User talk:TallMan

What is going on? World Blogs Clogs Elections The Bar (talk) (talk) (talk) (talk) (hic) Welcome to RationalWiki, TallMan! Check out our guide for newcomers and our community standards! Tell us how you found RationalWiki here! If you are interested in contributing: Read what our articles are intended to be Check out the to-do list See our help page and Wikipedia's formatting cheatsheet If writing a new article, consider writing up a draft And most importantly: Pull up a goat and have some fun!

How tall are you? I am 6 foot 3 inches. Ace McWicked^{The Liquid Room} 03:16, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm 5'6" or 5'7".TallMan 03:20, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Thats not very tall. Please recreate your account with your real first name and last initial. Ace McWicked^{The Liquid Room} 03:21, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Pay no never mind to Ace's jocularity. He's drunk more often, and more, than I am, and have. And he's only 12! ħuman 05:57, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

And, oh, yeah, Welcome to the Dollhouse! ħuman 06:06, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi there TallMan , welcome to RationalWiki - Al-Muʿizz

's own glugging hub cap. - π 06:23, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

5'7" is tall in my neighborhood. But I'm 6'8" so what do I know? Ungtss 07:41, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Sweet creeping jesus Ungtss, 6'8"? What utter fucking garbage. How dare you pollute this Tall Mans talkpage with your atheist lies! I see you dont confrom to our naming policy. Recreate your account with your real first name and last intial. Ace McWicked^{The Liquid Room} 08:08, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

As if there weren't enough dumb shit in the world without parodists multiplying it for their own amusement. Ungtss 08:44, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually, TallMan is making many good points. Ungtss, you undermine your points elsewhere by your profanity - and stupidity - here. ħuman 08:59, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't referring to Tallman -- he's no parodist, and I'm enjoying our discussion. I was referring to the ASchlafly impression by Ace. Also, I don't understand what effect profanity has on credibility. Some of the best men I know curse like M****rf*****s. Ungtss 09:04, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Word has it that Hemmingway had the foulest mouth of them all Ace McWicked^{The Liquid Room} 09:38, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Sysop Janitor

You are a sysop, errr, Janitor now. Congrats are in order. Have some champagne Ace McWicked^{Disco Jesus} 04:23, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks; I didn't expect to be made a janitor at all, much less so quickly.TallMan 04:25, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Heh, after a few days if your not an vandal or an obvious asshole then that's what happens. And you seem like an intelligent, civil sort of guy. Ace McWicked^{Disco Jesus} 04:31, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Teh Ace wears his 'cratship well. ħuman 04:48, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Philosophy of Language

I see you're working in formal semantics. Strange that (as far as I can tell) the only two philosophers here are both language folks, don't you think?

Not really. It's hard to do analytic philosophy without doing philosophy of language these days; even ethicists and the like are getting in the language game (and typically doing it poorly, in my experience). I really think of myself as a logic and metaphysics guy, but formal semantics is somewhat more marketable.TallMan 22:19, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, fair enough. Say, if you're a logic guy, I may have something to talk to you about in a few weeks. Well, a month or two, more probably. I'm always optimistic about when I actually finish things... Sir Sockpuppet 10:06, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Fire away.TallMan 12:20, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Amusingly, my only "real" philo background was... a philosophy of language seminar thing back in about '78 or so. Still have some of the books. Still can't understand them ;) ħuman 00:36, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Welcome back

Good to see you back again. Congratulations on the degree. ListenerX^TalkerX 04:13, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

I'll have a large, with pepperoni, mushrooms and extra cheese. C®ackeЯ

No, the joke goes like this: The engineer asks "how can I build that?" The scientist asks "how does it work?" and the philosopher asks "do you want fries with that?" Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 04:18, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Or, if you wanted to take a swipe at Plato, you could have the philosopher saying, "Grasp at the shadow and lose the substance." ListenerX^TalkerX 04:22, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Also, don't forget that engineers are banned from philosophy conferences. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 04:24, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

