Viewing Thread:
"SSC27-I Need Someone"

Today I felt terrible I woke thinking my wife would be laying, beside me and I would be able to put my arm round her. But no I couldn’t it was just lonely me I got up, and walked to the shower. I washed myself nice and clean, so I didn’t smell then I got dressed, in some nice clothes. Even though no one would really care I was wearing nice clothes. I went out the house and walked down the street, I walked along looking down at the floor, feeling sorry for myself.

Like I normally do every single day; every single second, minute, hour. I feel sorry for myself and I have never stopped. I have been acting like this since my wife went; we had been together for 10 years. She stopped it to go off with some other man, so now I hate her. I walk down the road kick some rubbish along. I walk into the café I go into every morning, to have my breakfast. I go in and ask for the usual bacon, egg, sausages and a nice warm cup of tea.

I shove it down me then walk out, I walk down to work I work in a little tiny office, where there’s no air conditioning and it’s boiling. Well the things to do today, walk up loads of stairs to my office because the lifts broken, then turn on my computer and wait for five damn minutes for it to load, then sit down and type up a load of horrible work. So I walk into the office no one greeting me I go and sit down, turn on the computer and wait for it to load. I go and open a window, when I look back round a woman is walking into the office. A woman I had never seen before with long blonde straight beautiful hair, her face so nice her eyes look glazed she was beautiful and I wanted her.

I went over to Mike “Who’s that woman” I asked. “What that one” He answered. “No the other Woman there” I answered “O she’s Sal” he told me. “Oh she’s beautiful. I didn’t need anybody anymore I had found the perfect person and she was great.

