Glad to know I helped a bit
paranoid
- Thread starter crazyman
- Start date
thewanderingjack
Well-Known Member
HAH... HAHAHAHA seriously... so funny.
What's going on in your life that you have to go looking for trouble?
Asking or people to include a little reference material or basic explanation of logic behind some piece of advice, so that people can learn something and understand better, have a starting point for more knowledge, that's dumb.
Because obviously it's not like someone asking a question question on here couldn't have simply done and online search to begin with, rather than post on here.
There's plenty of "common knowledge" out there that doesn't need reference, for sure. I don't ask people to give detailed research on why over watering hurts plants. There's a lot of info out there though, from myth to real (but sometimes sketch) research. Some things need a little explaining. If someone's asking to begin with, given them a line and not explaining why helps very little. Like I said, any question could be answered by doing it yourself... it's what I mostly do and why I hardly ask. Especially when a lot of stuf depends on my specific conditions. A lot of answers end up really being opinions. You have to do the research. But A) some reference helps to prove your point. Less arguments. OH NO!
B) it gives people who apparently didn't know before, somewhere to start. Again, OH THE HUMANITY!!!!Sine you have been apparently stalking me, care to share some of the contextual evidence for your opinion? I mean, the whole thread in which I'm just trying to start fights and talking out my ass without a foot to stand on? I think we all say things that sound like that... I did when talking in a thread about outdoor... but since I wasn't an authority, or present myself as one, I was pointed in the right direction, asked questions and learned a lot.
https://www.rollitup.org/t/light-schedule-for-plant-to-remain-in-flower-outdoors.916681/
and the sequel
https://www.rollitup.org/t/12-12-does-not-apply-to-outdoor-growing.916846/
So... What's up with the stat reading? Is that supposed to prove I'm talking shit, because I have 50% likes to posts? are people supposed to agree with me all the time? that sounds pretty crazy. Are they suppose to find everything I say amusing? I'm not a clown... I don't even think I'm that funny.
Ok here's some stats: Most of the threads I posted to are in the Grow Room section (like 10 to 1 vs Toke n Talk). Most of those are my thoughts/advice/opinions on things, as opposed to me asking for answers (again, prob 10 to 1). I've never said my word was gospel, nor have I gone around berating people for their opinions, though I've questioned their logic, either because I see a flaw or to understand it better, to see why what they say works for them, but may not seem true for me.
If most of my posts are in T'nT (probably true, hard to tell... anyone know an easy way to figure it's because those are discussions, conversations... as opposed to just posting what you may think is the answer to someone's issue. Most grow threads, when they don't involve a lot of opinion, are short. I often post in the basic questions stuff because i know the answer, it is basic. And the thread ends.
As to the insistence that I've been here before and all that, well hey, I get what you're saying and how that looks. But sorry to pop your paranoid bubble... but no. I just joined. I have started a new grow and gotten ill recently, so I've had too much time and boredom on my hands, as well as growing on my mind. SO yeah, I've been wasting a lot of time on here. But I hadn't even known much about this forum really... I've seen it to come when looking up info before. I got a lot of good info on here and Grasscity before ever thinking to join. To be honest I hate forums and such, because of things like this right here. And I have a life. So I mostly avoid them. But when I got sick I thought what the hell, and joined both. But Grasscity doesn't seem very active... and more idk... it's more about different stuff around cannabis, as opposed to growing, which is what I'm most thinking of right now. So here I am. I can prove who I am to anyone who's not a total conspiracy theory (or deeply philosophical or scientific... as it would be impossible for any of us to prove our reality or existence), though that wouldn't disprove that I've never been here before... but I think if you saw how inactive I was on Facebook (have one, barely ever use it, once every few years) yo may just believe
.Anyway, I think you're being an ass right now, looking for trouble.
I do like to stir the pot (a little) sometimes. It keeps the stew from burning and helps mix the flavors.
