Knickoftime wrote:

arkrud wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

arkrud wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

arkrud wrote:The truth is much less important that the way people fell about it.

Yeah, no.

There is nothing real in the world. All we people see is produced by our senses.

That doens't make indisputable perception (another way of looking at what a truth is) any less real.

For example, indipustable perception of say altitude, speed, distance and trajectory of commercial airliners is how we manage to make air travel safe and we don't have 777's crashing into one another over Citifield.

Indisputable perception is who we're able to put a satellite in orbit around the Earth, and the perceptions of anyone who think the Earth is flat is irrelevant to the equation, other than they too get to enjoy the tangible benefits provided to them by science they don't believe in.

So why to not make other people happy by just accepting that they see the world and truth differently.

Literally thousands of answers to this question - one off the top of my head is because some people see the world and truth in a way that justifies to them denying the human rights and even the lives of others.

No, I don't think we should accept the world and truth view of the guy who walked into the Pittsburgh synagogue and decided to act on his perceptions.

Do you?

Really?

Not accepting other people view of the world made this person to kill this people.
Acceptance is not let people to do what they want.
It is for you own sake to not try to change other people perception by the only possible way by make them non-existent.
No one can change other people world. You can make them shut up and stop them expressing it. But they will still see the world in their own way.

That isn't mutually exclusive to there being truth.

A person who perceives him or herself to be bulletproof will almost certain die or suffer catastrophic injury if they hold a loaded gun up to their head and pull the trigger.

Not a single other person who knows that person is in fact not bulletproof and whether or not they choose to dispute his or her perception will not alter what will happen in that circumstance.

And our knowledge that the Earth is round not flat is just more precise perception but deferentially not the whole truth.
There are many more beings in the universe who may see Earths in compositely different way.
As a wave of frequencies, or cloud of energy.
This does not matter for us. But we will have to accept their perception if we come to meet them.

If you have a driver's license and own a car, you by your actions utterly deny what you claim is your world view.

You in fact put yourself in a situation in which you are entirely dependent upon the assumption everyone else on the road with you in other cars you've never met in fact has a universal perceptual vernacular. With your very life and perhaps the lives of your children your assume they also perceive and then interpret 'red' and 'double yellow lines' and 'stop' and speed the same as you without every having a conversation with them about it.

4 people who have never met before and may have little to nothing in common and who never utter a word to one another can successfully navigate a 4-way intersection because they agree they perceive the situation the same.

That's what our shared language describes as truth.

You're lying or confused if you believe otherwise.

I think we actually agree on all counts.
Person perceives him or herself to be bulletproof cannot be saved from suicide by the gun. The fact that his perception of the world is self-destructive does not mean that this was not his truth until he died and so it remain truth for him forever.
People on the intersection survive as they accept that the other people will stop and start driving only when cars who came first will pass.
The only difference is that you advocating others to accept your perception of reality but I propose to accept the perception of others without changing your own. The difference seems small but it changes violence to piece and stress to bliss.

TripleThreat wrote:Feel free to disagree with his politics.

One of the problems with "political" discussion is this false notion ANYTHING having to the world that we live in that isn't about sports, entertainment or celebrity culture is "politics".

It isn't.

TripleThreat wrote:

anrst wrote:THANK YOU FOR BANNING HIM

this is a much better place without him

It is not a better place without him.

I don't agree with even one piece of pure basketball analysis he ever had. Not once. But he loves this team. Right down to the ****ing bone.

He brought value to the site by initiating basketball discussion that spread out from his original topics. There is not enough legit NBA news to cover a 365/24/7 cycle. There is certainly not enough Knicks news to do that.

If he was banned or chose not to return, to me, the only proof it shows is that there should be ZERO political discussion in the General Discussion areas. I get sometimes personal stuff gets out ( someone's kid dies or someone finds out they have bad health, **** when I was going through chemo, it would have been nice to ask for support on a really rough day, I get sometimes things are community based and not always NBA based, I also get NBA talk spins out into pop culture/entertainment/celebrity, things that extend into how we function as a society) but politics is just going start **** somewhere with someone.

If Andrew asked me ( and he's not), I'd say ban all political discussion from the Gen Disc area period. Nothing good will come of it. It's too personal for people. Then again, he could say to me, talking about how marriage sucks all the time, nothing good will come of that either. The difference though is my male model good looks. When I say something off the rails, people say, "That Triple Threat, he's such a cad! Pass the crumpets!" But when regular people do it, they just get really angry.

