The 32-year-old's unselfishness took ...

The 32-year-old's unselfishness took some neighbors by surprise.

There are 157 comments on the 104.7 WTUE story from Jan 8, 2014, titled The 32-year-old's unselfishness took some neighbors by surprise.. In it, 104.7 WTUE reports that:

A Michigan man with a snowblower is being hailed as a hero by his neighbors after he cleared their driveways and walkways in subzero temperatures, unprompted and for free.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at 104.7 WTUE.

FTW Yall

“"Trust no one"”

Level 1

Since: Jul 13

Drive it, like you stole it

#44 Jan 9, 2014
Spotted Girl wrote:
<quoted text>
Nobody is confused, and it is always immoral to refer to someone with ANY negative label. I have a precise reason for everything I say and do. It does seem that assertive and independent people bother you.
On a public forum, nobody is supposed to "stand behind" anything. Besides, standing behind something or expecting that in others is what the most violent, most raping gender does. In a public forum, you are only supposed to state what you believe or feel at that given moment. It is wrong to lock anyone into that or expect them to be the same person in a different context or a different moment. I might make a permanent lifetime change in an opinion or idea in the next 5 minutes, and I expect everyone to give me that room. People can grow and change in miraculous ways, but only when others stay out of their way. Sores heal well, when left alone.
So bringing up what is said in one forum IN THE PAST to another is just another way to try to control someone. You should ONLY relate to whatever person you are with at that moment, never someone else from the past. Everyone changes with the moment, and thus it is impossible to know them since the target is always changing, and it is impossible to know whether another person wants or needs help. So if you say you know someone, it means you know an unsavory caricature of them, not them.
Since you cannot know someone, what you might see as a need might be something they deliberately set up for a specific private reason. The person struggling with boxes might actually get a self-esteem boost from carrying them. That would be comparable to catching someone with a drug needle in their arm, snatching it out, breaking the needle, throwing out their drugs, and forcing them into rehab. Yes, that would be helping them too, but it would be you telling them how they need helped and taking away their personal autonomy.
I gave the example of how people pick up papers. Most don't do it the correct way. They tend to shuffle them, not stack them, all turned the same way, and they have no way of knowing the other person's private organization system, nor did you see them as they fell. So only the person who dropped them (assuming they are also their owner) knows the way in which they fell. Knowing all that, you can easily reconstruct how they were. So leaving the one who dropped their papers alone to let them do it actually saves them more time. In the bike example, the woman made things harder since she was lifting at the lightest part and pushing all the weight back onto me. I said twice to let go, and she refused. I had it down to a formula, and there was nothing she could add that would improve things nor be appreciated.
This story doesn't violate my codes because it was him vs. the snow. Nobody else was already doing this. It was a passive and indirect way of helping others. It wasn't forced. Nobody came out and told him to stop, and I assume he would have if they would have, but we don't know. But stopping would not undo the act. There is no way to put virgin snow back in precisely the same way. It will look tampered with no matter what. I've never heard of anyone upset over their driveway being cleaned. It is the yard that some would have a problem with. Making a snowman leaves tracks, and some just want a yard of pristine snow. The only other concern most have with driveways is unwanted objects, whether it be nails, animal waste, trash, or someone else's car. Garbage isn't as bad since something will likely eat it, or it will rot/compost.
Anyway, take care.
Sorry, but your rational seems more and more as a mechanism for you to never have any responsibility or accountability for anything that happens. I find it interesting, but extremely illogical and totally impractical.

FTW Yall

“"Trust no one"”

Level 1

Since: Jul 13

Drive it, like you stole it

#45 Jan 9, 2014
Lylah wrote:
Lol. Sublime I said American. Geees. ;). Tehehe
Ok...whether post here are someones true beliefs or a make believe pile of bulsht is not the point. When one comes here and makes post that portray themself a certain crazy way, it is fair game to be challenged. This is a forum for conversations. Bottom line if you don't want someone questioning your logic do not post totally illogical ideas. Just sayin' folks.
FCK YEAH!!!!

