The entirety of the first season of "Sledge Hammer" was packaged as a DVD release, thanks to the author asking everyone who had a home taped copy to send it to them, so that he could rescue and remaster it.
I see you have shied away from any semblance of rational argument and drifted into the familiar and comforting snappy comebacks of "you're a big baby". Well, that certainly ends this debate.
OOOH, I see. Now it turns out *I* don't understand courtesy. You've made your mind that I text during a movie, while I merely argue about using whatever method actually decreases the amount of "douche-bags" that text and interrupt movies, instead of thinking, like you, that there must be some sort of Inquisition that rains retribution over those that dare make you feel bad.
(see, I can also make snap judgments about specific people)
That first sentence is ridiculous. "The fact that people are taking actions to teach people proper etiquette is the biggest indication that people don't have proper etiquette!"
"A trophy that doesn't mean anything and does nothing to actually reward you"
Basically, you're starting from the assumption that "that method does not work, because it does not work, and therefore should not be used." A trophy that does not reward you? I thought we were talking about discounts. Forgive me if I misread the article stating that there are discounts which according to you does not give discounts at all!
You're fighting a method which may or may not be more successful at curbing the behavior that you so despise. Your "justification" is that the other method is better, but offer no evidence, just that it's punishment, and punishment is sometimes better, so that the method should be better (circular logic). Then, you add that texting is more pervasive, more or less proving the point that the negative method isn't working.
You're just using an appeal to emotion: THIS behavior is out of control. "At an all time high! Pervasive!". That changes nothing, and certainly does not define whether positive or negative reinforcement works better or worse at stopping it. Essentially, it's "but... texting! Why do you hate moviegoers so much?"
On the post: Racist Apps In Google's Play Store Test Just How Free You Want Speech To Be
Re: Re: Re: Re: Poor quality writing on techdirt.
On the post: Camming Group Leader Sentenced To 5 Years; Barred From Owning 'Any Device' That Can Infringe Copyrights After Release
Re: Re: Pens. Paper. yada yada
On the post: Razer Updates Synapse Software With Better 'Offline Mode,' Other Problematic 'Features' Remain Unchanged
Re: Re:
Start stocking up on that cheese.
On the post: So, What Didn't Enter The Public Domain This Week, That Should Have
Re: Re: Re: I don't think any "culture" is actually lost, you just have to pay for it.
On the post: No, The Major Labels Didn't Fake 2 Billion YouTube Views
Re: ALSO majorly ASSUMES that we can trust Youtube.
On the post: No, The Major Labels Didn't Fake 2 Billion YouTube Views
Re: ALSO majorly ASSUMES that we can trust Youtube.
Here's one for you too: www.techdirt.com
Happy new year!
On the post: So, What Didn't Enter The Public Domain This Week, That Should Have
Re: Re: Re: Maybe we need some help...
On the post: So, What Didn't Enter The Public Domain This Week, That Should Have
Re: Re: Re: I don't think any "culture" is actually lost, you just have to pay for it.
www.techdirt.com
On the post: Is Peru Going To Get Its Own SOPA?
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re:
On the post: The US's Public Domain Class Of 2013
Re:
On the post: Rather Than Punishing Moviegoing Texters, Why Not Provide Incentives For Them To Put Down Their Phones?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Rather Than Punishing Moviegoing Texters, Why Not Provide Incentives For Them To Put Down Their Phones?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Y U HATE OTHERS". Real good arguing.
On the post: Rather Than Punishing Moviegoing Texters, Why Not Provide Incentives For Them To Put Down Their Phones?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Rather Than Punishing Moviegoing Texters, Why Not Provide Incentives For Them To Put Down Their Phones?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Rather Than Punishing Moviegoing Texters, Why Not Provide Incentives For Them To Put Down Their Phones?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
(see, I can also make snap judgments about specific people)
On the post: Rather Than Punishing Moviegoing Texters, Why Not Provide Incentives For Them To Put Down Their Phones?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Rather Than Punishing Moviegoing Texters, Why Not Provide Incentives For Them To Put Down Their Phones?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"A trophy that doesn't mean anything and does nothing to actually reward you"
Basically, you're starting from the assumption that "that method does not work, because it does not work, and therefore should not be used." A trophy that does not reward you? I thought we were talking about discounts. Forgive me if I misread the article stating that there are discounts which according to you does not give discounts at all!
On the post: Rather Than Punishing Moviegoing Texters, Why Not Provide Incentives For Them To Put Down Their Phones?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
You're just using an appeal to emotion: THIS behavior is out of control. "At an all time high! Pervasive!". That changes nothing, and certainly does not define whether positive or negative reinforcement works better or worse at stopping it. Essentially, it's "but... texting! Why do you hate moviegoers so much?"
On the post: Rather Than Punishing Moviegoing Texters, Why Not Provide Incentives For Them To Put Down Their Phones?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Next >>