Glad you mentioned 'tall'. YEP. That has to go also. In my case, describing myself as only 5 feet 7 inches TALL is ridiculous. I use 'long' so as to avoid being laughed at, shamed, embarrassed, put out, made to feel small, exposed......well, you know the rest I'm sure.

"""....(and entirely unnecessary anyway).... ******-word" !"""

I object to the removal of the word "******".

How's that for a twist!

THROWING OUT 'OLD AGE'

Quote from technovative

".....reevaluating the more negative perceptions of what old means....."


Me: YES.
And so a 'dating site' COULD get rid of a pretty sensitive-to-some, (and entirely unnecessary anyway), "*****-word" !

p.s. It's said that there's a fool-proof cure for "old age".
Celebrate one's birthday everyday when (surprisingly!), waking up.....and wallow in the thoughts of all the presents one's certain to get.

Be a pioneer Mingle2!

As a friendly gesture to your clients, delete the word 'old' from your superb site.....ENTIRELY. Why? Because it's offensive. Plenty of women protest (quite rightly) that they're not as old as their, um, billing indicates!!

I should think not too. These days, WHO IS?!

Yes, the number can serve as some sort of an indicator; but surely if we see JANE SMITH 29 YEARS, or even just 29.....isn't that enough? Why "OLD?!!"

Be daring Mingle2. Give it a shot.

keithpl2

I, (Homomal), can postulate that others exist or that they do not exist should I myself cease to do so; but there is no possibility of verifying this either way! So if I base my final conclusions on my educated beliefs, then Existence just “IS” - with or without me. If I succeeded in freeing myself from the dictates of Word, (a somewhat unachievable task!), I’d comprehend that without an identifiable identifier this cannot possibly be so. I must then conclude that my perceived consciousness is the sole creator of a perceived existence. Identification of what I perceive is only possible with a definement tool: word. It is ‘word’ that proclaims Life and Being: nothing else. No word = no “being”. There is no evidence of anything other than the conclusion of the human that something it calls ‘life’, exists. Remove ‘word’ from humans and their communication is at about the level of dogs, which have no means of rationalising; they have no defining tool. For dogs, there is no ‘existence’........any more than for a pinball.(The former don't 'think' they're awake; the latter doesn't think !)

But without words he couldn´t have said it.....could he!

IF
bawling muZic flabby bellies
adolescents lashed to tellys
surfeits of yapping pooping dogs
sad princesses who marry frogs
those beggars laying guilt-edged traps
adults with ‘macho' schoolboy caps
absurd tattoos pierced body parts
plain-looking chicks with tarty arts
that neighbour you fiercely detest
with ever-effervescing zest
loud snoring in your precious bed......

if these distress you think instead
that ’tis a modest price to pay
for that free gift of Priceless Day!

To IgorFrankensteen

At the end of my last message "...what there IS NOT", was meant to refer to underlining, and so forth.

k

Thank you TxsGal3333

Then there aren't really any moves to make in this regard. ("As far as blocking members off of they have no plans on doing so..")

Happily, (thanks to a certain son of mine), I now have a way in which at any time - as soon as I spot THE NAME of the "known-participant-with-problems"
- I can if I want to, instantly blank out that person's text, and so not have to read it.

Your information was appreciated.

kpl

Thanks Igor for going to the trouble of assisting me.

The E=W over A, started off as E=V (vocabulary) over A. I only featured this to give the thing some kind of a logo or icon. I wrote it all by the way, in the first place, as an exercise that I felt would be good for me; (sort-of taking the dogs for a walk….).

I’d love it if you could think of a better ‘heading’ – or I could remove it.

Your last sentence: “Your existence...” etc.

The fact that I know that nothing is here unless I am, and that I agree with myself, (POST-initial indoctrination!), that it is so, has no effect on the way I live – with the exception that, as said in the EW full version, I see the world and everything in it, as PERFECT. (Why? Because, TODAY, I’VE GOT IT!) I couldn’t be saying this, of course, without the availability of words.

Quoting from full version:
“THE FRAME’S THE GAME. (And all the men and women, merely winners.)
Oh yes they are! Just ask anyone, "if you'd been given a choice, would you have missed this particular trip?"!

I can assume that after a meal, if I had no words, I’d simply be satiated and content for a period…...until the next meal, and so on. I would not be comparing, defining, enumerating, etc: there would be no EXISTENCE per se.

(Quoting from full version: “Without Word, there can be neither ‘chair’ nor anything else. To assert that “Existence”, (i.e., ‘chair’), is around in any case, begs this question: “but what proves that the chair is/was there if ‘homo sapiens’ is not?”  Mind you, if you dare[!] to propose that ‘Word’ was around before “the big bang”, (or any other ‘kick-off hypothesis’), you’ll have to ask, ‘then who or what was doing the talking at the time?’!)

keith

P.s. I don’t have to say that blockcaps are mostly in place of what there IS NOT.
p.p.s The full version of EW only takes 4 minutes to read – (about 1500 words).

I guess then that all I can do is "invisibilize".

Perhaps I'm 'looking a gift-horse in the mouth'. After all, Mingle2 - as far as I'm concerned - is truly the crème de la crème.

Thank you TxsGal3333

All points understood.

k

Thank you actionlynx

Your first line…..done.
Your second sentence…..noted. Yes, I’ve seen a couple of ‘target-seekers’. I now “invisiblize” them immediately!