My idea of stirring the pot:
https://www.rollitup.org/t/do-you.916798/
https://www.rollitup.org/t/why-isnt-there-a-movies-tv-under-cafe.916780/
https://www.rollitup.org/t/welcome-to-aeroponics-and-what-it-is.916625/
Sometimes my opinions are contentious, but that's life
See here:
https://www.rollitup.org/t/seattle-minimum-wage-not-working-out.916807/unread
https://www.rollitup.org/t/i-think-i-have-cracked-it-read-me-need-ppl.916849/unread
https://www.rollitup.org/t/what-the-flaming-fuck.916864/
Sorry for the rant, just want to get that all out of the way, since this is the second person to go on a personal thing about me for no apparent reason.
In the end, you don't like me? hit ignore. I'm certainly not going to spend time engaging with you... I am copying and saving this for all future nutters, and then hitting ignore if that's not enough. Some people you just have to anyway (what's with all the personal attacks, cursing rants and just general poop flinging sometimes? too weird. It's a forum... heck, even if it was real life... it's a group on growing weed... chill out... plenty of good here without dwelling in the bad). Some times the best way to get along is to move along.
GardenGnome83
Well-Known Member
Lol, tldrHAH... HAHAHAHA seriously... so funny.
What's going on in your life that you have to go looking for trouble?
Asking or people to include a little reference material or basic explanation of logic behind some piece of advice, so that people can learn something and understand better, have a starting point for more knowledge, that's dumb.
Because obviously it's not like someone asking a question question on here couldn't have simply done and online search to begin with, rather than post on here.
There's plenty of "common knowledge" out there that doesn't need reference, for sure. I don't ask people to give detailed research on why over watering hurts plants. There's a lot of info out there though, from myth to real (but sometimes sketch) research. Some things need a little explaining. If someone's asking to begin with, given them a line and not explaining why helps very little. Like I said, any question could be answered by doing it yourself... it's what I mostly do and why I hardly ask. Especially when a lot of stuf depends on my specific conditions. A lot of answers end up really being opinions. You have to do the research. But A) some reference helps to prove your point. Less arguments. OH NO!
Sine you have been apparently stalking me, care to share some of the contextual evidence for your opinion? I mean, the whole thread in which I'm just trying to start fights and talking out my ass without a foot to stand on? I think we all say things that sound like that... I did when talking in a thread about outdoor... but since I wasn't an authority, or present myself as one, I was pointed in the right direction, asked questions and learned a lot.
https://www.rollitup.org/t/light-schedule-for-plant-to-remain-in-flower-outdoors.916681/
and the sequel
https://www.rollitup.org/t/12-12-does-not-apply-to-outdoor-growing.916846/
So... What's up with the stat reading? Is that supposed to prove I'm talking shit, because I have 50% likes to posts? are people supposed to agree with me all the time? that sounds pretty crazy. Are they suppose to find everything I say amusing? I'm not a clown... I don't even think I'm that funny.
Ok here's some stats: Most of the threads I posted to are in the Grow Room section (like 10 to 1 vs Toke n Talk). Most of those are my thoughts/advice/opinions on things, as opposed to me asking for answers (again, prob 10 to 1). I've never said my word was gospel, nor have I gone around berating people for their opinions, though I've questioned their logic, either because I see a flaw or to understand it better, to see why what they say works for them, but may not seem true for me.
If most of my posts are in T'nT (probably true, hard to tell... anyone know an easy way to figure it's because those are discussions, conversations... as opposed to just posting what you may think is the answer to someone's issue. Most grow threads, when they don't involve a lot of opinion, are short. I often post in the basic questions stuff because i know the answer, it is basic. And the thread ends.