Spotted Girl

“The Spotted Girl News Network”

Level 8

Since: Apr 09

Spotted World

#46 Jan 9, 2014
FTW Yall wrote:
<quoted text> Her thinking and ideas seem very convoluted and contradictory, but she's not an idiot.
No contradictions, just nuances that change with every context and situation. I am governed by unchanging codes, and when you think there is an exception or contradiction, it is a stronger code with a higher priority. You seem to miss shades of meanings in my words and often try to say things back stronger than I say them. When quoting me, you have to use EVERY SAME WORD I use, since changing even one destroys the entire meaning. If I use weak wording, it is always deliberate, and should be said back with the same level of certainty. "Might" and "will" mean different things.

Calling someone's words contradictory or convoluted is disrespectful and attacking them. It is possible to critique without labeling. But still, all you have to do is take EVERY post I leave as separate to itself, and never try to understand within any "greater framework." Feel whatever you want, assimilate what you want, then forget the original text and move on. Then when you encounter them again, you give them a clean slate in your mind and read that post - again in a vacuum from all others.

In this case, he was not helping them. He was fighting the snow and helping the anonymous, impersonal "public," not individuals. Like when I give, it is usually to charities. It is to the "poor," not John Smith the smelly drunk.(And to justify my use of a label here is the fact I am not referring to any real person.) He was simply struggling alone against the cold, hard world (and a bit literally in this case).

I left my first post as a one-way comment and expected it to be left as such. You replying to that post was disruptive, off-topic, and unnecessary. You could have simply said you felt the same way or something else that had nothing to do with me, and which was on topic (since you did it first, it automatically excuses others who do it in response - first wrong acts are always wrong, but punishment never is). I consider it wrong to do things which are not necessary, unless you are deliberately setting aside time for recreation.(It is not necessary to drink alcohol, watch TV, play online games, etc., but they are done for recreation - another separate container). You could have still gotten even recreation value without posting to me or questioning me. I said nothing IN THIS THREAD to justify what you said.(Sure, get to know my ideas, and in a way that is separate from me, but never me.)

FTW Yall

“"Trust no one"”

Level 1

Since: Jul 13

Drive it, like you stole it

#47 Jan 9, 2014
Spotted Girl wrote:
<quoted text>
No contradictions, just nuances that change with every context and situation. I am governed by unchanging codes, and when you think there is an exception or contradiction, it is a stronger code with a higher priority. You seem to miss shades of meanings in my words and often try to say things back stronger than I say them. When quoting me, you have to use EVERY SAME WORD I use, since changing even one destroys the entire meaning. If I use weak wording, it is always deliberate, and should be said back with the same level of certainty. "Might" and "will" mean different things.
Calling someone's words contradictory or convoluted is disrespectful and attacking them. It is possible to critique without labeling. But still, all you have to do is take EVERY post I leave as separate to itself, and never try to understand within any "greater framework." Feel whatever you want, assimilate what you want, then forget the original text and move on. Then when you encounter them again, you give them a clean slate in your mind and read that post - again in a vacuum from all others.
In this case, he was not helping them. He was fighting the snow and helping the anonymous, impersonal "public," not individuals. Like when I give, it is usually to charities. It is to the "poor," not John Smith the smelly drunk.(And to justify my use of a label here is the fact I am not referring to any real person.) He was simply struggling alone against the cold, hard world (and a bit literally in this case).
I left my first post as a one-way comment and expected it to be left as such. You replying to that post was disruptive, off-topic, and unnecessary. You could have simply said you felt the same way or something else that had nothing to do with me, and which was on topic (since you did it first, it automatically excuses others who do it in response - first wrong acts are always wrong, but punishment never is). I consider it wrong to do things which are not necessary, unless you are deliberately setting aside time for recreation.(It is not necessary to drink alcohol, watch TV, play online games, etc., but they are done for recreation - another separate container). You could have still gotten even recreation value without posting to me or questioning me. I said nothing IN THIS THREAD to justify what you said.(Sure, get to know my ideas, and in a way that is separate from me, but never me.)
This is exactly my point about what I said.