I've been keeping an eye on the site for a while; I just didn't bother to log in. Turns out defending a dissertation takes a lot of work.TallMan (talk) 04:27, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Since I can edit this, I can see that I was not blocked for insulting a lowly user who hasn't even gotten a frigging MOP (yet)...rectifying...tsk. NM I'll do it myself since it's bedtime anyways. 04:33, 28 May 2011 (UTC) C®ackeЯ

Thank you

Nice hustle. 04:54, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

If you're a philosopher

You might be open to some discussion on why sexual contact should or should not be harmful to children. I'm still hoping for a reasonable person to pop up and resolve the situation in a better way. Are you up to it? Can you justify me getting immediately banned and my posts removed just because I admitted to being a pedophile, despite having written extensive posts explaining why I believe myself to be a perfectly ethical person? For some food for thought, you might look up the 1977 French petition against the age of consent law on Wikipedia; several notorious philosophers signed it and there's a transcription of a radio talk they had about it in 1978, in which Michel Foucault took part, under the Wikipedia page "Sexual Morality and the Law". (I'm not linking them directly because some filters have been put in place to censor my posts.) I believe very firmly that I'm on the right in this topic, but through reasoning and not blind belief, and if you disagree you should be able to change my mind. I hope to have a serious discussion on this topic, if just to show the rest of the moderators that their animosity is unwarranted and one can have a civil debate on this topic.

Thanks in advance. 176.10.100.230 (talk) 15:12, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

I also created an account now so you can perhaps keep better track of me, or move this discussion to my talk page if you want. Though there's no telling when the zealous bigots will ban this account too, though I'm having a rest from "vandalizing" now. Still, I continue to use Tor and if some vandal happens to get the same IP as me it could cause my account to get banned nevertheless. Oh well, let's wait and see; if it doesn't work out I'll just continue as a BoN. Drotsky (talk) 15:24, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Please do not harass other users of the site. Keep your discussions in as few places as possible. And yes, your talking of condoning pedophilia does constitute harassment here. Like I said, we are prejudiced against pedophilia. Bear that in mind, and if you have the slightest sense of courtesy, think of the saying "When in Rome, do as the Romans do." This is Rome, and we Romans don't go door to door talking about how sexually abusing children is okay.--"Shut up, Brx." 15:36, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Do you really mean it when you say you're prejudiced? Aren't prejudices intrinsically irrational?

"When in Rome, do as the Romans do." How does that fit with RW's hobby of vandalizing CP? And I don't even mean to vandalize, I came here starting civil discussion, and was immediately banned and censored because I was too offensive of a personality. All in all you're just saying I should take the discrimination against me? Homosexuals should have done as Romans do when they were in Rome and should never have fought for their rights? Women in middle eastern countries should not fight for their rights? When should anyone, ever go against the status quo? Should we just keep repeating our mistakes forever? Sorry, this has gotten long winded, the short story is that you saying "when in Rome, do as Romans do" is equivalent to telling me to not try to correct people who are wrong. I suppose it shows how strongly you believe in yourself being right; you forgot that my whole point is, obviously, that you're not right...

By the way I will copy this to my own talk page so we can continue there. I'm posting it here too because otherwise there wouldn't be an indication here that I responded to you. If he wants, User:TallMan can remove this whole section I started. Drotsky (talk) 16:07, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm not interested in talking about anything with you. Please don't attempt to engage with me again. TallMan (talk) 01:18, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Bruh

Might wanna take that to the talk page, don't wanna edit war am I right? <-𐌈FedoraTippingSkeptic𐌈-> (pretentious, unwarranted self importance) (talk) 02:47, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Linguistic discrimination page

Aw, I thought my addition had an appropriate level of RationalWiki snark. Well, I knew it was kind of borderline. Peyre (talk) 17:00, 20 April 2018 (UTC)