Is seth a GUY?, seriously Options

[Dr Strum]

It's not irrelevant at all if it's what you asked for.

[Raijinili]

I'm saying it's not evidence, because it's rather irrelevant.

[Dr Strum]

But it's not, because it's what you asked for.

[Raijinili]

No, I asked for evidence. What you gave is not evidence, because it's not relevant to what you said.

[Dr Strum]

How is it not relevant? The reason I believe it - or my evidence - is suddenly not relevant?

[Raijinili]

It's not evidence because you are equating"power" and "true strength". Do you pretend that "true strength" refers to destructive force rather than an ideal?

This post has been edited by Raijinili: Mar 21 2007, 05:54 PM

[Dr Strum]

Did you just go insane and stupid today, or are you intentionally seeking out any and all arguments you can arbitrarily start or continue?

[Megafreak]

Okay, I think I get what sturm is trying to say.
So, "True strength lies in the heart, or the soul, am I right?"
Well, If I'm correct, aren't they both spirits/or prozies or something like that?
So, Sturm's statement would better ake sense in this case.
Oh yeah, Apparently, Spirite CAN be attacked in Riviera, not the real world.

[Lord Ryo]

How can you classify on what they think or decide as a gender? Let's see: Seth just wants power. Not much to go on there. Ursula is the protector of Riviera. Ursula decides on what is best for the survival and safeness of Riviera, just like any decent protector would as that is their purpose. The "gender of their mind" has nothing to do with it.

Regardless of what their intentions were, they pretended to be females. Unless you’re saying that one can’t be female and have goals. *shrugs*

You did not say that, you specifically said they took on a form of…

What do you mean I didn’t say that, you quoted me on it.

Oh really, your posts say otherwise.

If you know how to, read again, that’s exactly what I said. How do I know this, because once again, you quoted me on it. Unbelievable the level of stupidity you find on the internet…


I’m going to say this for the last time so that there are no misunderstandings, so read carefully.

I agreed with Sturm, yes, I Lord Ryo actually agreed with Dr. Sturm for once and said that they were genderless seeing how they don’t have the sexual organs of ether male or female because they’re spirits, right. However, I’ll say it again, however, they LOOK LIKE females, or as I said exactly; “are woman-like”, you can’t argue with that. So instead of saying “oh shoot, he’s right.” or just letting it go, because I don’t need anyone telling me that I’m right. Sturm says “What, I don’t have a reason to argue with Lord Ryo, impossible! Oh wait, I’m the admin I can do whatever I want. Yeah, that’s it, I’ll shove a couple of misused words in his mouth and make a few worthless points and pretend like I know what I’m talking about, I’ll make myself look like an ass in the process, but hey, at least I get to argue.” There was nothing to misinterpret about what I said.

And for anyone who is unsure about what a ribbon is, grab a dictionary off you computer desk or check out any of the many dictionary web sites, seeing how you currently have access to the internet because you’re reading this.

Oh, and you Rhiannon, lets see, oh yes, you can go and look up the definition for the word string if you want to, it’ll do you good to learn some basic words.

Now I’m glad I could clear up everyone’s confusion. And seeing how that’s everything, and everyone should understand now, this will be the last I post on this thread, see ya! ^^

[ChefMKT]

It was well established what you thought about the gender of Seth and Ursula, I was pointing out that how you worded your posts completely contradicted what you said.

I mean they took on the form of a living creature, and living creatures have genders.

I agreed and said they were of neither sex, but stated that they have the appearance of females.

A LIVING CREATURE AND HAVING THE APPEARANCE OF A FEMALE ARE NOT THE SAME THING

See the parts of the quotes I have bolded? They are the key words which contradict what you are saying. By saying that living creatures have genders and that both Seth and Ursula took form of one, that directly implies that you are saying they do have genders.

Just to make sure you understand, something that has a gender has the respective reproductive organs. Do you see how those two quotes above contradict what you said? That was where your misinterpretation was and it was your own fault.

Regardless of what their intentions were, they pretended to be females.

We are discussing their mindset on this point, not about their physical appearance. You can not categorize their mindset into genders, it's ludicrous.

[Unown1]

I don't see what the probelm was. He said their genderless its just that they look like girls. Taking on the form of something doesn't mean you actually are that something. And having the appearance of something doesn't mean that you are that something either. And the part about the mindset thing doesn't make any sense at all.