Spotted Girl

“The Spotted Girl News Network”

Level 8

Since: Apr 09

Spotted World

#48 Jan 9, 2014
FTW Yall wrote:
<quoted text>Sorry, but your rational seems more and more as a mechanism for you to never have any responsibility or accountability for anything that happens. I find it interesting, but extremely illogical and totally impractical.
Not at all. What I said was specific to public forums and not related to libelous nor criminal acts, not matters where responsibility are supposed to matter (like work, paying bills, or taking care of your kids). On a message board, are are supposed to post only in that moment and share what they feel at that time. Then everyone is supposed to read it and move on, and never hold them to it. That is not the same as making a promise. The sick need to care whether others are responsible or not in ways that don't impact others is a man's trait I am proud not to have. If you want to post to me or be my friend, it must be in a traditionally feminine manner and passive. I am only responsible to God, the government, and any employers, never a mere equal or friend (it is impossible to act as both an authority and a friend at the same time).

Actually, it is very logical and practical. It is the only correct way of interacting on message boards. Just take each post as the first you've read from that person.

Whether another person is responsible or not is ONLY that person's concern, unless it directly impacts others. If I loaned you money, then I will hold you responsible to pay it back, and may take you to small claims if you don't. But all message boards are supposed to be consequence free, and free of anal-retentive types who try to impose "responsibility" to a mostly rules-free environment (assuming they are not committing criminal acts, bullying, or posting libel). But in all other things, you should post how you feel at that moment and others are obligated to respect you enough to act as if you never said it in the future. It just means that you have to overcome your addiction to controlling others or "getting to know them."

I hate being forced to debate, and I am sick of explaining what should be the obvious. The ONLY purpose of a message board is to express yourself, never to keep track of others of for EQUALS to hold anyone to anything. The only ones we are responsible to here is Topix staff. If you have a problem with me, then never disrespect me by correcting me (since you are a mere equal and nothing more), but file a report to Topix. They are the only authorities here, not you, me, nor anyone else.

Spotted Girl

“The Spotted Girl News Network”

Level 8

Since: Apr 09

Spotted World

#49 Jan 9, 2014
FTW Yall wrote:
<quoted text> This is exactly my point about what I said.
No, because nuances and context is not the same as contradiction. Notice how I discussed the topic without discussing people nor throwing out labels. You can learn to do the same.

And also, it is not the same point since I mentioned disrespect, and you probably didn't intend to do that. You probably don't realize that what is respect is highly individual and specific to each person. I don't see you as evil or anything. I think you might have discomfort around people who cannot be controlled, but I really don't know, and you'd likely deny it if you did, since control issues are so deeply ingrained. That seems to be human nature, and we are all in this together.(But together as autonomous individuals.)

Oh, a self-help story. A self-help expert went to a seminar hosted by another expert. He asked for volunteers, and the expert in attendance volunteered. The speaker asked him what was one problem that bothered him. He said he had an a**hole in his life. The speaker asked how much of an a**hole, and he said if you look up the word a**hole in a dictionary, the guy's picture would be found there. Then the speaker asked him if it would bother him to see a dog on a leash. He said no, that it was stupid to suggest such. He asked him why. He said that was what dogs were supposed to do. You walk dogs on leashes. Then the speaker asked him, "Why do you expect this guy to not behave like an a**hole. You just said that was his nature, that this is what he was. So if he is an a**hole, wouldn't you expect him to act like one? It would be irrational to expect an a**hole to not act like an a**hole."

“Will cause trouble when bored”

Level 6

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#50 Jan 9, 2014
Blah blah blah. Sg.

We are not bound by the same foolish thoughts and rules that u try to force on ppl that reply to u. Isn't that just u trying to control everyone on topix.
I have free will and I will freely state my opinions on this forum to whomever I please. And I will not be controlled by ur silly rules of what the proper way to address u.
And to answer your question no I am not bother by ur non existent aggressiveness or independence. This is Topix...online strangers can't bother me. ;)

“Will cause trouble when bored”

Level 6

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#51 Jan 9, 2014
Bothered*
Christianist Taliban

Philadelphia, PA

#52 Jan 9, 2014
Sublime1 wrote:
<quoted text>
A) I said "fake Internet personas", not anonymous profiles.
It's all equally fake. You don't make any sense. Goodnight.

