Posted by Lou Pilder on September 7, 2007, at 6:49:42
In reply to Lou's response to Sam's post-A » sam123, posted by Lou Pilder on September 7, 2007, at 6:08:39
> > > B.Sam posted ;
> > > 1. [...that statement by ZZDuck (can} be a put down...]
> >
> >
> > Sorry to pick nits, but I never said that.
> >
> > I said:
> >
> > "In some contexts"
> > "I have not read the post that caused this PBC."
> >
> > I still have not read the post that caused the block. I never said anything about ZZDuck.
> > I was just offering some ideas on how the phrase in question might be seen as uncivil.
>
> Friends,
> In my statement,
> [...that statement by ZZDuck (can} be a put down...],
> I was not quoting Sam, for the three dots mean that there are words left out, such as {In some contexts} and {asking if someone has any hobbies}.
> The statement in question by ZZDuck is listed in the thread so that discussants in the thread can have a knowlege of that statement by ZZDuck.
> It is that the statement by Sam,[...{asking if someone has any hobbies}, {can} be a...put down...]and the action that DR. Hsiung has taken,that he thinks that Sam explained that well, which is posted by Dr. Hsiung as being fine to discuss here, that is part of this discussion now.
> Sam posted,[...I was...offering...ideas of how {the phrase in question} might be seen as uncivil...]. The {phrase in question} in this thread could be {that statement by ZZDuck} that can be seen here in this thread.
> In,[...that statement by ZZDuck {can} be a put down...], this is my paraphrase of what I think could be an aspect of the thread. The statement does not say anything about ZZDuck, but says that {the statement} {can} be a put down, not that it always is a put down. It is the aspect of [...that the statement {can}...] that is of what I think is important here in this discussion, for if {that statement} {can} be a put down, then could that statement also be of the nature that it is not a put down? If so, what then are the criteria for making that determination? And did not ZZDuck post that it was not intended to be a put down?
> Also, what if ZZDuck prefaced the statement in question with {I believe}? Would the preface make the statement in question acceptable? Does the context of the statement in question mean that it goes without saying that ZZDuck believes that?
> LouFriends,
The gramatical structure of the statement in question by ZZDuck uses the word {hobby} that DR. Hsiung has posted that he thinks that [...Sam explained it well...].
My friends, a hobby generally means that it is a pursuit outside of one's regular occupation, in their spare-time, and generally means that one does not make a living from doing it.
The taxing laws of many countries make a distinction as to if what one is declaring income from is a hobby or not.
ZZDuck's use of {hobby} as to this forum can be determined as feasible or not as to how one {belives} the forum is operated. One could ask themselves in making their own determination as to if the forum is a hobby or not:
A. Does Dr.Hsiung derive his major income from the forum?
B. Is the forum operated in the spare-time of Dr. Hsiung?
C.Is the forum outside of his regular occupation as a university psychiatrist?
These questions can be be answered by Dr. Hsiung. But not withstanding a clear understanding as to the clarification of the questions, could not it be reasonable for one here that they could think that the forum is a hobby? If not, why not?
Lou
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:777282
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20070817/msgs/781330.html