[Rhiannon]

If you know how to, read again, that’s exactly what I said. How do I know this, because once again, you quoted me on it. Unbelievable the level of stupidity you find on the internet…

Flaming? I thought I told you not to do that. Oh, wait, you don't listen to what I say. That's also why you didn't see my implications that you should just ignore Sturm if you think he's being stupid that first time I talked to you. Instead, you basically asked him to say only nice things to you. And that was bound to fail, because Sturm is not a nice enough person to say only nice things.

And for anyone who is unsure about what a ribbon is, grab a dictionary off you computer desk or check out any of the many dictionary web sites, seeing how you currently have access to the internet because you’re reading this.

No wonder you're using some words incorrectly. Don't you realize that "online dictionary" encompasses some of the worst dictionaries there are? Dictionary.com is a good example of a less-than-perfect online dictionary. At first, it looks just fine. And then, you look up a certain word, and you do not find the definition you're looking for, but instead you find propaganda. Not very reliable, if you ask me.

Oh, and you Rhiannon, lets see, oh yes, you can go and look up the definition for the word string if you want to, it’ll do you good to learn some basic words.

I don't have to, I already know what a string is.

[Lord Ryo]

Okay, I know I said I was done on this thread but this is getting out of control, and I guess no one read that part *I’m not surprised* seeing how some people continue to post in response to me, but I won’t waste your efforts, I’m back! ^^

It was well established what you thought about the gender of Seth and Ursula, I was pointing out that how you worded your posts completely contradicted what you said.

My saying that living creatures have genders was to show Sturm that they resembled a creature that DID have a gender. Having the appearance of females was me telling Sturm that they DO look like females no matter what they really are. You picked two different arguments of mine and ran them together; of course it seemed to contradict.

A LIVING CREATURE AND HAVING THE APPEARANCE OF A FEMALE ARE NOT THE SAME THING

See the parts of the quotes I have bolded? They are the key words which contradict what you are saying. By saying that living creatures have genders and that both Seth and Ursula took form of one, that directly implies that you are saying they do have genders.

I’m just going to say it again because it seems like I have to always repeat myself around here.

I never said they were, you distorted my arguments and created your own, one that yes, contradicts what I was saying, but it was you who contradicted my statement from the start not me.

And me saying they look like females and took on the form of females does not contradict either, it’s me using different words to describe the same thing, you know like “This cake tastes bad.” and “The cake doesn’t have a very good taste.” Try expanding your vocabulary.

Flaming? I thought I told you not to do that. Oh, wait, you don't listen to what I say. That's also why you didn't see my implications that you should just ignore Sturm if you think he's being stupid that first time I talked to you. Instead, you basically asked him to say only nice things to you. And that was bound to fail, because Sturm is not a nice enough person to say only nice things.

I’m sorry Rhiannon; I don’t remember our first conversation. Was it in this thread? Anyways, I’m allowed to express my opinion or point and I wasn’t flaming until now. However, I never asked Sturm to say only nice things to me *oh wait maybe I did a while back…* that’s outrageous; I knew before I joined that Sturm is incapable of saying nice things. But it doesn’t hurt to ask…

No wonder you're using some words incorrectly. Don't you realize that "online dictionary" encompasses some of the worst dictionaries there are? Dictionary.com is a good example of a less-than-perfect online dictionary. At first, it looks just fine. And then, you look up a certain word, and you do not find the definition you're looking for, but instead you find propaganda. Not very reliable, if you ask me.

True, online dictionaries are not the most reliable; however, they’re not always wrong either. But when did I say I used them? Not everyone owns a dictionary so I was giving options for those who didn’t. I am a writer who has a dictionary for a right hand, I’ll find one almost anywhere in my home and will run to one of them first if truly in need. Now the dictionaries you find in the book store, The Merriam Webster Dictionary is always correct, I’ll trust that one. After being told that I misused the definition of ribbon I had to go check and guess what I found; I was again right!

I don't have to, I already know what a string is.

Really now? So why did you say I described a string instead of a ribbon, their definitions are not remotely similar? And if you truly knew what a string was you would have known that. I know what both a string and a ribbon are.

You know, it’s sad that the n00b *no offense* was the only one to understand what I had to say. Thank you for being the most intelligent person I’ve met on this board so far.

[Dr Strum]

I am a writer

I think you need to go back to school, then.

So why did you say I described a string instead of a ribbon, their definitions are not remotely similar?

Your definition of a ribbon is one that could far more accurately be applied to a string.

[Lord Ryo]

think you need to go back to school, then.

Should I go back to school before or after I sell millions?

Your definition of a ribbon is one that could far more accurately be applied to a string.

That's funny, my definition clearly describes what a ribbon is and shares the same description as a bandage.