Spotted Girl

“The Spotted Girl News Network”

Level 8

Since: Apr 09

Spotted World

#53 Jan 9, 2014
Lylah wrote:
Lol. Sublime I said American. Geees. ;). Tehehe
Ok...whether post here are someones true beliefs or a make believe pile of bulsht is not the point. When one comes here and makes post that portray themself a certain crazy way, it is fair game to be challenged. This is a forum for conversations. Bottom line if you don't want someone questioning your logic do not post totally illogical ideas. Just sayin' folks.
Not is not game to be challenged. This is a place for self-expression, and EVERY person's ideas and beliefs are correct FOR THEM (and only them). To attack such is to attack them. Everyone has a right to express their own opinion, beliefs, and self, and without ridicule nor question. Nobody has the right to question the validity of someone's right to have whatever beliefs. Everyone has a right to think, believe, and say (within reasons) what they want, even if it is wrong. It is nobody's place here to correct anyone. That is between the person, their creator, and the government, or parents if they are under their roof as a minor.

It is not your place to decide what is logical for other people. Even if you think something is illogical, you are obligated to keep it to yourself as all polite and properly raised people do. You must exercise your self-control. What someone says in another thread is not your business in this one. I simply had the right to post my initial opinion what was specific to this thread, and with NOTHING I said elsewhere brought in. If you want to discuss the help thing, then you are obligated to return where it was first discussed.

I consider myself better than others because ALL comments I make to someone's post ONLY comes from that thread. If they didn't say it there, then I have no right to take what they said elsewhere and twist into their current words. I am also capable of discussing ONLY the stated topic in each place. Everything has its own purpose and container. You are supposed to go to school only to learn, not to socialize, date, have sex, use drugs, etc.

Plus I think your friend has the ability to speak for himself, unless the sock puppetry allegation has any validity.
Christianist Taliban

Philadelphia, PA

#54 Jan 9, 2014
Spotted Girl wrote:
<quoted text>
It is always immoral to refer to someone with ANY negative label. I have a precise reason for everything I say and do....So bringing up what is said in one forum IN THE PAST to another is just another way to try to control someone. You should ONLY relate to whatever person you are with at that moment....That would be comparable to catching someone with a drug needle in their arm, snatching it out, breaking the needle, throwing out their drugs, and forcing them into rehab....Anyway, take care.
Oh boy, must be a full moon.

And that disjointed, black and white thinking screed is not id otic, right?
Christianist Taliban

Philadelphia, PA

#55 Jan 9, 2014
FTW Yall wrote:
<quoted text> This is exactly my point about what I said.
You have really opened Pandora's Bollocks now.

That's a very witty reply, however.

FTW Yall

“"Trust no one"”

Level 1

Since: Jul 13

Drive it, like you stole it

#56 Jan 9, 2014
Spotted Girl wrote:
<quoted text>
No, because nuances and context is not the same as contradiction. Notice how I discussed the topic without discussing people nor throwing out labels. You can learn to do the same.
And also, it is not the same point since I mentioned disrespect, and you probably didn't intend to do that. You probably don't realize that what is respect is highly individual and specific to each person. I don't see you as evil or anything. I think you might have discomfort around people who cannot be controlled, but I really don't know, and you'd likely deny it if you did, since control issues are so deeply ingrained. That seems to be human nature, and we are all in this together.(But together as autonomous individuals.)
Oh, a self-help story. A self-help expert went to a seminar hosted by another expert. He asked for volunteers, and the expert in attendance volunteered. The speaker asked him what was one problem that bothered him. He said he had an a**hole in his life. The speaker asked how much of an a**hole, and he said if you look up the word a**hole in a dictionary, the guy's picture would be found there. Then the speaker asked him if it would bother him to see a dog on a leash. He said no, that it was stupid to suggest such. He asked him why. He said that was what dogs were supposed to do. You walk dogs on leashes. Then the speaker asked him, "Why do you expect this guy to not behave like an a**hole. You just said that was his nature, that this is what he was. So if he is an a**hole, wouldn't you expect him to act like one? It would be irrational to expect an a**hole to not act like an a**hole."
Like you said regardless of truth I'm going to deny it. In my practical opinion I'm bothered and distrustful most of those who truly try and control others and all situations. Not that I have distaste for you, but you sometimes come off as trying to control others speech, thoughts on things, and situations and use the excuse or label of asserting your independence and ability. You assert your independence of thought and speech by suppressing and negating others.