As to the insistence that I've been here before and all that, well hey, I get what you're saying and how that looks. But sorry to pop your paranoid bubble... but no. I just joined. I have started a new grow and gotten ill recently, so I've had too much time and boredom on my hands, as well as growing on my mind. SO yeah, I've been wasting a lot of time on here. But I hadn't even known much about this forum really... I've seen it to come when looking up info before. I got a lot of good info on here and Grasscity before ever thinking to join. To be honest I hate forums and such, because of things like this right here. And I have a life. So I mostly avoid them. But when I got sick I thought what the hell, and joined both. But Grasscity doesn't seem very active... and more idk... it's more about different stuff around cannabis, as opposed to growing, which is what I'm most thinking of right now. So here I am. I can prove who I am to anyone who's not a total conspiracy theory (or deeply philosophical or scientific... as it would be impossible for any of us to prove our reality or existence), though that wouldn't disprove that I've never been here before... but I think if you saw how inactive I was on Facebook (have one, barely ever use it, once every few years) yo may just believe
Anyway, I think you're being an ass right now, looking for trouble.
I do like to stir the pot (a little) sometimes. It keeps the stew from burning and helps mix the flavors.
My idea of stirring the pot:
https://www.rollitup.org/t/do-you.916798/
https://www.rollitup.org/t/why-isnt-there-a-movies-tv-under-cafe.916780/
https://www.rollitup.org/t/welcome-to-aeroponics-and-what-it-is.916625/
Sometimes my opinions are contentious, but that's life
See here:
https://www.rollitup.org/t/seattle-minimum-wage-not-working-out.916807/unread
https://www.rollitup.org/t/i-think-i-have-cracked-it-read-me-need-ppl.916849/unread
https://www.rollitup.org/t/what-the-flaming-fuck.916864/
Sorry for the rant, just want to get that all out of the way, since this is the second person to go on a personal thing about me for no apparent reason.
In the end, you don't like me? hit ignore. I'm certainly not going to spend time engaging with you... I am copying and saving this for all future nutters, and then hitting ignore if that's not enough. Some people you just have to anyway (what's with all the personal attacks, cursing rants and just general poop flinging sometimes? too weird. It's a forum... heck, even if it was real life... it's a group on growing weed... chill out... plenty of good here without dwelling in the bad). Some times the best way to get along is to move along.
Fuck off
thewanderingjack
Well-Known Member
words longer than 5 letters are probably TL for you... idiocy cannot be informed. *ignore* See? that simple. : )
abe supercro
Well-Known Member
thewanderingjack
Well-Known Member
I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THAT MEANS BUT I LOVE IT!!!! hahaha what's it from?
abe supercro
Well-Known Member
My livingroom. I'm filming right now!
Naw, just a weird giphy I stumbled across when looking at Star Trek gifs.
abe supercro
Well-Known Member
my waffle toaster is disrepair currently
thewanderingjack
Well-Known Member
mine toomy waffle toaster is disrepair currently
srh88
Well-Known Member
HAH... HAHAHAHA seriously... so funny.
What's going on in your life that you have to go looking for trouble?
Asking or people to include a little reference material or basic explanation of logic behind some piece of advice, so that people can learn something and understand better, have a starting point for more knowledge, that's dumb.
Because obviously it's not like someone asking a question question on here couldn't have simply done and online search to begin with, rather than post on here.
There's plenty of "common knowledge" out there that doesn't need reference, for sure. I don't ask people to give detailed research on why over watering hurts plants. There's a lot of info out there though, from myth to real (but sometimes sketch) research. Some things need a little explaining. If someone's asking to begin with, given them a line and not explaining why helps very little. Like I said, any question could be answered by doing it yourself... it's what I mostly do and why I hardly ask. Especially when a lot of stuf depends on my specific conditions. A lot of answers end up really being opinions. You have to do the research. But A) some reference helps to prove your point. Less arguments. OH NO!
