Validity. Ironworks and reality.

[Yorick]

I read this post today and it got me thinking.

Where did you do this? I don't recall ever seeing your name in the War forum. Are you just trolling?

Do you see a persons posts as the only valid way of expressing support for an opinion?

Do you believe a person on ironworks can support a cause without vocalising that support here?

**** Was suggested I make this a PM so I did ****
[img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 06-09-2003, 02:16 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

[Rokenn]

Why is it a shot? Just becuase a memeber never posted on a subject before does not mean they can not state what their opinion was/is. Now if they posted something in direct contradtion to a past stand, and did not acknowledge that, then you would have been justified in calling them on it.

[Yorick]

Quoted by Magik Only way you could get your 2c and shot in eh? Edit: by the by, no one ever said it had to have been expressed in IW...I asked where, not where on IW. He did say he has been supporting something...you cannot support something by keeping your thoughts and actions to your self.

Well that's why I'm asking the question.

Maybe you CAN support something by keeping your thoughts to yourself. Let's get opinions on that shall we?

Even given that vocalisation is necessary, who's to say posting on the INTERNET is the only way someone can vocalise support? I know many people that strongly support issues, that never go online. Others keep online and issue support as two seperate things.

Anyone else?

I do not agree this belongs in PMs BTW. I'm asking for anyones opinions as I'm interested in how people perceive things.

[ 06-09-2003, 02:22 PM: Message edited by: Yorick ]

[Timber Loftis]

Some thought or action is required for "support" of an issue, otherwise it's just "think." Of course, someone out there suing power plants to clean up is "supporting" the environment or someone protesting war is "supporting" an idea, regardless of whether or not they have the common decency to come visit IWF, though arguably everyone the globe over should make daily posts on IWF to inform us all of their actions and intentions.

I'd say someone who did not post in the War Forum was simply smarter and wiser than many of us.

[Rokenn]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: I'd say someone who did not post in the War Forum was simply smarter and wiser than many of us. [/QB]

here! here! [img]graemlins/laugh2.gif[/img]

[Djinn Raffo]

I believe that a person's 'thinking' support for something is a totally valid way of expressing support. How else do you explain prayer, hope, or positive well wishing towards something/someone? (unless you don't believe in any of those). Thinking support is prayer. Even if you never give your thoughts a voice.. it is still a very real thing.

[Yorick]

Could inaction be described as support? Going along with the status quo? Not raising dissent about a course of action?

If there is only 'for' or 'against', and no fence to sit on, then one can indeed support by doing nothing.

A populous supports a dictator by simply going about their business.

Isn't a person simply present at a rape a party to the crime? Deemed supporting it through inaction?

[Djinn Raffo]

Originally posted by Yorick: Could inaction be described as support? Going along with the status quo? Not raising dissent about a course of action? If there is only 'for' or 'against', and no fence to sit on, then one can indeed support by doing nothing. A populous supports a dictator by simply going about their business. Isn't a person simply present at a rape a party to the crime? Deemed supporting it through inaction?

yes.

[Timber Loftis]

Complicity may be, but is not always, "support."

In order to avoid any confusion that I am an avowed fence-sitter, I strive to be neutral by supporting one side, then the other, and back and forth and such.