Losers don't do drugs

[TJ Lambini]

>>>I get more and more dissappointed with the people running this website and magazine everytime I see an issue.

Then Rick, I would suggest you stop writing for tha magazine in protest.

And hey, you're WDP-sponsored, right? What do you think about representing a company that runs, how shall I put this, risque behind-the-scenes shows at certain events? Or is tha objectivization of women fine in your book?

 

[Mr Big]

Oh dear Rick

So you've seen lives wrecked by drugs, have you?

I wonder how many lives have been wrecked by warfare and firearms...and I wonder who it was that very recently thought we were dumb for not reviewing replica firearm paintball markers?

If I remember rightly, you came to me with the idea, I said it wasn't the right thing to do, but you still thought that we should do it anyway because it would appeal to lots of readers. You were also disappointed in us then.

Why - because we weren't prepared to sell out on our moral standpoint for the sake of potential commercial gain? And now you're 'disappointed' because you believe we are prepared to sell out on a moral issue...

Make your mind up.

 

[Robbo]

Originally posted by Wolf
Sorry, but I have seen drugs destroy too many lives to ever turn a blind eye or let a laissez-faire attitude allow them to become accepted. And yes, that includes marijuana.
The shirt may be free speech, but for a corporation (Aceville/PGI)to put their name on and behind such a declaration is stupid. Tying it to paintball is asinine.
I get more and more dissappointed with the people running this website and magazine everytime I see an issue.

I tell ya what Rick, ain't you the guy who sent in a request to Ant for us to review a gun that was a carbon copy of a real M16 and suggested we make a big thing of it ?
Now I know you are an English teacher as well which surprises me since I was under the impression the US dictionary did have the listing of the word 'irony', in fact it comes after the letter 'H' which I know you have in your dictionary of life coz it harbours the word 'Hypocrisy'.

Nah, Rick, go back into the woods mate and play soldiers, resign your post and be done with us.
Coz if we sacked ya, you'd only say we were victimising ya.
Rick, goodbye !!!!
Robbo

 

[Robbo]

Originally posted by Hotpoint
What was I saying about subjective/"moral" arguments earlier?
Ho Hum slippery-slope time methinks
I agree with Baca!* This does have the makings of a really worthwhile thread but please lets all remain objective and avoid sweeping generalisations or it'll go all to hell
*Not a frequently occuring statement

Hotpoint, sometimes it's expedient to let things go to hell to clear out all the crap if ya get what I mean !!

And by the way, wasn't the fact that you were trying to subject others to listen to your views regarding moral and subjective arguments (as above, first line) an imposition as well ?

Robbo

 

[Hotpoint]

Originally posted by Robbo
Hotpoint, sometimes it's expedient to let things go to hell to clear out all the crap if ya get what I mean !!

Can't we all just get along?

Originally posted by Robbo
And by the way, wasn't the fact that you were trying to subject others to listen to your views regarding moral and subjective arguments (as above, first line) an imposition as well ?

Opposing heated subjective arguments on the grounds they interfere with rational debate is not a subjective viewpoint in exactly the same way that "bald" is not a hair colour!

I would not seek to "impose" anyway... only advise

 

[Robbo]

Originally posted by Hotpoint
Can't we all just get along?

And what? All inhabit cloud cuckoo land at once ?

Opposing heated subjective arguments on the grounds they interfere with rational debate is not a subjective viewpoint in exactly the same way that "bald" is not a hair colour!
I would not seek to "impose" anyway... only advise

Isn't opposition the first step in trying to impose views ?

And you cannot, as you well know, ascribe valued judgements to what you describe as 'rational debate' or in this case 'irrational debate', as being objective.

And to advise whilst not seeking to impose, who you trying to kid ?

Nah, you tinker with semantics for the sake of saving face, hardly the stuff of rational debate !!!
Would have my ole mate Rene turning in his grave !!

Robbo

 

[rancid]

oi bum boys.

Shall we stick to the subject?

 

[Hotpoint]

Originally posted by rancid
oi bum boys.

Shall we stick to the subject?

Not quite how I'd have put it but I agree especially given that Baca has already opted not to thread-jack after a prior post from yours-truly

I'll respond in a PM okay Robbo?

We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread

 

[Robbo]

Originally posted by rancid
oi bum boys.

Shall we stick to the subject?

Lightweight !!!

 

[Wolf]

Let's see.

TJ: No, I do not drink (I don't like the taste) and I have never done drugs (many reasons). As far as WDP, I do not think the party tents should be there, but all inside are supposed to be of age, correct? I am far more upset with their name attached to the Skirmish big game that also had a contest topless minors. Criminally dumb. I may have to make a choice there as well soon.

Pete and Ant: I disagree about your firearm connection on many grounds, not the least of which are Constitutional issues here in the US. I'm licensed to carry one every day. The huge jump in UK and Australian crime since outlawing them is a different thread entirely, though valid. Anyway, paintball started as a WAR GAME and it will remain a war game, like it or lump it. The industry is making more equipment along those lines, too. Rec promoters are also very aware of this, hence series and games designed for it.

To all three: You are probably correct, and I have struggled with this situation for years. You know I have pushed the family angle since I started. The problem is, for the same reason Pete calls things "Tygerisms," someone has to be the voice of reason. I'll let you know.