Marinky_Kongshi wrote:
> FinalFantasyFanatic wrote:
> Marinky_Kongshi wrote:
> Many people have different views. So in order for something to be
> good or bad we must ALL have the same view, in which case there
> would
> be no-one to think otherwise. So only one would exist in every
> situation. However, as people do have different views, good and bad
> can't exist.
>
> Didn't I already explain all this?
> It's called majority rules - it's how the world works, because it's
> how the world has to work.
>
> You do live in this world, right? You can see how it works - and how
> very much it just wouldn't work if a unanimous decision had to be
> reached on everything?
>
> Have you no courage of conviction - is there nothing you truely
> believe that is right or wrong? If someone murdered your family, and
> beat you halfway to death for no reason - you couldn't say that was
> a
> bad thing to do? You'd have to concede to yourself that the guy
> himself obviously didn't think so - so it couldn't have been a bad
> thing?
> Cause that's actually rather sad. Belief ... morals ... these things
> make us human, not some logical analytical robot.
>
> I wouldn't think it is particularly 'good', but that's
> not stopping the person(s) responsible(or my family for that matter)
> from thinking it's not bad. So it would be neither. Anyone would
> probably choose peace(being dead) over suffering anyway. Although, in
> order for this person to kill my entire family they would have
> to come to us, Empingham, Stamford, Birmingham, America and a lot of
> places that not even I know of(not forgetting that they might not
> even know who or where my family are). I don't even know why they
> would bother with all that running around in the first place.
>
> Or is this just some massive misunderstanding about definitions?
> Let's see ...
>
> Say ... the words good and bad were only reserved for when the
> entire
> population of the planet agrees on something unanimously.
> Say perchance, for some bizzare reason, everyone decides that
> killing
> a complete stranger in the street with absolutely no provocation is
> a
> bad thing. That's okay, right?
>
> If everyone thought it was bad then no-one would do it anyway-but
> yes, if there is absolutely no other option then it actually
> would be bad. Although, unfortunately that will probably never
> happen.
>
>
> But then there's these new words - for the sake of argument, called
> 'doog' and 'dab' - which come into play on the majority of opinion,
> social norms and laws.
>
> Although I'd like to know where you stand on laws, and being able to
> statystically analyse some things for whether they are good or bad,
> as with this story. But whatever ... on we go ...
>
> You could say pretty easily that this story was dab?
> Hitler was a dab man?
>
> Not bad, of course, because not everyone would agree, but dab?
> Yes?
>
> Does 'dab' mean 'bad' by any chance? If so then it would obviously
> have the same definition. Many people thought Hitler's ideas were
> good. Then again, many thought they were bad. Just like someone can't
> both enjoy a cake and hate it at the same time- good and bad can't
> both be right at the same time. So the same would probably go for
> 'doog' and 'dab'.
>
> Wouldn't you agree that writing your own story is a much better
> experience than criticising others'? Or is it just me?
>
> I would. But does that mean I should stop doing it?
>
> See below.
>
> In the writers point of view, their story could be brilliant. They
> could be cherishing every word they typed, whether they used tidy
> grammer or not. Many people enjoy their work. He could've hoped that
> he would be praised for it- Only to see many complaints about it.He
> may be saying he thinks it's crap, but that could just be
> because he was hoping it would shut the others up shortly
> afterwards.
>
> To be honest, as a writer, I'd be pretty p!ssed with all this.
> If everyone came in saying 'ooh ... yeah ... I can't really say this
> is good or bad, because not everyone could agree with me, so er yeah
> ... it was equal to everything. I don't hate it, if that helps, if
> I'm allowed to say that'
>
> Because there are such things as good and bad stories, and I'd like
> to know about it.
>
> I didn't say people couldn't say they hate it. If you do, you do- but
> that doesn't mean you should just insult someone's work. Would you
> prefer it if someone said "This is crap! You shouldn't have
> written it, and you never should have written any of your other
> stories either!"?
>
>
> I don't hate it- I think it is alright. Sure there are quite a lot
> of
> grammer mistakes, but nobody's perfect(or at least, in the sense
> that
> people use the word perfect for today. We are all perfect in the way
> that we can't get any more 'perfect' than we already are). I'm more
> of a video game freak myself mind you(NNNOOOOO!!! I'm losing the
> rest
> of my American...ness. Wanna play some B-ball?).
>
> You really think people can't get any better than they already are?
>
> They can? Okay then... tell me, how do you get rid of touretts
> syndrome(don't know how to spell it, and personally don't really
> care)? What about Epilepsy, etc.?
>
> You know ... self improvement? Broadening your horizons ...
> expanding
> your knowledge ... becoming a better person?
>
> I really, really hope not.
>
> Anyone can "expand their knowledge", but does that
> neccaccarily make them 'a better person'?(Besides, I said perfect,
> not better)

STOP!

I have no idea.

He doesn't take any of the points on board, so what's the point?

I don't think there is good or bad. Just peoples opinions aka I think something is good. And i think it would be good if people would stop insulting other peoples work and just start telling them how to improve.

That's the poorest reply I ever did read, and so many of your points are just completely irrelevant.

Good and bad exist. People can improve.
I play guitar. According to you, I'm no better now than I was 2 and a half years ago, because there is no 'good' or 'bad'.

FinalFantasyFanatic wrote:
> Marinky_Kongshi wrote:
> Many people have different views. So in order for something to be
> good or bad we must ALL have the same view, in which case there
> would
> be no-one to think otherwise. So only one would exist in every
> situation. However, as people do have different views, good and bad
> can't exist.
>
> Didn't I already explain all this?
> It's called majority rules - it's how the world works, because it's
> how the world has to work.
>
> You do live in this world, right? You can see how it works - and how
> very much it just wouldn't work if a unanimous decision had to be
> reached on everything?
>
> Have you no courage of conviction - is there nothing you truely
> believe that is right or wrong? If someone murdered your family, and
> beat you halfway to death for no reason - you couldn't say that was a
> bad thing to do? You'd have to concede to yourself that the guy
> himself obviously didn't think so - so it couldn't have been a bad
> thing?
> Cause that's actually rather sad. Belief ... morals ... these things
> make us human, not some logical analytical robot.