Sine you have been apparently stalking me, care to share some of the contextual evidence for your opinion? I mean, the whole thread in which I'm just trying to start fights and talking out my ass without a foot to stand on? I think we all say things that sound like that... I did when talking in a thread about outdoor... but since I wasn't an authority, or present myself as one, I was pointed in the right direction, asked questions and learned a lot.
https://www.rollitup.org/t/light-schedule-for-plant-to-remain-in-flower-outdoors.916681/
and the sequel
https://www.rollitup.org/t/12-12-does-not-apply-to-outdoor-growing.916846/
So... What's up with the stat reading? Is that supposed to prove I'm talking shit, because I have 50% likes to posts? are people supposed to agree with me all the time? that sounds pretty crazy. Are they suppose to find everything I say amusing? I'm not a clown... I don't even think I'm that funny.
Ok here's some stats: Most of the threads I posted to are in the Grow Room section (like 10 to 1 vs Toke n Talk). Most of those are my thoughts/advice/opinions on things, as opposed to me asking for answers (again, prob 10 to 1). I've never said my word was gospel, nor have I gone around berating people for their opinions, though I've questioned their logic, either because I see a flaw or to understand it better, to see why what they say works for them, but may not seem true for me.
If most of my posts are in T'nT (probably true, hard to tell... anyone know an easy way to figure it's because those are discussions, conversations... as opposed to just posting what you may think is the answer to someone's issue. Most grow threads, when they don't involve a lot of opinion, are short. I often post in the basic questions stuff because i know the answer, it is basic. And the thread ends.
As to the insistence that I've been here before and all that, well hey, I get what you're saying and how that looks. But sorry to pop your paranoid bubble... but no. I just joined. I have started a new grow and gotten ill recently, so I've had too much time and boredom on my hands, as well as growing on my mind. SO yeah, I've been wasting a lot of time on here. But I hadn't even known much about this forum really... I've seen it to come when looking up info before. I got a lot of good info on here and Grasscity before ever thinking to join. To be honest I hate forums and such, because of things like this right here. And I have a life. So I mostly avoid them. But when I got sick I thought what the hell, and joined both. But Grasscity doesn't seem very active... and more idk... it's more about different stuff around cannabis, as opposed to growing, which is what I'm most thinking of right now. So here I am. I can prove who I am to anyone who's not a total conspiracy theory (or deeply philosophical or scientific... as it would be impossible for any of us to prove our reality or existence), though that wouldn't disprove that I've never been here before... but I think if you saw how inactive I was on Facebook (have one, barely ever use it, once every few years) yo may just believe
Anyway, I think you're being an ass right now, looking for trouble.
I do like to stir the pot (a little) sometimes. It keeps the stew from burning and helps mix the flavors.
My idea of stirring the pot:
https://www.rollitup.org/t/do-you.916798/
https://www.rollitup.org/t/why-isnt-there-a-movies-tv-under-cafe.916780/
https://www.rollitup.org/t/welcome-to-aeroponics-and-what-it-is.916625/
Sometimes my opinions are contentious, but that's life
See here:
https://www.rollitup.org/t/seattle-minimum-wage-not-working-out.916807/unread
https://www.rollitup.org/t/i-think-i-have-cracked-it-read-me-need-ppl.916849/unread
https://www.rollitup.org/t/what-the-flaming-fuck.916864/
Sorry for the rant, just want to get that all out of the way, since this is the second person to go on a personal thing about me for no apparent reason.
In the end, you don't like me? hit ignore. I'm certainly not going to spend time engaging with you... I am copying and saving this for all future nutters, and then hitting ignore if that's not enough. Some people you just have to anyway (what's with all the personal attacks, cursing rants and just general poop flinging sometimes? too weird. It's a forum... heck, even if it was real life... it's a group on growing weed... chill out... plenty of good here without dwelling in the bad). Some times the best way to get along is to move along.
Douglas.Curtis
Well-Known Member
bbyb420
Well-Known Member
I came.
whitebb2727
Well-Known Member
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/know-your-mind/201407/cannabis-really-can-cause-paranoia
http://www.leafscience.com/2014/03/07/study-explains-marijuana-makes-paranoid/
Literally 30 seconds to find a couple studies.