Spotted Girl

“The Spotted Girl News Network”

Level 8

Since: Apr 09

Spotted World

#57 Jan 9, 2014
Lylah wrote:
Blah blah blah. Sg.
We are not bound by the same foolish thoughts and rules that u try to force on ppl that reply to u. Isn't that just u trying to control everyone on topix.
I have free will and I will freely state my opinions on this forum to whomever I please. And I will not be controlled by ur silly rules of what the proper way to address u.
And to answer your question no I am not bother by ur non existent aggressiveness or independence. This is Topix...online strangers can't bother me. ;)
If you don't want to hear from me, then don't post from me. Do you notice that rectangular thing on the right? In case you are not aware, you can drag it past posts you don't want to read.

I am not controlling anyone. EACH person has the right to decide who posts to them, and EVERY person is duty bound to respect that right of others. By posting to people who asked you not to post to them or even hate your guts, you are attempting to control them. The right to decide who speaks to someone is that person alone. I am not controlling your ideas as you can say the same things without addressing it to anyone or quoting anyone.

EVERY person has the right to be themselves in public so long as being themselves doesn't impact the rights of others. Saying I like green doesn't impact you, but saying you are something disgusting would impact you. Trying to change someone's opinion or convince them is trying to control them. Everyone has the right to control who speaks to them and control what things they are exposed to, but in ways that don't impact others. So posting to someone you disagree with is trying to change or control them (as a parent might), but scrolling past it and respecting their right to post something you disagree with is not.

I have no silly rules. If you want to post to me, you have to respect my wishes. If you post to someone else, you must respect theirs - no matter what your feelings tell you. If you dislike me, you are duty bound to forever ignore me. Notice I never posted to you nor your friend first here. I respected you that much.

So you can freely express your opinions to all who didn't tell you not to post to them or not to post certain ways to them. You have no inherent right to post to me nor any other specific person, and if you can't with one, there are millions more - you can expect everyone to agree with you. Every person has a right to be different in public, express their real selves in public, and never be bullied into silence and never have to deal with people they dislike. When you dislike someone, the only correct thing to do is leave them alone.

So no silly rules, just the same things that every polite, properly raised person already know how to do. You need to learn to assert yourself like I do and be independent like me. If someone disrespects you, it is your responsibility to ask them not to and to stand up for yourself. I hate that you keep forcing me to defend myself. Just stay out of my way and let me be myself. If I need corrected, the it is the job of Topix, not yours.

I have no aggression, just like every properly raised person. You can learn to be like me and not have any either. You can learn to be independent like me so you won't feel a need to control others. When you post to someone who doesn't want to post to you, you are saying they don't matter, that they are unimportant, and that you own them like a parent or slave owner. If you don't mean that, then don't do the actions that inherently mean that. Your choice.

And take care.

FTW Yall

“"Trust no one"”

Level 1

Since: Jul 13

Drive it, like you stole it

#58 Jan 9, 2014
Spotted Girl wrote:
<quoted text>
If you don't want to hear from me, then don't post from me. Do you notice that rectangular thing on the right? In case you are not aware, you can drag it past posts you don't want to read.
I am not controlling anyone. EACH person has the right to decide who posts to them, and EVERY person is duty bound to respect that right of others. By posting to people who asked you not to post to them or even hate your guts, you are attempting to control them. The right to decide who speaks to someone is that person alone. I am not controlling your ideas as you can say the same things without addressing it to anyone or quoting anyone.
EVERY person has the right to be themselves in public so long as being themselves doesn't impact the rights of others. Saying I like green doesn't impact you, but saying you are something disgusting would impact you. Trying to change someone's opinion or convince them is trying to control them. Everyone has the right to control who speaks to them and control what things they are exposed to, but in ways that don't impact others. So posting to someone you disagree with is trying to change or control them (as a parent might), but scrolling past it and respecting their right to post something you disagree with is not.
I have no silly rules. If you want to post to me, you have to respect my wishes. If you post to someone else, you must respect theirs - no matter what your feelings tell you. If you dislike me, you are duty bound to forever ignore me. Notice I never posted to you nor your friend first here. I respected you that much.
So you can freely express your opinions to all who didn't tell you not to post to them or not to post certain ways to them. You have no inherent right to post to me nor any other specific person, and if you can't with one, there are millions more - you can expect everyone to agree with you. Every person has a right to be different in public, express their real selves in public, and never be bullied into silence and never have to deal with people they dislike. When you dislike someone, the only correct thing to do is leave them alone.
So no silly rules, just the same things that every polite, properly raised person already know how to do. You need to learn to assert yourself like I do and be independent like me. If someone disrespects you, it is your responsibility to ask them not to and to stand up for yourself. I hate that you keep forcing me to defend myself. Just stay out of my way and let me be myself. If I need corrected, the it is the job of Topix, not yours.
I have no aggression, just like every properly raised person. You can learn to be like me and not have any either. You can learn to be independent like me so you won't feel a need to control others. When you post to someone who doesn't want to post to you, you are saying they don't matter, that they are unimportant, and that you own them like a parent or slave owner. If you don't mean that, then don't do the actions that inherently mean that. Your choice.
And take care.
No one is controlling anyone that is the thing. This control is imaginary. Taking offense and to and perceiving any kind of counter- point to a publicly stated opinion is an attack, is a sign of weakness, not a sign of independence.