Open political discussion in this area of the board is just gonna **** things up. Plenty of other sites ban it in their main areas for reason. There are things that just polarize and set people off. For example, I have to buy 200 new shirts every month, because women keep chasing me around and tearing them off of me. I can't fight them off. Guys keep asking me, are you wearing Axe or something? I'm tired of doing yard work and having neighbors get lawn chairs, watch me and start the applause. It's mentally taxing. I just want to be loved for my mind, not used for my body over and over again. See, that **** sets me off.

Briggs brought value to this site in his own way. Feel free to disagree with his politics. But let's not pretend he was not a member of this community as a whole.

I miss Briggs. I feel he's the kind to love me for my mind. So there's that.

I did not like a lot of staff that BRIGS said but I am accepting all people as they are.
It is up to me how to react and it is not possible to change what people are.
Some would argue that this way anything can be accepted, even crime.
But this is not between me and somebody, it is between somebody and The Law.
Thankfully nobody can make harm to others over Internet...unless people harm themselves by reading too much into somebody's runt.

Knickoftime wrote:

arkrud wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

arkrud wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

arkrud wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

arkrud wrote:The truth is much less important that the way people fell about it.

Yeah, no.

There is nothing real in the world. All we people see is produced by our senses.

That doens't make indisputable perception (another way of looking at what a truth is) any less real.

For example, indipustable perception of say altitude, speed, distance and trajectory of commercial airliners is how we manage to make air travel safe and we don't have 777's crashing into one another over Citifield.

Indisputable perception is who we're able to put a satellite in orbit around the Earth, and the perceptions of anyone who think the Earth is flat is irrelevant to the equation, other than they too get to enjoy the tangible benefits provided to them by science they don't believe in.

So why to not make other people happy by just accepting that they see the world and truth differently.

Literally thousands of answers to this question - one off the top of my head is because some people see the world and truth in a way that justifies to them denying the human rights and even the lives of others.

No, I don't think we should accept the world and truth view of the guy who walked into the Pittsburgh synagogue and decided to act on his perceptions.

Do you?

Really?

Not accepting other people view of the world made this person to kill this people.
Acceptance is not let people to do what they want.
It is for you own sake to not try to change other people perception by the only possible way by make them non-existent.
No one can change other people world. You can make them shut up and stop them expressing it. But they will still see the world in their own way.

That isn't mutually exclusive to there being truth.

A person who perceives him or herself to be bulletproof will almost certain die or suffer catastrophic injury if they hold a loaded gun up to their head and pull the trigger.

Not a single other person who knows that person is in fact not bulletproof and whether or not they choose to dispute his or her perception will not alter what will happen in that circumstance.

And our knowledge that the Earth is round not flat is just more precise perception but deferentially not the whole truth.
There are many more beings in the universe who may see Earths in compositely different way.
As a wave of frequencies, or cloud of energy.
This does not matter for us. But we will have to accept their perception if we come to meet them.

If you have a driver's license and own a car, you by your actions utterly deny what you claim is your world view.

You in fact put yourself in a situation in which you are entirely dependent upon the assumption everyone else on the road with you in other cars you've never met in fact has a universal perceptual vernacular. With your very life and perhaps the lives of your children your assume they also perceive and then interpret 'red' and 'double yellow lines' and 'stop' and speed the same as you without every having a conversation with them about it.

4 people who have never met before and may have little to nothing in common and who never utter a word to one another can successfully navigate a 4-way intersection because they agree they perceive the situation the same.

That's what our shared language describes as truth.

You're lying or confused if you believe otherwise.

I think we actually agree on all counts.

I don't think so.

Person perceives him or herself to be bulletproof cannot be saved from suicide by the gun. The fact that his perception of the world is self-destructive does not mean that this was not his truth until he died and so it remain truth for him forever.

You're just playing with language at this stage. You want to equate two different concepts as being the same because you can sort of use them same word to describe it.

A person will die if they shoot themselves in the head.

That is a FACT.

If you want to purposely muddy the waters by saying "truth" as opposed to "fact" you can, but I don't know what purpose it serves.

I'm referring to facts. What you refer to as his own personal "truth" is an entirely different premise than a fact.

The only difference is that you advocating others to accept your perception of reality but I propose to accept the perception of others without changing your own. The difference seems small but it changes violence to piece and stress to bliss.

But again, it is a shared perception of reality that makes societies possible.

I like cake. I don't give a **** if you don't like cake.

I know there is a shared perception of the Earth that we refer to as round. If you want to work on the U.S.'s missile defense system you better damn well agree to that fact, because if you don't you're a danger. You'll create havoc and error, not peace and bliss.