No reason to be a dick. 'You " not experiencing paranoia doesn't mean its not true.
thewanderingjack
Well-Known Member
hmmm I just learned something... not from you but through you, thanks .
I never said it wasn't true, btw, I asked that you give someone (the op) somewhere to get started rather than just "advice" or "answer"...obviously, he could have done the search himself to start, rather than post the question.
And I was trying to be civil, you're right though, I knew some of the words would make the whole thing sound like an attack, I tried to say that too... but I guess I couldn't phrase things to get the idea out without hurting your feelings... i
how about: If it was a less "comonly known" thing, you'd be asking people to point you to some research rather than spout bs no? I mean obviously this wasn't well known to him...
I mean either way it's no skin of my nose, I know that info... just trying to keep things useful for those that don't...
But no worries... won't be commenting on your posts (unless apparently, you quote me... then I might... getting less likely though... hahah I'd forgot all about this even, wasn't it yesterday, or 2 days ago?). Peace.
.I never said it wasn't true, btw, I asked that you give someone (the op) somewhere to get started rather than just "advice" or "answer"...obviously, he could have done the search himself to start, rather than post the question.
And I was trying to be civil, you're right though, I knew some of the words would make the whole thing sound like an attack, I tried to say that too... but I guess I couldn't phrase things to get the idea out without hurting your feelings... i
how about: If it was a less "comonly known" thing, you'd be asking people to point you to some research rather than spout bs no? I mean obviously this wasn't well known to him...
I mean either way it's no skin of my nose, I know that info... just trying to keep things useful for those that don't...
But no worries... won't be commenting on your posts (unless apparently, you quote me... then I might... getting less likely though... hahah I'd forgot all about this even, wasn't it yesterday, or 2 days ago?). Peace.
Douglas.Curtis
Well-Known Member
thewanderingjack
Well-Known Member
buzzardbreath
Well-Known Member
ok, time to put an end to this madness, and show ya'll real madness...happy reading and welcome to my world.
Semiotics for Beginners
Signs desire to make meanings: above all, we are surely Homo significans - meaning-makers. Distinctively, we make meanings through our creation and interpretation of 'signs'. Indeed, according to Peirce, 'we think only in signs'
Signs take the form of words, images, sounds, odours, flavours, acts or objects, but such things have no intrinsic meaning and become signs only when we invest them with meaning. 'Nothing is a sign unless it is interpreted as a sign', declares Peirce (Peirce 1931-58, 2.172). Anything can be a sign as long as someone interprets it as 'signifying' something - referring to or standing forsomething other than itself. We interpret things as signs largely unconsciously by relating them to familiar systems of conventions. It is this meaningful use of signs which is at the heart of the concerns of semiotics.
The two dominant models of what constitutes a sign are those of the linguist Ferdinand de Saussure and the philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce. These will be discussed in turn.
Saussure 1983, 67; Saussure 1974, 67). Saussure 1983, 101;Saussure 1974, 102-103). A sign is a recognizable combination of a signifier with a particular signified. The same signifier (the word 'open') could stand for a different signified (and thus be a different sign) if it were on a push-button inside a lift ('push to open door'). Similarly, many signifiers could stand for the concept 'open' (for instance, on top of a packing carton, a small outline of a box with an open flap for 'open this end') - again, with each unique pairing constituting a different sign.
