Sit there and say my hair ain't luxurious, when you know that it is, bitch.

Quote:

---

I have a new guru. I just watched the Katt Williams

---

Read the full article

i am curious Amelia, what do you consider valid criticism, as opposed to "hatin'"?

can a person be genuinely dissatisfied with the state of things, without feeling an avatistic need to change everything they are not pleased with?

Sorry you have haters (or maybe not if you're finding them to sources of motivation as Katt seems to allude to).

And personally I would never hate on Katt Williams either... the man does green velure like nobody's business.

your hair aint luxurious. i say this despite knowing the contrary. also, i am a bitch.

ah, im kidin. i aint a bitch, im a son of a bitch :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buster Friendly

i am curious Amelia, what do you consider valid criticism, as opposed to "hatin'"?

can a person be genuinely dissatisfied with the state of things, without feeling an avatistic need to change everything they are not pleased with?

---

An atavistic need to change everything they are not pleased with is a good thing. I think that is called leadership potential.

Hating, in contrast, is when a person feels the atavistic need to criticize something or be down on something just because it is successful.

Valid criticism is just expressing an opinion based on values other than not wanting the subject of your criticism to do well. Valid criticism is almost the exact opposite of hating because, if a person applies valid criticism and makes changes, they should do better, but, if they apply hater advice, then they should do worse.

I hate haters, seriously :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Amelia G

Hating, in contrast, is when a person feels the atavistic need to criticize something or be down on something just because it is successful.

---

so people can criticize something based on something other than petty jealousy, right?

how does a person know the subjective motivations for others actions, and opinions?

see, although i DO hate g.w.bush, i do NOT feel that this is based on the fact that he's 'successful'. infact my hatred of that individual, and his cohorts, seems, subjectively-ie. to me- based in the critique that infact he's not successful at all, but is infact, an abject failure, strutting around saying 'don't say my forgien, and economic policy ain't luxurious when you know it is, bitch!'

it's a pretty obvious example, but there it is.

bah, olix. hatin on haters for hatin? fuck i hate that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buster Friendly

so people can criticize something based on something other than petty jealousy, right?

how does a person know the subjective motivations for others actions, and opinions?

see, although i DO hate g.w.bush, i do NOT feel that this is based on the fact that he's 'successful'. infact my hatred of that individual, and his cohorts, seems, subjectively-ie. to me- based in the critique that infact he's not successful at all, but is infact, an abject failure, strutting around saying 'don't say my forgien, and economic policy ain't luxurious when you know it is, bitch!'

it's a pretty obvious example, but there it is.

---

Of course, people can criticize something for reasons other than petty jealousy.

And, sadly, yes, there are people who claim that totally valid criticisms are just haters trying to keep them down.

Because I am not wired to be a hater, just don't have it in my DNA, am happy when my friends do well and do everything to help, I never initially assume any critique is destructively-intended. I always assume they are all legit and something this causes me harm, but Katt Williams is going to show me the way in the future :)

So his agenda is to love haters?!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by evilstonermonkey

bah, olix. hatin on haters for hatin? fuck i hate that.

---

I hate you too darling :)

Sometimes haters make me feel alive too in it's own way.
We should be greatfull for them..........lord. :icon_smil

your hair is very luxurious, Amelia

I read somewhere recently (I can't find the source and it's pissing me off so I'm paraphrasing), "Competition is the urge to see others Go Down."
Successful people are often those who have both the drive to get things done and the urge to see other people Go Down while they succeed. It's difficult to be successful without being selfish and thereby acting or employing inaction against or the best interests of your fellow man. Competitive sports and high finance are both perfect examples of this. Possibly why I don't participate in either. I'm painting in broad strokes but this could easily be pages and pages of thought and I'm all for brevity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joel Awesome

I read somewhere recently (I can't find the source and it's pissing me off so I'm paraphrasing), "Competition is the urge to see others Go Down."
Successful people are often those who have both the drive to get things done and the urge to see other people Go Down while they succeed. It's difficult to be successful without being selfish and thereby acting or employing inaction against or the best interests of your fellow man. Competitive sports and high finance are both perfect examples of this. Possibly why I don't participate in either. I'm painting in broad strokes but this could easily be pages and pages of thought and I'm all for brevity.

---

See, I think those are two separate drives, and some people are strong on one or the other and some people are strong on both. In sports, you want to win, either by three points or by 40, the important part s to beat the other team or player. Sure a sizable margin feels nice sometimes, but can actually count against your general good will if it seems like you are just piling the points on to humiliate the other team or player. In finance, it doesn't generally do you a damn bit of good if your whole marketplace suffers. You want to rank high, or even at the top of a successful market, not a loser market. So, undercutting competition too effectively is actually self defeating. I want to do well, but I want to have peers that do well too. I want to be inspired by positive friendly competitive spirit. The kind that drives us all to try to do better. That's very different from trying to break down my peers, discourage them from doing anything cool, making their existence unpleasant, etc. I enjoyed the zine days when lots of people made cool zines and shared them with one another and traded ads and collaborated on mailings and all that. I want to set lofty goals and strive to meet them, not strive to get an inch farther than the next guy by simply pulling the rug out from under him. That's a hollow win to me.