I’m afraid we can’t do much, as you suggest: but it seems to me that while the scoffers are holding steady, the scammers are rising!

Either way, thank you for your response.

k

Would you care to comment on these two points?

1. I‘ve been “reporting abuse” and then blocking whatever looks like call-girls “who”(!) turn up on my profile page’s ‘who viewed you’ drop-down. (And also in the normal “search” areas, by the way).

This is not only time-consuming, but seems to be of no avail because they are increasing in number.

It’s much faster to just delete all, but if I do so, is that LESS useful to Mingle2 than ‘reporting’ them?

2. On another subject – let’s call them scoffers rather than scammers. It may or not be known that when participants are being harrassed in the forums – (but not so blatantly that Mingle2 must step in) – there is a way in which one can, (as soon as one spots a familiar ‘harrasser’……...i.e., someone trying to exorcize their presumably insoluble problems by needling the author of a post).......of removing all the text instantly, without therefore having to read it: (although it’s advisable not to erase the name of the miscreant, in order to be quickly able to repeat the operation whenever the name reappears). Any thoughts on this?

Thank you.
keithpl2

1. Every day is MY BIRTHDAY. My presents? What I will have LIKED today.

2. All MY ERRORS will be largely caused by my EXPECTATIONS!!

3. Whatever I wish were different, should be changed - NOW.

4. Every day's my LAST DAY on the planet: I’ll never know if I DIDN’T wake up

To RockGnome

As said, I’m not looking for debate, but ASSISTANCE with what one might call “the layout” of the summary. I’d like everything to be as clear as possible to the viewer.

If however, I get comments or questions, I’m very happy to respond; but I’m not interested in verbal convulsions coming from those with axes to grind – (or those who are obviously horrified that what they are reading might actually make sense).

Thank you IgorFrankensteen.

It is supposed to be:

E=W
A

with a line indicating divided....but I can't post it here!

(Suggestions?)


You: “Did you mean to say that E equals W divided by A?”
Me: Yes. Existence is Word divided by Agreement. (Or one could use 'multiplied' by Agreement)

You: “You essentially deny all deduction, which requires that you further deny logic and all science”.
Me: All deduction is assumption, (by word, without which no deduction/comment/communication, is possible).
If there is no evident perceiver, (i.e., ‘Man’), there is no evidence of anything to perceive.

p.s. I tried again, but can't manage it. (It's OK in other parts of the Net.) Anyway, I'm sure you know what I meant.

To notbeold.

If you have the time/inclination to check my last post under 'PHILOSOPHY', I'd be happy to hear from you.

keith

E=W
A

In response to 'summarising' suggestions/advice, here and there, I’ve attempted a short summary of the above.
I’m anything but an academic – (in case you didn’t guess!) - so any hints as to improving/clarifying THE SUMMARY, would be very happily received. ("NOTBEOLD"?)

p.s. I’m not interested in DEBATING the points, by the way. It’s all been done before !!
keith

UNDERSTANDING THE UNHAPPENING. (Summary of E=W by A)

THE PERCEIVER
Nothing can be proved to exist without its being, (in some recognizable way), perceived by a ‘provable’ perceiver. Anything otherwise stated as ‘existing’, is creative speculation.

‘IMMORTALITY’
Today consists of the sum total of my perceived existence: tomorrow is no more than a presumption. ‘Not waking up’, [i.e., Death], cannot be experienced by me. I live forever; i.e., indefinitely.

HOMOMAL
I, Homomal, [animal-plus-word], perpetually edit and ‘rewrite’ - to my ultimate satisfaction - what I observe. My own assertion that this is ‘the Here-And-Now’, is the only proof there can ever be of it.

NEVER ‘HAPPILY EVER AFTER’
Being freed of the ‘fairy-tale-like’ expectations of Homo Sapiens bred into me, I now expect far less, (or even nothing), of anyone or anything. Therefore I enjoy all experience to a far more intensive degree.

LIBERTY PLUS
If discontented with my planet ‘as is’, I can decide, (as any “off-gridder” for instance), to abandon my present mode de vie and reconstitute another, consisting of almost all the ingredients of my choosing.

__________________________

TEDDY BEARS can never harm anyone
DOGS their affection is no more than a reflection
TEDDY BEARS are the best ever silent partners
DOGS are half-blind creatures with deadly teeth
TEDDY BEARS are comfortingly cuddly
DOGS can easily become aggressive
TEDDY BEARS do not excrete or urinate
DOGS are obsessed with it
TEDDY BEARS have no fleas
DOGS are adored by them
TEDDY BEARS don’t need to be leashed
DOGS will quit everything at the drop of a stool
TEDDY BEARS neither bark nor bite
DOGS do both without impunity
TEDDY BEARS could even distract an intruder!
DOGS as protectors, are useless against ‘pros’.
TEDDY BEARS are very clean indeed
DOGS need decontaminating frequently
TEDDY BEARS cost nothing to keep
DOGS gobble up a chunk of your income
TEDDY BEARS are perfect listeners
DOGS mainly hear what they fear
TEDDY BEARS will never turn away from you
DOGS are hopelessly distractible
TEDDY BEARS are soothing to nervous infants
DOGS irritate or infuriate neighbours
TEDDY BEARS emit their own friendly odour
DOGS stink of whatever they’ve picked up
TEDDY BEARS will protest at nothing
DOGS will yap at the blink of an eye!

OH...............OF COURSE: SILLY ME. I QUITE FORGOT.
TEDDY BEARS CAN’T WALK !