I think we getting to the bottom of it.
Fact is happening in the past.
Fact are not getting disputed. They are getting questioned sometimes if they are not very obvious.
Also fact is not a subject for much emotions. Why get worked out about something that cannot be changed?
Truth is something that specific person perceive about reality that is now.
This were we all can talk about same things and see the things differently.
Now, the current moment is the only thing that matters emotionally. So it cannot be fact. It is always distorted by our fillings.
Longing is the future. Something we want to be good for us. It may never come.
So why get worked out about something that not there yet and may not be. It will became truth of the moment and then a fact of the past.
With us or without us around.
So don't worry, be happy.

arkrud wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

arkrud wrote:I did not like a lot of staff that BRIGS said but I am accepting all people as they are.
It is up to me how to react and it is not possible to change what people are.

I don't doubt this is how you explain it to yourself and therefore it is your truth.

Your actions, however, speak otherwise.

You are clearly an advocate of a certain viewpoint, a viewpoint in which advocacy is contradictory.

Human mind cannot exist without a viewpoint. It is all it is.
And contradiction is the being of the mind.
The truth is in Self which is what we are as a part of The whole Creation.
Mind is juts temporary shell for The Self.

You're selling now. You're a frequent salesperson.

What you're trying to sell is that no one should try to sell.

TripleThreat wrote:

anrst wrote:THANK YOU FOR BANNING HIM

this is a much better place without him

It is not a better place without him.

I don't agree with even one piece of pure basketball analysis he ever had. Not once. But he loves this team. Right down to the ****ing bone.

He brought value to the site by initiating basketball discussion that spread out from his original topics. There is not enough legit NBA news to cover a 365/24/7 cycle. There is certainly not enough Knicks news to do that.

If he was banned or chose not to return, to me, the only proof it shows is that there should be ZERO political discussion in the General Discussion areas. I get sometimes personal stuff gets out ( someone's kid dies or someone finds out they have bad health, **** when I was going through chemo, it would have been nice to ask for support on a really rough day, I get sometimes things are community based and not always NBA based, I also get NBA talk spins out into pop culture/entertainment/celebrity, things that extend into how we function as a society) but politics is just going start **** somewhere with someone.

If Andrew asked me ( and he's not), I'd say ban all political discussion from the Gen Disc area period. Nothing good will come of it. It's too personal for people. Then again, he could say to me, talking about how marriage sucks all the time, nothing good will come of that either. The difference though is my male model good looks. When I say something off the rails, people say, "That Triple Threat, he's such a cad! Pass the crumpets!" But when regular people do it, they just get really angry.

Open political discussion in this area of the board is just gonna **** things up. Plenty of other sites ban it in their main areas for reason. There are things that just polarize and set people off. For example, I have to buy 200 new shirts every month, because women keep chasing me around and tearing them off of me. I can't fight them off. Guys keep asking me, are you wearing Axe or something? I'm tired of doing yard work and having neighbors get lawn chairs, watch me and start the applause. It's mentally taxing. I just want to be loved for my mind, not used for my body over and over again. See, that **** sets me off.

Briggs brought value to this site in his own way. Feel free to disagree with his politics. But let's not pretend he was not a member of this community as a whole.

I miss Briggs. I feel he's the kind to love me for my mind. So there's that.

THIS.

Knickoftime wrote:

TripleThreat wrote:Feel free to disagree with his politics.

One of the problems with "political" discussion is this false notion ANYTHING having to the world that we live in that isn't about sports, entertainment or celebrity culture is "politics".

It isn't.

People can mince this a thousand different ways. If politics threads that have zero to do with basketball and/or professional sports are in the Gen Disc area here, it's going to start ****. It's going to set some people off. It will bleed into other NBA threads and the place will likely lose people, some will leave, some might get banned. For what? How does that help this place? Or anyone here?

It doesn't.

Did Briggs fall to the wayside over **** he said. That COULD be part of it. Did it happen because of how he said it? That COULD be part of it.

But did whatever happen because TALKING POLITICS IN THE MAIN AREA was allowed to happen in the first place? Absolutely.

You guys can do what you want. Does talking politics in the main area make UK a better place for Knicks fans or not? It's that simple honestly. Shedding contributors and devaluing the brand doesn't look like a win to me. But you all can do what you want.

arkrud wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

arkrud wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

arkrud wrote:I did not like a lot of staff that BRIGS said but I am accepting all people as they are.
It is up to me how to react and it is not possible to change what people are.

I don't doubt this is how you explain it to yourself and therefore it is your truth.