I wouldn't think it is particularly 'good', but that's not stopping the person(s) responsible(or my family for that matter) from thinking it's not bad. So it would be neither. Anyone would probably choose peace(being dead) over suffering anyway. Although, in order for this person to kill my entire family they would have to come to us, Empingham, Stamford, Birmingham, America and a lot of places that not even I know of(not forgetting that they might not even know who or where my family are). I don't even know why they would bother with all that running around in the first place.

> Or is this just some massive misunderstanding about definitions?
> Let's see ...
>
> Say ... the words good and bad were only reserved for when the entire
> population of the planet agrees on something unanimously.
> Say perchance, for some bizzare reason, everyone decides that killing
> a complete stranger in the street with absolutely no provocation is a
> bad thing. That's okay, right?

If everyone thought it was bad then no-one would do it anyway-but yes, if there is absolutely no other option then it actually would be bad. Although, unfortunately that will probably never happen.

>
> But then there's these new words - for the sake of argument, called
> 'doog' and 'dab' - which come into play on the majority of opinion,
> social norms and laws.
>
> Although I'd like to know where you stand on laws, and being able to
> statystically analyse some things for whether they are good or bad,
> as with this story. But whatever ... on we go ...
>
> You could say pretty easily that this story was dab?
> Hitler was a dab man?
>
> Not bad, of course, because not everyone would agree, but dab?
> Yes?

Does 'dab' mean 'bad' by any chance? If so then it would obviously have the same definition. Many people thought Hitler's ideas were good. Then again, many thought they were bad. Just like someone can't both enjoy a cake and hate it at the same time- good and bad can't both be right at the same time. So the same would probably go for 'doog' and 'dab'.

> Wouldn't you agree that writing your own story is a much better
> experience than criticising others'? Or is it just me?
>
> I would. But does that mean I should stop doing it?

See below.

> In the writers point of view, their story could be brilliant. They
> could be cherishing every word they typed, whether they used tidy
> grammer or not. Many people enjoy their work. He could've hoped that
> he would be praised for it- Only to see many complaints about it.He
> may be saying he thinks it's crap, but that could just be
> because he was hoping it would shut the others up shortly
> afterwards.
>
> To be honest, as a writer, I'd be pretty p!ssed with all this.
> If everyone came in saying 'ooh ... yeah ... I can't really say this
> is good or bad, because not everyone could agree with me, so er yeah
> ... it was equal to everything. I don't hate it, if that helps, if
> I'm allowed to say that'
>
> Because there are such things as good and bad stories, and I'd like
> to know about it.

I didn't say people couldn't say they hate it. If you do, you do- but that doesn't mean you should just insult someone's work. Would you prefer it if someone said "This is crap! You shouldn't have written it, and you never should have written any of your other stories either!"?

>
> I don't hate it- I think it is alright. Sure there are quite a lot
> of
> grammer mistakes, but nobody's perfect(or at least, in the sense
> that
> people use the word perfect for today. We are all perfect in the way
> that we can't get any more 'perfect' than we already are). I'm more
> of a video game freak myself mind you(NNNOOOOO!!! I'm losing the
> rest
> of my American...ness. Wanna play some B-ball?).
>
> You really think people can't get any better than they already are?

They can? Okay then... tell me, how do you get rid of touretts syndrome(don't know how to spell it, and personally don't really care)? What about Epilepsy, etc.?

> You know ... self improvement? Broadening your horizons ... expanding
> your knowledge ... becoming a better person?
>
> I really, really hope not.

Anyone can "expand their knowledge", but does that neccaccarily make them 'a better person'?(Besides, I said perfect, not better)

C®ø§$ Bób wrote:
> I can't be Bothered FOOL.

Like the use of capitals there, really puts the emphasis on the wrong place.

And Marinky_Kongshi, give up already, you know FFF is right.

if you can't be bothered reading them, don't ask what they're about.
No-one is going to explain to you if you're not actually interested, it would just be a waste of time. Moron.

I can't be Bothered FOOL.

READ THEM YOU FOOL