remember me complaining about a very specific aspect of <Clinical Psychology>. It has to do with an uncritical ontology of "naming" things that don't actually exist, and this practice is by no means restricted to <Clinical Psychology>. Here's a list of things that don't actually exist:
the ego
a road map
the perfect storm
elves
eskimos
I have always been clear about
beyonce (black format)
pluto (both the ex-planet and Mickey Mouse's dog)
a skill set
oprah windfall
a control group
spain
personality vectors
everything in the DSM
Well I could go on, but I doubt there's much point. |
|
| Dec-15-13 | | hms123: <Jess>
I might quibble about elves, but otherwise I am in complete agreement. I take ontology seriously to the extent that it exists in the first place. |
|
| Dec-15-13 | | Thanh Phan: I have other songs I listen to when I wish to relax, just checked my playlist, just under 182 hours of songs for my music player that I put on random then low volume, I don't even need repeat yet unless it's been on about half a week lol |
|
Dec-15-13
| | jessicafischerqueen: <H> Excellent point. It brings to mind the realm of "philosophy" where things are even more slipshod, if that's possible. It is.
QUESTION: Is it really worth mastering German in order to understand <Martin "I informed on my mentor to the Nazis" Heidegger's> distinction between the "ontic realm" and the "ontological realm"? To quote <Ohio> yet again, No. |
|
| Dec-15-13 | | Thanh Phan: Apollo 13 was lucky they had Aquarius and not Java or Adobe ^.^ |
|
Dec-16-13
| | jessicafischerqueen: <Thanh> did you see the movie? I think Ron Howard directed it was a good movie. Tom Hanks stars as the "Aquarius" if I'm not mistaken. |
|
| Dec-16-13 | | hms123: <cg> In my view, <chessgames.com> is in large part a social networking site focused on chess. As with many social networking sites, the members provide most of the content. They upload games, create game collections, offer corrections, write reviews, offer advice and analysis to other members, play against GMs (thus attracting other members), etc. In the past year or so you have made a wise decision to include more and more members in the provision of historical content through the writing of bios and the creation of coherent pages on historically important tournaments. All of this has been well-received and has contributed to the continuing success of this site. This expanded inclusion comes at a price, however. As the members become more invested in the content of the site because of their roles in its provision, they also expect that you will take their views on certain issues into account. In the current discussion, that means putting the emphasis on historical accuracy. I believe that this current controversy is reflective of the progress that the site has made from a small start-up to an important part of the chess scene. In order to maintain this progress, I believe that the site needs to recognize its larger role and to recognize that it is in transition. Further, I believe that most members understand that you run a business and are respectful of that fact. Your continuing challenge is to manage that transition successfully. To me, that means letting us help. Although, I do not have the same enthusiasm for chess history that many others have, I do find that their work and discussions have piqued my interest more than I should have thought. In short, I stand with <jess> and others in their wish to keep this site an important part of the chess world and an important part of the historical record with regard to the biographies of important GMs. |
|
| Dec-16-13 | | hms123: <Thanh <Age of Aquarius> Phan> heh |
|
Dec-16-13
| | jessicafischerqueen: Aha the old "back up post ploy."
Well played, <H>.
Rumor has it you were a bridge hustler when you were a single messin' roun' gentleman? How many did you sell?
HAHAHAHA |
|
| Dec-16-13 | | hms123: <Jess>
Just one, but I sold it over and over again, sometimes to the same person. That's some serious messin' roun'. |
|
| Dec-16-13 | | dakgootje: Guess the first time you sold it to the guy, he thought it was a steal. |
|
| Dec-16-13 | | hms123: <dak> Yes, he got confused when I told him it was made of <steel>. He thought I meant it had fallen off the back of the truck and that no one would miss it. |
|
| Dec-16-13 | | Thanh Phan: Have seen the movie ^.^
A vid with dogs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_So... (isn't Tom Hanks but is cute) |
|
Dec-16-13
 | | juan31: Señorita Jessica: Do you have a work ( in video, Y. T.) about the player of this day, Sonja Graf S. ? Thank you in advance for your answer. |
|
| Dec-17-13 | | Karpova: <Jess>
Thanks! I wish you Merry Christmas also, if you celebrate it! |
|
Dec-17-13
 | | chancho: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbj2... |
|
| Dec-18-13 | | playground player: <jessicafischerqueen> We wish you a Merry Christmas,
we wish you a Merry Christmas,
we wish you a Merry Christmas
and a Happy New Year!
--Mr. and Mrs. <PGP> |
|
| Dec-18-13 | | Travis Bickle: Hey Jess here's a neat interview with John Lennon near the end of The Beatles. http://youtu.be/dIxdxWkgILc |
|
| Dec-18-13 | | Travis Bickle: Hey Jess, Peter Gabriel was voted into The Rock n Roll Hall of Fame 2014 class! Big Time
http://youtu.be/F0FBi5Rv1ho |
|
| Dec-18-13 | | Shams: <Travis> I think it's one of the strongest groups of inductees I can remember. Nirvana, Linda Ronstadt ("about @#$%* time" my departed father would say), KISS, Hall & Oates-- I can't argue against any of those choices. Nice work, Cleveland. |
|
| Dec-18-13 | | Jim Bartle: Kiss? Hall and Oates?
I don't think so, even though the latter posts here: User: Holland oats. |
|
| Dec-18-13 | | Shams: <JB> KISS get in just for being that iconic, I think. I mean, they carved out a *huge* niche. The HoF loves that stuff. Hall & Oates, I could see arguing against them but they were a really successful duo. Tons of platinum albums and a lot of hits, plus they've kept it going and not just on the casino circuit. Also, after the Prince/Madonna/MJ echelon *some* bands are gonna have to make it from the 80s. (Notably, The Cars have never even been nominated.) If I had a vote it'd go for the Violent Femmes but that's never going to happen. |
|
Dec-18-13
 | | Check It Out: I can't believe Cat Stevens and H&O got in before Deep Purple. Those guys have sold over 100 million records, are still touring, and somebody had to write that Smoke on the Water riff. Not my favorite band to be sure but they definitely have been snubbed when bands like Guns n Roses, Heart, and Red Hot Chili Peppers are already in. |
|
| Dec-18-13 | | Shams: <Check It Out> Out of my respect for your multiple black belts I'm not going to punch you in the groin for that last post. You're from Seattle, son: you wanna talk smack about Heart, you best cross the Cascades! |
|
Dec-18-13
| | Check It Out: <Shams> Nowhere did I speak smack about our beloved Heart! That rendition they did recently of Stairway was magical. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8e2f... But, they were in diapers when Deep Purple was establishing hard rock along with Heart's daddys, Led Zeppelin. My point was, GnR, Heart, RHCP, these bands are all a generation later than DP. I think those bands got in sooner than DP due to better songwriting. But then, Kiss is even weaker than DP in that regard. I mean, Cat Stevens? That's not a shot at Yusuf, he's a great songwriter, but the guy can barely rock a boulder. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 300 OF 644 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
