So, is there a Mr rascal. We don't have too many women on this board, so I hit on all of the babes. Unfortunately, the first babe I met here (Jenna) never would sit with me at a game, and ended up leaving my bbs life completely. I hope we can get off on the right foot. I don't have an SUV; that's a good start isn't it, babe.
Jeff, all I'm saying is, people are self-interested. If you had to choose between your family's safety or someone else's, you'd side with your own. Heck, all other factors being equal I might even drive one of those monstrosities (or course, all other factors are not equal). So BK you're the one! From now on I'm taking 51st cross-town. ------------------ I don't want to achieve immortality through my work... I want to achieve immortality by not dying. - Woody Allen
BK: OHHH! Now, I get it. Heypartner: I think there might be a Mr. Rascal on this BBS. ------------------ Mmmmmmm. Sacrelicious.
drat...another deadend. Oh well, I have a feeling I probably shouldn't have let my "babes" slip out with this one. I probably blew it anyhow. She seems too smart for me. At least before when I thought she was a guy, he seemed smart. I have to get passed my sexist tendency to paint female posters with pink fonts.
Hmm.....If this is in any way typical of your pick-up techniques, then I'm not too surprised you're trolling for women on a basketball BBS.
BK, What made me so mad was you said "We have a winner for 'Most Naive Post of the Year'. Congratulations." with no explanation, nothing. SamCassell got your back and said some good stuff. But you never said what naive about my post or any supporting arguments. Quality discourse: a naked blanket statment. So, I'll say "We have a winner for 'Dumbest Man on Earth'. Congratulations Brian" ^^^^ - Sorry BK, I shouldn't have said that. [edit] jamcracker is a little thin-skinned I apologize [edit] [This message has been edited by jamcracker (edited December 06, 2000).]
Thanks for the compliment jamcracker. I love you like a brother. BTW, interesting about the prisoner's dilemna. I'd be interested in seeing that article (or is it a book?) that you talk about. I wouldn't really characterize the SUV situation, or the freeway traffic scenario, as a prisoner's delimna. If it is, it is a very mild one, as you mention there is very little incentive to not choose the self-serving choice. What we're talking about here, to me, is a classic example of the free rider phenomenon. OK, feel free to get back to your flame-war with BK. [This message has been edited by SamCassell (edited December 06, 2000).]
SamC, _Metamagical_Themas_ is a book of Hofstader's Scientific American columns from the early 80s. I've read my copy to shreds. The title of Hofstader's book and column is an anagram of Martin Gardner's Scientific American column (Hofstader's predecessor), "Mathematical Games". BK, I said "It seems like a better way to keep all families safe would be for families to purchase less destructive cars. " I never said that families WOULD or SHOULD not buy SUVs. Obviously, families are buying the hell out of SUVs and they will continue to do so. I DO think its a better solution. Can it be implemented? No. We'll never convice people not to buy tanks. I agree with you guys. I DO think it would better if we drove small cars, though. Can we kiss and make up? [This message has been edited by jamcracker (edited December 06, 2000).]
SamC, I just read about the Free Rider phenomenon. Interesting... From the article (1st hit on Google): ps I love the "I'm feeling lucky" button on Google.com. Makes so happy when brings up just what I was looking for [This message has been edited by jamcracker (edited December 06, 2000).]
Just curious -- why does everyone here seem to have so much venom toward SUV's? They are based on a pickup chassis and engine -- and I haven't heard anyone slamming pickups. There's also a huge range in size and weight. Jeff, your pickup isn't much different from a 4-runner, pathfinder, or small blazer. The most popular SUV, the Explorer, is based on a Ford Ranger, and really isn't that big. Larger SUV's like Expeditions are becomming more common, but Suburbans, one of the biggest gas guzzlers of all time, have been around for a while, and have always been popular. They have similar weights and gas milage to trucks -- and the V6 engines popular in most light and mid sized SUV's are the same engines that exist in many trucks and cars. Most of the people I know that have SUV's didn't buy them for ego -- they bought them as a good compromise between a car and a truck. They wanted the ability to carry stuff that a car can't provide, and the room to carry their family that a truck can't provide. I've also heard comments about bad Houston streets -- that the truck suspension is nicer with potholes. Yes, some people probably get them for ego, but people buy big trucks, sports cars, and Honda Accord's for ego. There are a lot more soccer moms out there with Explorers then Bubbas with Suburbans. There is a huge variety in SUV's, and reasons for buying them. To stereotype all SUV's and SUV owners in with Dr. Evil and Satan is pushing it a little far. ------------------ Stay Cool...
Based on what I've seen, the venom seems to be caused by the gender of SUV drivers. My favorite anti-SUV quote is that "it's always some 95-pound female driving it"-- the implication being that a huge SUV is too much vehicle for such a tiny person. PROCLAMATION: Henceforth, only very, very fat men shall be allowed to drive SUVs. They'll have to trade in their little mini-motorcycles.
