SubjectRe: [dq] Rune College: Binding Elements
FromMartin Dickson
DateWed, 13 Apr 2011 08:15:52 +1200
--000e0cd5bee6fd2ea004a0be5bb9
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Bah, prescriptivists!  :)

Poe's Law originally referred to creationist arguments, but has over time
become generally reformulated to include any extremist view, whether
religious or secular; the litmus test is whether it's totally bonkers. :)

Apologies for brevity; this little keyboard is hard to type on.

- Sent by my Android

On 12/04/2011 5:57 PM, "Ian Wood" <dawnhaven@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
>
> I am not sure on that Martin.
>
>
>
> I don't think Jono's statement can be an example of Poe's Law as it is
> neither a parody of a fundamentalist belief nor is it a fundamentalist
> belief.
>
> (The Mirriam Webster online dictionary's second definition of
fundamentalism
> is "a movement or attitude stressing strict and literal adherence to a set
> of basic principles" which I take to mean strict adherence to the existing
> rule book, and Jono's statement does not advocate that.)
>
>
>
> Jim's response may be an example of Poe's Law, although the belief being
> parodied or stated is open to interpretation; although I don't think it
> reasonable to deem Jim to be a fundamentalist.
>
>
>
> Unless of course you are adding a corollary to Poe's Law: that parody is
> difficult to discern from an extreme view, in which case Jono's statement,
> which includes the concept of intimidating or confusing the Bind Elements
> (being my dictionary's synonyms for fazzed), is comical and possibly
> parodical.
>
>
>
> (:-))
>
>
>
> Ian
>
> _____
>
> From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz] On Behalf Of
> Martin Dickson
> Sent: Tuesday, 12 April 2011 5:06 p.m.
> To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> Subject: Re: [dq] Rune College: Binding Elements
>
>
>
> Poe's Law <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law> strikes again. :)
>
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 4:27 PM, Jim Arona <jim.arona@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> <sigh>
>
>
>
> On 11 April 2011 16:24, Jonathan Bean <jonobean@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Given Jims' post;
>
> I no longer think Bind Elements is a useful part of the game.
>
> I would rather see them removed/fazzed out....
>
>
>
> _____
>
> _____
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 10.0.1209 / Virus Database: 1500/3565 - Release Date: 04/11/11
>

--000e0cd5bee6fd2ea004a0be5bb9
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<p>Bah, prescriptivists!=A0 :)</p>
<p>Poe&#39;s Law originally referred to creationist arguments, but has over=
 time become generally reformulated to include any extremist view, whether =
religious or secular; the litmus test is whether it&#39;s totally bonkers. =
:)</p>

<p>Apologies for brevity; this little keyboard is hard to type on.<br></p>
<p>- Sent by my Android </p>
<p>On 12/04/2011 5:57 PM, &quot;Ian Wood&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:dawnha=
ven@xtra.co.nz">dawnhaven@xtra.co.nz</a>&gt; wrote:<br type=3D"attribution"=
>&gt;  <br>&gt; <br>&gt; I am not sure on that Martin.<br>&gt; <br>&gt;  <b=
r>
&gt; <br>&gt; I don&#39;t think Jono&#39;s statement can be an example of P=
oe&#39;s Law as it is<br>&gt; neither a parody of a fundamentalist belief n=
or is it a fundamentalist<br>&gt; belief.<br>&gt; <br>&gt; (The Mirriam Web=
ster online dictionary&#39;s second definition of fundamentalism<br>
&gt; is &quot;a movement or attitude stressing strict and literal adherence=
 to a set<br>&gt; of basic principles&quot; which I take to mean strict adh=
erence to the existing<br>&gt; rule book, and Jono&#39;s statement does not=
 advocate that.)<br>
&gt; <br>&gt;  <br>&gt; <br>&gt; Jim&#39;s response may be an example of Po=
e&#39;s Law, although the belief being<br>&gt; parodied or stated is open t=
o interpretation; although I don&#39;t think it<br>&gt; reasonable to deem =
Jim to be a fundamentalist.<br>
&gt; <br>&gt;  <br>&gt; <br>&gt; Unless of course you are adding a corollar=
y to Poe&#39;s Law: that parody is<br>&gt; difficult to discern from an ext=
reme view, in which case Jono&#39;s statement,<br>&gt; which includes the c=
oncept of intimidating or confusing the Bind Elements<br>
&gt; (being my dictionary&#39;s synonyms for fazzed), is comical and possib=
ly<br>&gt; parodical.<br>&gt; <br>&gt;  <br>&gt; <br>&gt; (:-))<br>&gt; <br=
>&gt;  <br>&gt; <br>&gt; Ian<br>&gt; <br>&gt;   _____  <br>&gt; <br>&gt; Fr=
om: <a href=3D"mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz">dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz</a> [mai=
lto:<a href=3D"mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz">dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz</a>] On =
Behalf Of<br>
&gt; Martin Dickson<br>&gt; Sent: Tuesday, 12 April 2011 5:06 p.m.<br>&gt; =
To: <a href=3D"mailto:dq@dq.sf.org.nz">dq@dq.sf.org.nz</a><br>&gt; Subject:=
 Re: [dq] Rune College: Binding Elements<br>&gt; <br>&gt;  <br>&gt; <br>&gt=
; Poe&#39;s Law &lt;<a href=3D"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law">ht=
tp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law</a>&gt;  strikes again. :)<br>
&gt; <br>&gt; On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 4:27 PM, Jim Arona &lt;<a href=3D"mai=
lto:jim.arona@gmail.com">jim.arona@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br>&gt; <br>&gt=
; &lt;sigh&gt;<br>&gt; <br>&gt;  <br>&gt; <br>&gt; On 11 April 2011 16:24, =
Jonathan Bean &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:jonobean@gmail.com">jonobean@gmail.com<=
/a>&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt; <br>&gt;  <br>&gt; <br>&gt; Given Jims&#39; post; <br>&gt; <br>&gt; I =
no longer think Bind Elements is a useful part of the game. <br>&gt; <br>&g=
t; I would rather see them removed/fazzed out....<br>&gt; <br>&gt;  <br>
&gt; <br>&gt;   _____  <br>&gt; <br>&gt;   _____  <br>&gt; <br>&gt; No viru=
s found in this message.<br>&gt; Checked by AVG - <a href=3D"http://www.avg=
.com">www.avg.com</a><br>&gt; Version: 10.0.1209 / Virus Database: 1500/356=
5 - Release Date: 04/11/11<br>
&gt; <br></p>

--000e0cd5bee6fd2ea004a0be5bb9--


-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --