To cheat or not to cheat?

[Nicodemus Phaulkon]

Hmm, to try and quell the anger that's going around here...
...
No doubt my post has been seen as highly controvertial, and will most probably draw flames.

Oxymoronic thinking. Classic.

Also, you might want to put a small wanrning in future for links that one has to sign up to something to use, it's aggrivating if one is using a low bandwidth connection or has limited time to wait for the page to load and then to have to fill in all the details to actually read it.

I'm on a 56k modem... and it took me 30 seconds to fill in the fields and start reading the article. I suggest you upgrade from your 9600 baud, pal.

basically, the front cover of this months FHM (a mens magazine) has absolutely NO gossip, and from the list of contents, about 2 of 20 features could be classed as gossip, most of it is cars, women, oh, and 27 pairs of trainers (sneakers) on test.

It also, without exception, has rampant articles on sex, sexual positions, how to get laid, and a plethora of T'n'A photo spreads. I find it completely apt that you chose this particular piece of published shyte to give as an example... because most of us (and I DO mean men) wouldn't be caught dead reading it, much less wasting cash on it. In the future, if you seek to give an example of a periodical, I would suggest something a tad more respected. As in... say... THE NEW YORK TIMES. Rumour has it you can get it online FOR FREE! Gah. I think I'm allergic to this much stupidity. :blink:

however, if someone doesn't have any facts to back up an opinion, it's no reason not to take the opinion for what it is, his opinion. It is a fact that he thinks what he thinks.

So if I make a judgement call without having a single idea of what I'm talking about, that's fine... because it's my opinion? You couldn't POSSIBLY be more wrong. An opinion is ONLY valid when it can be attributed to facts. Having an opinion without information sits you among the great Ignoramuses of history. Defending the right to have an opinion, without the education or information to actually form an opinion, suggests a level of stupidity that borders on scary.

And what Conner said wasn't sexist, it was making a generalisation

Yes, it was completely sexist. Generalizations tend to accomplish this. Lumping anything together with a commentary will always classify itself as derogatory.

Rethink your position, Bob... or you're sitting in the same place as the loser you're defending.