Spotted Girl

“The Spotted Girl News Network”

Level 8

Since: Apr 09

Spotted World

#59 Jan 9, 2014
Lylah wrote:
Blah blah blah. Sg.
We are not bound by the same foolish thoughts and rules that u try to force on ppl that reply to u. Isn't that just u trying to control everyone on topix.
I have free will and I will freely state my opinions on this forum to whomever I please. And I will not be controlled by ur silly rules of what the proper way to address u.
And to answer your question no I am not bother by ur non existent aggressiveness or independence. This is Topix...online strangers can't bother me. ;)
I force no rules on anyone. I only asked you to treat me as a stranger each time and act as if you never saw my posts before. I respect you enough to always give you the distance you need to change and grow. I've never disrespected you by holding you to anything. I don't reply to most of your posts because you have a right to your own beliefs and for those beliefs not to be challenged, so long as you don't use your beliefs to harm anyone. Someday you ill get it, and without personally attacking others, labeling, trying to force others to change, posting to those who don't want you around, etc.

Everyone is only supposed to interact with their friends, families, and the people who agree with them. For instance Republicans should only interact with other Republicans and stay out of the Democrats' business and never try to change them. Debate them during the campaigns or whatever, not to change them, but to win voters.

Being my friend is easy. Just stay out of my way, do the least possible, and never try to parent or control me. In fact, it is too easy for the most proud. They want to do something because they live in a negative world where everyone in their mind is sick and broken, and their self-worth comes from pretending everyone is sick or broken and forcing cures on them. That is why so many WW date BM - they are addicted to those they perceive as poor, broken, addicted, etc. They have a need to fix others as a way to control them. That disease is called codependency. It was once called co-addiction. The alcoholics had no need to change or grow because they had someone in their life pretending to be their mother taking responsibility for them. A person who pours out their booze, lies to their bosses, lies to their PO, pays their debts, and fixes their messes (just like a mother wiping a baby's bottom after they soil themselves). As long as this enabler is in their lives, the addict never has to change. The well-meaning enabler is crippling them - and it is quite a lot of control to deliberately hold another back. In nature, the mother bird pushes nearly grown birds out of the nest, and no longer protects them from nature anymore.

If people are strangers to you online, then why don't you treat them like strangers? If they are strangers, you don't know them. If you don't know them, then there is no possible way to know what they want or need, so you would always proceed with caution.
Chris P Critter

