RIP Sawyers Soul

[D-Roc]

Originally Posted by Murgatroyd

I use the irony one when I want to be sure that I'm not mistakenly going to be taken seriously, but otherwise I prefer not to use them, yes. They're not exactly journalistic and my personal preference is for my words themselves to carry the sense of what I mean without the addition of props. But I'm fine with other people's using them as they see fit and I've never said anything about 'smiley purges' - I objected to the repeated use of one very particular smiley, once, in the same way I might've seen fit to object to a particular word (they're no different to words: that's my point). That's all.

Dont get me wrong..im not digging at the way you post, just like id like to think that you werent digging at the way i post. Personally i think that after getting to know your posting style etc, it is often filled with tinges of irony and wit, which is fun and of course your words do carry weight. Im just saying that although you (and others) might question the way i chose to make my posts (eg use smilies) it could be argued that all posting styles are open to interpretation. Smilies are my way of adding fun and expression to my posts..believe me, i could quite easily make powerful posts without any smilies at all..i believe myself to be quite a good writer when i need to be..it's just that i prefer to add spice to my posts by sprinkling in a few of the little fellas. I feel that they bring out more of my character because although i can be serious when i need to be im also quite fun (believeit or not:P).

Fair enough i will believe you when you say you dont wish to purge the little mites it's just that no-one loves them these days.

Seriously though my use of smilies is wide ranging..they reflect my opinion yes, but i feel that if my posts were to not contain them then id get misinterpreted far more than i currently do. I.E. i could come across as harsher than I may actually be at the time.

Anyway, whats with this diverting?

[D-Roc]

Originally Posted by Murgatroyd

I do. Backed it up with a sensible and logical compare and contrast exercise to the substantially different Ben/Locke analogy.

But..but, the Ana incident was before this latest execution..so in effect he is being hypocritcal in the way he wasnt able to accept Sawyers influence in Ana's death some months ago..yet now..conveniently he is jumping on this 'chain of events' thing which he and others were previously unwilling to accept.

An analogy it may be, but it is steeped in convenience and hypocrisy

[Murgatroyd]

Originally Posted by KoR-evo

But..but, the Ana incident was before this latest execution..so in effect he is being hypocritcal in the way he wasnt able to accept Sawyers influence in Ana's death some months ago..yet now..conveniently he is jumping on this 'chain of events' thing which he and others were previously unwilling to accept.

An analogy it may be, but it is steeped in convenience and hypocrisy

It's not though. As I've explained in another one of the 207 condemnatory threads about Sawyer, the two incidents in question are barely comparable. Sawyer's involvement in Ana Lucia's (and Libby's, lest we forget) death was unmalignant and his crime was essentially carelessness: he had no idea what the upshot of his actions were going to be. Both Locke and Ben wanted Cooper dead and acted in a way that they felt was going to bring that about - and succeeded. I don't see how the difference could be much more pointed, and it's fairly easy to say that Locke and Ben are significantly more to blame for Cooper's death than Sawyer is for Ana Lucia's.

[The_other_other]

im afraid KoR that Sawyer's part in ana's death and locke and Ben's part in coopers are not comparable, simply because it was Locke and Ben's intention for cooper to die (thats the only conclusion we can draw from what weve seen) while it was not sawyer's intention to cause anas death. They cannot be compared in any way

[IM-LOST-WITH-LOST]

Originally Posted by KoR-evo

Ironic..coz you're one of the most frequent, if not *the* most frequent users of smilies. Do you not see what you're saying ILWL?

Perhaps I should censor your use of the 'lol' smilie coz i feel it is laughing too hard?

Dear oh dear people..get a grip and see the hypocrisy

How does me using smilies alot effect what i said? I dont understand your post...

Obviously you and JB have had some sort of fight over a rolling eyes smilie I was just pointing out that it i also think it offensive if its used to undermind a post. How can you compare a smilie that 3 people have said they feel can be offensive at times to a laughing smilie. It just doesnt make sense that you bring that up...

And all this arguing about smilies is pretty pathetic...

All i was saying is that some people may find a smilie offensive so be careful before posting it or use it in a humouros way, And if you want to censor my laughing smilies then feel free dude, but i think if you read any of my posts were i have used smilies i have never used them in a bad way. Its always been humouros, hence the first smilie you thought of was a laughing smile.

[IM-LOST-WITH-LOST]

Originally Posted by Murgatroyd

It's not though. As I've explained in another one of the 207 condemnatory threads about Sawyer, the two incidents in question are barely comparable. Sawyer's involvement in Ana Lucia's (and Libby's, lest we forget) death was unmalignant and his crime was essentially carelessness: he had no idea what the upshot of his actions were going to be. Both Locke and Ben wanted Cooper dead and acted in a way that they felt was going to bring that about - and succeeded. I don't see how the difference could be much more pointed, and it's fairly easy to say that Locke and Ben are significantly more to blame for Cooper's death than Sawyer is for Ana Lucia's.

Completely agree

[Kennindra47]

Ana-Lucia's death and Cooper's death cant be compared. it's all to do with intention, like TOO said. For me, Locke is the most to blame for manipulating the situation simply to be "pally" with Ben lol. Then Ben, who threw out the idea of killing Cooper in the first place. But i dont see Ben as being as guilty as Locke, because he didnt force Locke to kill him. He merely stated if he wanted to come with them, Cooper had to die. It was Locke's choice as to whether he carried out the act. Sawyer is least to blame imo, purely cause he was manipulated, he wouldnt have been in that situation if it wasnt for Ben and Locke, topped off by the fact that Cooper was HORRIBLE to him by tearing up his little letter .... plus if i had been in that situation, i probably would have choked Cooper with a rusty chain. Good old sawyer

on the smiley debate ... who cares if a rolling eyes smiley is used? the point is that if you were having that conversation in real life with someone, who would just roll your eyes in real-life. it isnt the smiley you guys should be mad at, its the fact that the PERSON is rolling their eyes. In any case, if you're on a discussion thread, you should be able to take eye-rolling ... so tempted to use the smiley now. but i wont lol!