dimreepr

The most commonly used word in this thread is the word fair/is it fair? From the example above; which type is most likely to cry "unfair", before stamping their feet and slamming the door, in a dramatic exit? Do you know what your bias is?

That's tap-dancing around a strawman; my point is, the people who really give a shit are: Those who just want to compete, in order to find their limits. Those who just want to win at any cost. You'll note the lack of a gender...

It's an oversized fence strainer.

I'm back to, who cares?

Life is simple, here I am... 😉

Agreed, but the USA didn't patent that model... So, the best and worst of Amerca, is freedom? That seems unlikely...

Thanks for telling me what I meant; sport/games are inheritantly unfair, there can be only one; F1 for instance, is it fair that the winner's are the one's who find a way round the regs or that Diego Maradona won a game of 'football' by handballing a goal? We might all play the game to win, but cheating is no way to play the game, the point of playing is to test yourself; no one else cares... 😉 It would take a supercharged ego, to chop off a dick in order to win...

That doesn't make you, or me, his peer; and therefore unsuitable to judge... 😉 FYI, that's sarcasm, here's the thread I started, and some follow up arguments here.

The bias he brings to the table...

Because it's just a game...

The aim of the game is to play, what you learn from the game; is the point...

What is the point of a game?

You may as well argue, it's not fair because I lost...

About what?

I think iNow has a point, it's like the drugs in sport argument; who cares? Only the people who have a vested interest; most footballers don't give a shit who they play with... 😉

Who makes the law's?

What's traject is, what you said; our best chance is a coordinated global response. What's funny is, xenophobia is a self imposed siege.

That's just as wrong as the OP, and please explain the best and worst aspects of the USA?

It's a matter of number's; keep the disgruntled small enough to deal with and stop the differently disgruntled from converging and uniting; the more money at risk, the greater the force used to achieve that goal.

Who are you to judge? You're clearly very biased against Dawkins, but why are you questioning his credentials, rather than arguing his many mistakes? You should open a post about him and critique his conclusion's... 😉 What makes you think the privileged don't suffer?

When did we need to eat a second attempt?

You may as well ask, why am I rubbing these sticks together?

You still can't est it...

Indeed, much like, they don't taste the same I've never felt the need to eat gold

Best thing to do is, jump of the scales; never do anything deliberately hurtful, and on that basis never care about the judgement of other's. But if I'm hungry I'm deliberately going fishing.😉