A linguistic sign is not a link between a thing and a name, but between a concept and a sound pattern. The sound pattern is not actually a sound; for a sound is something physical. A sound pattern is the hearer's psychological impression of a sound, as given to him by the evidence of his senses. This sound pattern may be called a 'material' element only in that it is the representation of our sensory impressions. The sound pattern may thus be distinguished from the other element associated with it in a linguistic sign. This other element is generally of a more abstract kind: the concept. (Saussure 1983, 66; Saussure 1974, 66)
As for the signified, most commentators who adopt Saussure's model still treat this as a mental construct, although they often note that it may nevertheless refer indirectly to things in the world. Saussure's original model of the sign 'brackets the referent': excluding reference to objects existing in the world. Hissignified is not to be identified directly with a referent but is a concept in the mind - not a thing but the notion of a thing. Some people may wonder why Saussure's model of the sign refers only to a concept and not to a thing. An observation from the philosopher Susanne Langer (who was not referring to Saussure's theories) may be useful here. Note that like most contemporary commentators, Langer uses the term 'symbol' to refer to the linguistic sign (a term which Saussure himself avoided): 'Symbols are not proxy for their objects but are vehicles for the conception of objects... In talking about things we have conceptions of them, not the things themselves; and it is the conceptions, not the things, that symbols directly mean. Behaviour towards conceptions is what words normally evoke; this is the typical process of thinking'. She adds that 'If I say "Napoleon", you do not bow to the conqueror of Europe as though I had introduced him, but merely think of him' (Langer 1951, 61).
Thus, for Saussure the linguistic sign is wholly immaterial - although he disliked referring to it as 'abstract' (Saussure 1983, 15; Saussure 1974, 15). The immateriality of the Saussurean sign is a feature which tends to be neglected in many popular commentaries. If the notion seems strange, we need to remind ourselves that words have no value in themselves - that is their value. Saussure noted that it is not the metal in a coin that fixes its value (Saussure 1983, 117; Saussure 1974, 118). Several reasons could be offered for this. For instance, if linguistic signs drew attention to their materiality this would hinder their communicative transparency (Langer 1951, 73). Furthermore, being immaterial, language is an extraordinarily economical medium and words are always ready-to-hand. Nevertheless, a principled argument can be made for the revaluation of the materiality of the sign, as we shall see in due course.
Saussure noted that his choice of the terms signifier and signified helped to indicate 'the distinction which separates each from the other' (Saussure 1983, 67; Saussure 1974, 67). Despite this, and the horizontal bar in his diagram of the sign, Saussure stressed that sound and thought (or the signifier and the signified) were as inseparable as the two sides of a piece of paper (Saussure 1983, 111; Saussure 1974, 113). They were 'intimately linked' in the mind 'by an associative link' - 'each triggers the other' (Saussure 1983, 66; Saussure 1974, 66). Saussure presented these elements as wholly interdependent, neither pre-existing the other (Silverman 1983, 103). Within the context of spoken language, a sign could not consist of sound without sense or of sense without sound. He used the two arrows in the diagram to suggest their interaction. The bar and the opposition nevertheless suggests that the signifier and the signified can be distinguished for analytical purposes.
---read the rest of the righteousness here brohams: http://changingminds.org/explanations/critical_theory/concepts/signifier_signified.htm
thewanderingjack
Well-Known Member
hehe... I took Communications... I remember meeting with my Language Thought and Culture prof before taking the class ( to get past the wait list) and talking about the whole thing, he asked, "what do you see?" and pointed to a cup... I sat perplexed for a moment before going on a rant about the physics of light, mechanics of vision, and the bio-chemical and psychological factors of perception... as well as some other physics and spirituality... I mean, what did he expect right?
buzzardbreath
Well-Known Member
Ha! He probably would have been a dick and recommended reading this, don't try to go too deep into it unless you have your brain posse with you...or a dude that likes talking about nothing and everything.hehe... I took Communications... I remember meeting with my Language Thought and Culture prof before taking the class ( to get past the wait list) and talking about the whole thing, he asked, "what do you see?" and pointed to a cup... I sat perplexed for a moment before going on a rant about the physics of light, mechanics of vision, and the bio-chemical and psychological factors of perception... as well as some other physics and spirituality... I mean, what did he expect right?
http://www.earlymoderntexts.com/assets/pdfs/kant1781part1.pdf