My wife left me!

[PlatyPius 5]

I've got an old sock somewhere....*rummages around in the laundry hamper, picks out grey sock, dusts it off* ...yep, today's prize is this wonderful, erm, old sock.

Enjoy your prize, Mox!

Ooooh, old sock! This'll go well with...well...er...thanks!

Hey! That was MY old grey sock! Great, now I have a half-pair, just like all of my others......

[Jenn! 918]

A --> B --> C

What happens if there is no A?

[Ban Hammer 13,334]

I've got an old sock somewhere....*rummages around in the laundry hamper, picks out grey sock, dusts it off* ...yep, today's prize is this wonderful, erm, old sock.

Enjoy your prize, Mox!

Ooooh, old sock! This'll go well with...well...er...thanks!

Hey! That was MY old grey sock! Great, now I have a half-pair, just like all of my others......

you mean mags hasn't discovered bleach yet?

[Jason-Sasha 1]

Dang! It looks like there's a whole lot of fun going on in here now. And, as always, I have been missing out. I was just thinking earlier today about Jeff's hats, and wondering when the St. Pat's Day hats will appear. I think everyone here is doing a great job ignoring the original topic, and in our usual fashion, changing the subject to something a little more light hearted.

[Kazan' Tiger 1]

That's easy! B sucks the life out of A with excessive spousal and child support while C has to stay with B except for every other weekend and one day during each week.

A --> B --> C

What happens if there is no A?

I suspect they'll be appearing rather soon my friend!

Dang! It looks like there's a whole lot of fun going on in here now. And, as always, I have been missing out. I was just thinking earlier today about Jeff's hats, and wondering when the St. Pat's Day hats will appear. I think everyone here is doing a great job ignoring the original topic, and in our usual fashion, changing the subject to something a little more light hearted.

[Krikit 1,164]

While it might be in bad taste, you get the point...

How utterly offensive. How fitting that it was posted in an equally offensive thread.

As to AK's debate on foreseeability here is my take:

In law we punish someone civilly (tort) or criminally based on a concept of actual and proximate causation. Thus the actor must (1) be the "but for" (actual) because of an action and (2) be the legal proximate cause (foreseeable) cause. So everyone easily meets the first part "but for" causation in terms of B being offended that A stole his car. Being offended might also be foreseeable, but having B take his anger out on random group of people is not foreseeable.

When something is foreseeable we call it an intervening cause and when something is not we call it superseding. So one classical example is A is at fault in a car accident hurting B. B goes to the hospital and his doctor commits malpractice causing him to die. But for the doctor's actions B would have lived. Should we hold A the original tortfeaser liable? Surprisingly the answer is yes. An example of superseding causes in the same situation is A driving a gas tanker negligently drives it overturns the truck. Gasoline spills onto the sidewalk and runs 15 blocks down the street. B a random criminal lights a match and damages C's property 15 blocks away. Should we hold A liable? Answer no.

For what it's worth, I was not attempting to make a legal argument. I was making a logical argument - logic does not necessarily have anything to do with the law.

In summary, the point I was pressing is that it is irrational and illogical to claim that person A is somehow responsible for the feelings of person B, given that person A has no control over said feelings (and generally, person B doesn't either). This being the case, you (Satellite) are hardly responsible for making anyone reading this thread feel bad - especially since they are more than able to stop reading at any time. To come back to the thread and repeatedly claim "you offend me, you offend me" is really, nonsense. More succinctly, the statement, "you made me feel bad" is a misnomer. I argue that I didn't make you feel anything. Your feelings are your response to your environment, and it is only your environment that I may or may not have affected.

Cheers!

AKDiver

[mox 298]

How utterly offensive. How fitting that it was posted in an equally offensive thread.

Excuse me, I don't know how you run things over on the Canadian forum, but here in the Russian forum you are expected to stay on topic. Your post has absolutely nothing to do with spousal abandonment, Satellite bashing, lawyer bashing, Russian bashing, akdiver bashing, cannibals, the law as pertains to hurt feelings and auto theft, philosophy as pertains to hurt feelings and auto theft, funny hats, fishnet body stockings, pelmeni, vodka, or dirty socks. So unless you care to stay on topic I'll have to call in a moderator. And don't think we don't have one. We do. I saw her once.

Edited February 26, 2008 by mox

[sj5 4]

She didn't go anywhere. She is just having fun with my account. Suckers! For believing such a thing.

[Kazan' Tiger 1]

I think that pretty much covers it all! :lol:

How utterly offensive. How fitting that it was posted in an equally offensive thread.

Excuse me, I don't know how you run things over on the Canadian forum, but here in the Russian forum you are expected to stay on topic. Your post has absolutely nothing to do with spousal abandonment, Satellite bashing, lawyer bashing, Russian bashing, akdiver bashing, cannibals, the law as pertains to hurt feelings and auto theft, philosophy as pertains to hurt feelings and auto theft, funny hats, fishnet body stockings, pelmeni, vodka, or dirty socks. So unless you care to stay on topic I'll have to call in a moderator. And don't think we don't have one. We do. I saw her once.