Your actions, however, speak otherwise.

You are clearly an advocate of a certain viewpoint, a viewpoint in which advocacy is contradictory.

Human mind cannot exist without a viewpoint. It is all it is.
And contradiction is the being of the mind.
The truth is in Self which is what we are as a part of The whole Creation.
Mind is juts temporary shell for The Self.

You're selling now. You're a frequent salesperson.

What you're trying to sell is that no one should try to sell.

Do not afraid to be more specific.

I don't believe I have ever been accused of that.

We are not discussing the facts but rather believes. Believes cannot be overturned by facts. This is the nature of believes.

No, it isn't. It is the nature of some people's believes. People who are at a disadvantage in life. What you describe is a bad thing. Not a good thing.

I believe that if we will put in check our small Mind and big Ego we can find The great Self we all are longing for.

No, you don't. Your posts are consistently ALL about your ego.

You clearly believe you have some sort of insight into the nature of existence that others don't and you want them to benefit from what you know and they don't.

That is ego, by definition.

You practice the polar opposite of what you preach. You don't respect and accept MY truth or others. You try to influence and persuade it.

Which btw, I find nothing wrong with, its just ironic you present yourself as completely unaware of your own action and intentions.

TripleThreat wrote:People can mince this a thousand different ways. If politics threads that have zero to do with basketball and/or professional sports are in the Gen Disc area here, it's going to start ****. It's going to set some people off. It will bleed into other NBA threads and the place will likely lose people, some will leave, some might get banned. For what? How does that help this place? Or anyone here?

It doesn't.

Did Briggs fall to the wayside over **** he said. That COULD be part of it. Did it happen because of how he said it? That COULD be part of it.

But did whatever happen because TALKING POLITICS IN THE MAIN AREA was allowed to happen in the first place? Absolutely.

You guys can do what you want. Does talking politics in the main area make UK a better place for Knicks fans or not? It's that simple honestly. Shedding contributors and devaluing the brand doesn't look like a win to me. But you all can do what you want.

i've stopped posting here because of the political discussions in the main area. i came here for knicks, nothing else, don't wanna sift through threads to see which to avoid. i still check in from time to time (obviously since im posting this) but i use to be on this site 24/7 reading threads and posting. oh well, it is what it is. i've said my piece before in prior threads like this, but hey, it's not my forum. i anticipate i'll be back one day, but it won't be until i see most of that stuff gone. martin and andrew have always been very good to me and are great guys. just a difference of opinion.

arkrud wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

Nalod wrote:
Facts are more important then Opinions.

The Truth is not an opinion.

It is not about the opinion but about the way it presented and the audience it is presented to.
The truth is much less important that the way people fell about it.

arkrud wrote:There is nothing real in the world. All we people see is produced by our senses.

Okay, I'll play along.

Does this statement you made about nothing being real include the statement you just made?
Breathe through your nose for a few seconds and let that sink in.

Opinions generally are not more or less important than other opinions. Unless you're an unwanted fetus in America. Then some opinions are worse (and much more important) than others. Like the one from 1974. But I digress.

Truth is jumping out of a plane with a parachute on where the rip cord is on your left. But you firmly believe the correct cord to pull is on your right.

When you hit the ground face first, the truth will be much more important than yours or anyone else's feelings about it. No matter how sincerely felt they are.

jrodmc wrote:

arkrud wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

Nalod wrote:
Facts are more important then Opinions.

The Truth is not an opinion.

It is not about the opinion but about the way it presented and the audience it is presented to.
The truth is much less important that the way people fell about it.

arkrud wrote:There is nothing real in the world. All we people see is produced by our senses.

Okay, I'll play along.

Does this statement you made about nothing being real include the statement you just made?
Breathe through your nose for a few seconds and let that sink in.

Opinions generally are not more or less important than other opinions. Unless you're an unwanted fetus in America. Then some opinions are worse (and much more important) than others. Like the one from 1974. But I digress.

Truth is jumping out of a plane with a parachute on where the rip cord is on your left. But you firmly believe the correct cord to pull is on your right.

When you hit the ground face first, the truth will be much more important than yours or anyone else's feelings about it. No matter how sincerely felt they are.

I already replied - the truth will remain the same forever for Trump after smashing into the ground. His existence in the Trump body will end with all his believes and memories. Of course you will know that his believes were wrong but what it has do do with him?
No way you can affect how Trump or anyone for that matter feel or what he/she believes in.
The only thing you can control (to some extend) is what you feel or believe yourself.
And basically nothing else matter. So why to get worked out about things you and no one can affect?