but isn't The Urge to Watch Others Go Down on Each Other what sites like Blue Blood are all about?:lo: :rryumy:

thats sort of the thing that shits me come election time - the pols dont try to impress you with what theyve done, are doing or will do, they spend all their time smearing the opposition. i dont know if its the same in other countries as here, but in australia the tv ad campaigns are 99% scare tactics trying to shift the vote away from the (if you believe the ads) satanist/commie/vegetarian/whatever group.

id be more likely to shift my vote if i was being told 'if elected we will do this, this and this (yay)' as opposed to 'if elected, they will do this this and this (oh noes)'. we still hear about what they are planning to do, obviously. through second- or third-hand reports in the newspaper or from the one person in the office that actually finds politics interesting, but turn on your tv at election time and every second ad is a more and more expensive ad (paid by the taxpayers of course) personal attack on some asshole whos busily trying to dig up dirt on whoever made the first ad.

i mean, fuck! our new prime minister got into pretty deep shit a while ago because he once went to a strip bar. this is australia peopl, and hes a bloke. next youll be telling me he actually drank a beer there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForrestBlack

See, I think those are two separate drives, and some people are strong on one or the other and some people are strong on both. In sports, you want to win, either by three points or by 40, the important part s to beat the other team or player. Sure a sizable margin feels nice sometimes, but can actually count against your general good will if it seems like you are just piling the points on to humiliate the other team or player. In finance, it doesn't generally do you a damn bit of good if your whole marketplace suffers. You want to rank high, or even at the top of a successful market, not a loser market. So, undercutting competition too effectively is actually self defeating. I want to do well, but I want to have peers that do well too. I want to be inspired by positive friendly competitive spirit. The kind that drives us all to try to do better. That's very different from trying to break down my peers, discourage them from doing anything cool, making their existence unpleasant, etc. I enjoyed the zine days when lots of people made cool zines and shared them with one another and traded ads and collaborated on mailings and all that. I want to set lofty goals and strive to meet them, not strive to get an inch farther than the next guy by simply pulling the rug out from under him. That's a hollow win to me.

---

I'm all for healthy completion that inspires growth and I'm not trying to say that it doesn't exist, I'm discussing the part of competition that in my opinion inspires the "Hater". My examples were probably a little clunky, but I'm going to defend them anyway to stretch my brain.
I think that saying "the important part s to beat the other team or player" is the same as wanting them to "Go Down" in less harsh language. The finance example is a bit more complicated. I didn't mean to suggest that the competitive urge was related to the urge to see the entire market suffer. More I was suggesting that Brokers, Traders, Investors, and Market Niches require that the competition fail occasionally to increase the likelihood or margin of their own success. Also there wouldn't be a market if there were no risk, and that risk and the desire to see controlled or at least predictable failure is essential. If every publicly traded company in a category helped each other out and hit the same margins the market would stagnate as stock capitol would be spread out in low risk low return investment and Lack of capitol = lack of growth. On a personal level, I've worked with brokers and considered becoming one myself, and short of lawyers there is not a more bloodthirsty profession.

I don't do nearly enough thinking nowadays. this took me way longer than it should have to write.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joel Awesome

I'm all for healthy completion that inspires growth and I'm not trying to say that it doesn't exist, I'm discussing the part of competition that in my opinion inspires the "Hater". My examples were probably a little clunky, but I'm going to defend them anyway to stretch my brain.
I think that saying "the important part s to beat the other team or player" is the same as wanting them to "Go Down" in less harsh language.

---

Oh, I was agreeing with you on that example. Sometimes winning is about beating the next guy, or 'seeing them go down' as you put it. However, I don't think that should extend to be the definition of success. I think people sometimes take a sports like approach into arenas that it doesn't belong and end up being more destructive than productive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joel Awesome

The finance example is a bit more complicated. I didn't mean to suggest that the competitive urge was related to the urge to see the entire market suffer. More I was suggesting that Brokers, Traders, Investors, and Market Niches require that the competition fail occasionally to increase the likelihood or margin of their own success. Also there wouldn't be a market if there were no risk, and that risk and the desire to see controlled or at least predictable failure is essential. If every publicly traded company in a category helped each other out and hit the same margins the market would stagnate as stock capitol would be spread out in low risk low return investment and Lack of capitol = lack of growth. On a personal level, I've worked with brokers and considered becoming one myself, and short of lawyers there is not a more bloodthirsty profession.

I don't do nearly enough thinking nowadays. this took me way longer than it should have to write.

---

I certainly understand your flattening the market example, sort of outlining the problem with price fixing and such, but say for example you are in real estate and you have a somewhat nice house to sell. You could take a 'see the others go down' approach and poison everyone else on the block's lawn. You'd probably be able to sell your house for more than anybody else on the street, but ultimately, you'd probably get a worse sales price than you would have if the whole block looked nice. So, you fix your place up as nice as you can, probably better than anybody else, plus encourage good neighborly pride and responsibility, and you end up doing best of all. That's not really rooted in 'seeing the other guy go down' and it would be self defeating if it was.


But yeah, these days people do seem to take a teamsy divisive stance and feel comfortable being haters and cheerleaders and simply align themselves to a 'side' and celebrate a win if anyone but their man falls down, if not do whatever they can to trip him up. Too many people live their lives like reality television I guess. I think that's partly what you were getting at about where the haters come from.