Meridian, ID

#60 Jan 9, 2014
Spotted Girl wrote:
<quoted text>
Nobody is confused, and it is always immoral to refer to someone with ANY negative label. I have a precise reason for everything I say and do. It does seem that assertive and independent people bother you.
On a public forum, nobody is supposed to "stand behind" anything. Besides, standing behind something or expecting that in others is what the most violent, most raping gender does. In a public forum, you are only supposed to state what you believe or feel at that given moment. It is wrong to lock anyone into that or expect them to be the same person in a different context or a different moment. I might make a permanent lifetime change in an opinion or idea in the next 5 minutes, and I expect everyone to give me that room. People can grow and change in miraculous ways, but only when others stay out of their way. Sores heal well, when left alone.
So bringing up what is said in one forum IN THE PAST to another is just another way to try to control someone. You should ONLY relate to whatever person you are with at that moment, never someone else from the past. Everyone changes with the moment, and thus it is impossible to know them since the target is always changing, and it is impossible to know whether another person wants or needs help. So if you say you know someone, it means you know an unsavory caricature of them, not them.
Since you cannot know someone, what you might see as a need might be something they deliberately set up for a specific private reason. The person struggling with boxes might actually get a self-esteem boost from carrying them. That would be comparable to catching someone with a drug needle in their arm, snatching it out, breaking the needle, throwing out their drugs, and forcing them into rehab. Yes, that would be helping them too, but it would be you telling them how they need helped and taking away their personal autonomy.
I gave the example of how people pick up papers. Most don't do it the correct way. They tend to shuffle them, not stack them, all turned the same way, and they have no way of knowing the other person's private organization system, nor did you see them as they fell. So only the person who dropped them (assuming they are also their owner) knows the way in which they fell. Knowing all that, you can easily reconstruct how they were. So leaving the one who dropped their papers alone to let them do it actually saves them more time. In the bike example, the woman made things harder since she was lifting at the lightest part and pushing all the weight back onto me. I said twice to let go, and she refused. I had it down to a formula, and there was nothing she could add that would improve things nor be appreciated.
This story doesn't violate my codes because it was him vs. the snow. Nobody else was already doing this. It was a passive and indirect way of helping others. It wasn't forced. Nobody came out and told him to stop, and I assume he would have if they would have, but we don't know. But stopping would not undo the act. There is no way to put virgin snow back in precisely the same way. It will look tampered with no matter what. I've never heard of anyone upset over their driveway being cleaned. It is the yard that some would have a problem with. Making a snowman leaves tracks, and some just want a yard of pristine snow. The only other concern most have with driveways is unwanted objects, whether it be nails, animal waste, trash, or someone else's car. Garbage isn't as bad since something will likely eat it, or it will rot/compost.
Anyway, take care.
If I wanted to read a book everytime I came to Topix, I'd get a Kindlel.
With you I never make it past the first paragraph..

“Will cause trouble when bored”

Level 6

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#61 Jan 9, 2014
Again, This is a public forum I have no set obligations or any duty to anyone. I must follow the rules set forth by Topix As long as I don't abuse any of those rules I will and can say what ever the fck I want. If you don't want ppl replying to u why not try to write ur thoughts and ideas in something private like a personal journal. When u post such out of touch ideas u are surely to get responses. This is a website for conversations, not just a place to post ones thoughts.
And fyi ur lil Topix lesson is redundant seeing as how I'm on a phone. Smdh
You can quit replying to me at anytime. Seeing as how u love to have the last word, I will continue to make that impossible by continuing to reply to each of ur post. ;)
Bless ur heart!!
Spotted Boy

Los Angeles, CA

#62 Jan 9, 2014
Spotted Girl wrote:
<quoted text>
If you don't want to hear from me, then don't post from me. Do you notice that rectangular thing on the right? In case you are not aware, you can drag it past posts you don't want to read.
I am not controlling anyone. EACH person has the right to decide who posts to them, and EVERY person is duty bound to respect that right of others. By posting to people who asked you not to post to them or even hate your guts, you are attempting to control them. The right to decide who speaks to someone is that person alone. I am not controlling your ideas as you can say the same things without addressing it to anyone or quoting anyone.
EVERY person has the right to be themselves in public so long as being themselves doesn't impact the rights of others. Saying I like green doesn't impact you, but saying you are something disgusting would impact you. Trying to change someone's opinion or convince them is trying to control them. Everyone has the right to control who speaks to them and control what things they are exposed to, but in ways that don't impact others. So posting to someone you disagree with is trying to change or control them (as a parent might), but scrolling past it and respecting their right to post something you disagree with is not.
I have no silly rules. If you want to post to me, you have to respect my wishes. If you post to someone else, you must respect theirs - no matter what your feelings tell you. If you dislike me, you are duty bound to forever ignore me. Notice I never posted to you nor your friend first here. I respected you that much.
So you can freely express your opinions to all who didn't tell you not to post to them or not to post certain ways to them. You have no inherent right to post to me nor any other specific person, and if you can't with one, there are millions more - you can expect everyone to agree with you. Every person has a right to be different in public, express their real selves in public, and never be bullied into silence and never have to deal with people they dislike. When you dislike someone, the only correct thing to do is leave them alone.
So no silly rules, just the same things that every polite, properly raised person already know how to do. You need to learn to assert yourself like I do and be independent like me. If someone disrespects you, it is your responsibility to ask them not to and to stand up for yourself. I hate that you keep forcing me to defend myself. Just stay out of my way and let me be myself. If I need corrected, the it is the job of Topix, not yours.
I have no aggression, just like every properly raised person. You can learn to be like me and not have any either. You can learn to be independent like me so you won't feel a need to control others. When you post to someone who doesn't want to post to you, you are saying they don't matter, that they are unimportant, and that you own them like a parent or slave owner. If you don't mean that, then don't do the actions that inherently mean that. Your choice.
And take care.
I think I love you.