[Krikit 1,164]

How utterly offensive. How fitting that it was posted in an equally offensive thread.

Excuse me, I don't know how you run things over on the Canadian forum, but here in the Russian forum you are expected to stay on topic. Your post has absolutely nothing to do with spousal abandonment, Satellite bashing, lawyer bashing, Russian bashing, akdiver bashing, cannibals, the law as pertains to hurt feelings and auto theft, philosophy as pertains to hurt feelings and auto theft, funny hats, fishnet body stockings, pelmeni, vodka, or dirty socks. So unless you care to stay on topic I'll have to call in a moderator. And don't think we don't have one. We do. I saw her once.

Oh.... sorry. I had thought it was on topic. Well.... at least in my head it was. Let's see... it covered how I felt about Satellite en famille, as well as AKdiver's drivel. Oh, and.... qu'elle surprise!.... I had completely forgotten that AKdiver was the only VJ member who was on my ignore list! Can you imagine when... to my delight and surprise.... he suddenly re-surfaced after an extended absence to defend the undefendable? Well, it just doesn't get any better than that, does it?

[Mags 112]

So unless you care to stay on topic I'll have to call in a moderator. And don't think we don't have one. We do. I saw her once.

*waves*

Twice, now.

[slim 1,525]

So I just spent the last 21 minutes watching a video (Thanks, mox!) in hopes that I would see some non-arrogant Russians and someone displaying something other than indifference.

Although I did see some folks displaying what appeared to be compassion for these "street children" they were all gainfully employed by an organization, ngo, or the like and therefore, even though they appeared to care for these kids, it was their job to appear to do so. Sure, they probably cared more than the rest of the people walking by these smoking svolochi, but in truth, they were only doing their job. Most of the bystanders and passers by appeared genuinely disinterested in the kids.

And if you really want to see arrogance on display, the children themselves displayed it quite nicely.

What sealed the deal for me though was around the middle of the 16th minute when Alexei Bukharov, director of IPEC, said "the biggest frustration is the indifference of state officials."

Nice try mox.

And Blues Fairy, I'm not trying to shame you or anything like that. I'm sure you're compassionate and caring etc. But, can you say with honesty that you're better looking than most of the women you've met thus far in the U.S.? And doesn't that make you somewhat arrogant? If it's true.... it's not arrogance, it's simply the truth. But, the lack of humility directly after it and in dealing with others is what keeps the arrogance.

jsouthwick, welcome back. Stick around. The VJ Russia Forum is a pretty fun place to hang out. And for the record, M-60 hands-down! We can get a little more into that later, but that's my vote. I love that gun. If I'm going to use a machine gun, I want to use a machine gun, not a belt fed M-16. I like my bullets to go through stuff, not bounce off. I'll respect the SAW, but if there's a choice....

AKDiver, welcome back. Glad to see you as always.

And finally, to everyone else "visiting" the Russia Forum, welcome aboard. Please tell us all about what it's like in your forum over here in ours because we were having trouble finding yours. Thanks for making it easier for us to see your awesome posts.

[kud 0]

(4) Call me traditional but I cannot understand how someone can form "deep" attachments to a "virtual" community of people. For those that have, I feel sorry for you.

I was going to stay put of this fray, but with the above statement you lost my support too. We all are going through some shared tough experiences. And at times there is a little doubt (i.e. am I loved or just a green Card). Coming here helps with both the legal and some of emotional problems. And if you can't see the emotional problems people go through then I hope you are going to be a business lawyer and not involved with the general public.

[mox 298]

Although I did see some folks displaying what appeared to be compassion for these "street children" they were all gainfully employed by an organization, ngo

Wow, didn't realize you were that jaded slim. People who are "gainfully employed" in these positions often seek employment in such organizations because it's their passion. Teachers don't teach for the money, but they do need a roof over their heads. The clergy (evangelists and other crooks excepted) don't put on the vestments to get rich, but they too need shelter and food. Just hazarding a guess here, but I think a social worker in Moscow/St. Pete is probably doing it because they want to help. I'll take another guess and say the pay is probably bottom of the barrel. They take a paycheck because in order to keep helping they sorta need somewhere to live and the occasional meal.

And if you really want to see arrogance on display, the children themselves displayed it quite nicely.

Huh. You are jaded. Don't know what to say to that.

What sealed the deal for me though was around the middle of the 16th minute when Alexei Bukharov, director of IPEC, said "the biggest frustration is the indifference of state officials."

Politicians who don't give a ####### about the homeless? I'm shocked. It must be a Russian thing.

Nice try mox.

You can lead a horse to water...

Edited February 26, 2008 by mox

[Blues Fairy 0]

And Blues Fairy, I'm not trying to shame you or anything like that. I'm sure you're compassionate and caring etc. But, can you say with honesty that you're better looking than most of the women you've met thus far in the U.S.? And doesn't that make you somewhat arrogant? If it's true.... it's not arrogance, it's simply the truth. But, the lack of humility directly after it and in dealing with others is what keeps the arrogance.

I honestly don't understand what you're trying to say. Good looks = arrogance, by definition?

Please clarify your point.