Spotted Girl

“The Spotted Girl News Network”

Level 8

Since: Apr 09

Spotted World

#63 Jan 9, 2014
FTW Yall wrote:
<quoted text>No one is controlling anyone that is the thing. This control is imaginary. Taking offense and to and perceiving any kind of counter- point to a publicly stated opinion is an attack, is a sign of weakness, not a sign of independence.
Yes she is controlling. When you force your views on another, you are controlling them. When you post to someone who politely asked you not to do so, you are controlling them and calling them nothing. If you don't mean to say that, then don't act in ways that drop such hints.

ALL counter points are attacks. It is not about weakness. It is immoral to label anyone and their behavior. So make absolutely sure you use NO LABELS against me. I've never done that to you except AFTER you did wrong and did it first. When you do wrong, you must be punished. Forgiveness should always be given, but after punishment. Punishment is practical since effective punishment makes certain behaviors never happen again.

Labeling is a weakness, since strong people always keep derogatory feelings about others to themselves. So by calling others weak or saying they have a weakness, you are thus displaying your own weakness. It is better to be thought a fool (or weak) than to open your mouth to prove it. But only members of the defective gender care about who is weak. Normal people care about no such thing.

I have never taken offense at anything in my life, only trash does that as a way of controlling others. But I will assert myself and make sure nobody treats me in ways that I logically find disrespectful or immoral. If someone is acting in an immoral way towards you, then you are equally immoral unless you try to stop them.

Standing up for yourself each time someone even starts in the direction of wronging you is ASSERTIVENESS, and how EVERY person is supposed to respond.

You are controlling your friend to by speaking for her, intervening in her disagreements, ignoring her abilities, and treating her property you are protecting. I expect to ALWAYS disagree one on one and with ONLY one person at a time.

Unlike either of you, I've never controlled a single person. I find ALL forms of power over others to be immoral and wrong. I have no power over others, and nobody has a right to even attempt to gain power over me. Power should never be given nor taken. We were all born with the resources we need, but people steal that from us. So we have to work hard to preserve power and take it back when others take it from us.

As for independence, I am fiercely independent. It seems you confuse assertive and independent. Assertiveness is defending your rights from others and speaking up each time someone treats you in an immoral way, tries to get you involved in immorality, or encroaches on your rights. Independence is the ability to function alone and not need others. That is the goal of living, to learn so much and better yourself so much as to never need others. That is why it is important to learn. Stupid people and inferiors need controlled, but if you dislike that, then you are to learn everything you can to never be controlled by others. See, you are supposed to be abused for 17 years with 2 people who make you feel like nothing and "just a child." Then you are supposed to turn 18 and everyone automatically respect you like an adult because the arbitrary switch was thrown, and never try to nurture, baby, control, change you again, unless you are stupid enough to relinquish it to others (either by deciding you want to be a murdering brute for your country, deciding to marry, deciding to commit crimes and get caught, choosing to work for a controlling boss, etc).

Remember, try to always interact with my ideas themselves, never me. That is all I see online, never really people, just ideas.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Weird Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
It's really white... 15 min Rider on the Storm 85
Make A Sentance out of a 5 letter word. (Nov '09) 36 min Pardon Pard 39,547
Last two letters into two new words... (Jun '15) 42 min Pardon Pard 7,520
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 53 min Regolith Based Li... 223,363
Last 3 Letters into 3 new words. (Dec '08) 56 min Pardon Pard 62,678
First Word That Comes To Mind ....... (Apr '10) 1 hr North Mountain 14,004
A six word game (Dec '08) 1 hr Pardon Pard 21,473
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 9 hr wichita-rick 230,064