aghogday
KATiE MiA
Joined: Nov 26, 2010
Posts: 4736
|
 Posted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 7:36 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| theimperiousdork wrote: | Regarding my commitment to ask Plank my questions on the issue I raised previously, I had his permission to post our conversation.
Here is what I asked him:
| theimperiousdork wrote: | 1. Can you explain your collaboration with Autism Speaks, the group vilified by the autistic community at large and the group that you used to berate, but now the group you appear to join forces with?
2. Can you discuss with me your apparent inaction on issues concerning the usage of Wrong Planet (outages, annoying advertisements, unsolicited e-mail, etc.)?
3. Would you be interested, if time allows, that users may interact with you directly in an live and open forum? |
Here's Plank's response, which surprisingly was prompt:
| alex wrote: | 1. The reason for this has already been explained and most people (even the ones who didn't like it at first) are starting to see that this has been beneficial for the autistic community.
2. Apparent inaction is not the same as inaction. I'm working on these issues behind the scenes every day. I'd you don't want to get emails from Wrong Planet, then remove your email address from your profile. But then you shouldn't complain about me not communicatiing with you.
3. I am as interactive as possible. If I took the time to respond to everyone, I wouldn't be able to keep the site running (I'd be too busy writing emails to actually work on the issues othat WP experiences. |
Well, you be the judge. |
All those responses sound reasonable to me.
I don't personally experience any problems with the site now that I have moved to a different browser. As far as I can see the service works great given a good browser and a good connection. I got the page view server busy back in 1 to 2 minutes, one time since I changed browsers about a week ago. It lasted about 30 seconds. Other than that the service has been lightening fast for me.
99 percent of my issues seemed to have been browser related.
As far as I can remember there have only been two or three major outages of the service in the last year, that actually lasted more than a few minutes, affecting everyone equally. Like the last one that lasted about 4 hours. Not a bad track record for a year and a half, for a site, that is completely free to use.
If you are still having problems, a change to another browser might do the trick, along with setting your browser to clear cache automatically after every session. It did the trick for me.
There are so many factors related to a good internet connection not directly related to the source, it is difficult to know at times, if the problem is with the source or a factor somewhere between that source and one's hardware and software.
I'm glad that you were able to get the answers that you were seeking, per the owner of the site. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Cornflake
Rattles when shaken
Joined: Oct 31, 2010
Posts: 30270
Location: Hertfordshire, UK
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2012 12:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| theimperiousdork wrote: | | Well, you be the judge. |
It looks fine to me.
How do you feel about it?
_________________
Giraffe: a ruminant with a view. |
|
| Back to top |
|
danyalukin
Emu Egg
![]()
Joined: Jan 04, 2012
Posts: 5
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 11:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Perhaps autism speaks could gain a lot by putting at least one non-neurotypical person on their board of directors....  |
|
| Back to top |
|
aghogday
KATiE MiA
Joined: Nov 26, 2010
Posts: 4736
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 6:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| danyalukin wrote: | | Perhaps autism speaks could gain a lot by putting at least one non-neurotypical person on their board of directors.... |
It wouldn't be possible, unless someone with an autism diagnosis was interested in being on the board of directors. John Elder Robison, who is a member of the Scientific Advisory board, has added much for input into the organization, but has received mostly criticism from the autistic community, including being censored on at least one website.
It is rarely acknowledged that he exists as an active member in the organization, when the organization is criticized, as it is on the ASAN organization's website, and he is usually minimized as a factor when mentioned, as a token individual with autism.
Beyond this, there is no evidence that there isn't anyone with an autism diagnosis on the board of directors. It's not a requirement that anyone broadcast that information. The organization has already stated in the interview quoted in this thread that they employee individuals with autism in their organization. It is illegal to identify these individuals by name, because of medical privacy laws, as it would be illegal to identify members on the board of directors, if any of them had a diagnosis of mild autism. .
It is an established fact that several board members have children with an autism diagnosis. This is the case among most organizations associated with autism. There are some individuals with autism in the higher positions of very small organizations, but not indicated as such in larger organizations like autism speaks.
There are also no individuals with autism identified as such on the American Society of Autism's board of directors that ASAN endorses as an organization, in the same fact sheet that they endorse ASA, that receives the same standards of review on the charity Navigator organization, donates less money to direct family services, and has a sister organization the Autism Research Institute that has recently absorbed the Defeat autism now organization that recommends chelation as a treatment for individuals with heavy metal poison with autism.
Autism Speaks was criticized for having a link to the Defeat Autism Now certified doctors on their website among thousands of other resources, clearly disclaimed as a recommendation by Autism Speaks for potential services.
Note the credentials of the board members, linked below, which are much like what one sees in any large charitable organization. The credentials are a requirement to be part of the board on any large charitable organization. If there are any individuals with a diagnosis of autism with those type of credentials they certainly could be a candidate for a position on the board. But it's highly unlikely, and would not be fair if the credentials were waived for anyone regardless of disability or minority status, whether it is a specific disability, race, gender, religion, or national origin.
http://www.autism-society.org/about-us/board-advisors/board-of-directors.html
Part of the story is usually told, but rarely is the full story told.
Here is the fact sheet from the ASAN organization.
http://autisticadvocacy.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Autism_Speaks_Flyer.pdf
The criticisms are invalid, per their endorsement of the ASAN organization on the same fact sheet, which is reported with a similar mission that autism speaks does per stated mission goals, same overall rating and element rating per stars awarded by the charity navigator organization, no identified diagnosed individuals with autism on their board of directors, the fact that autism speaks provides more money for family services than any organization endorsed on that "fact" sheet, and as you can see referring to John Elder Robison as a token, not even naming him as a hardworking individual with autism contributing valuable input to the organization's scientific advisory board.
Autism Speaks marketing words are taken out of context in the paragraph that suggests that autism speaks portrays autistic adults and children as burdens that must be eliminated from society as soon as possible. Autism speaks has never suggested that any living human being be eliminated from the population.
And ASAN suggests that autism speaks funds are dedicated to the prospect of prenatal testing that autism speaks has already made clear that they are not funding, and there is no evidence that they are funding it in the publicly available research grants that they have awarded.
Perhaps more disturbing is that Autism Speaks will an email if one has constructive criticisms, but the ASAN organization at will can refuse to answer criticism to these invalid assertions, either in the public arena or through e-mail.
There is no method for an individual to provide comments or interact with the organization, other than those whom the organization personally selects, other than personal e-mail that they are under no obligation to respond to.
One of the reasons I mention the organization is they have provided constructive criticism to the autism speaks organization in the early days of the organization; autism speaks responded by altering elements of their marketing campaign that were suggested as being offensive, and now the organization is rewarded by answering to that criticism and responding in a reasonable manner, with criticisms that have gaping holes in them, easily evidenced with a cross analysis of the organization they endorse on the same page.
I think it is great that ASAN is finally acknowledging the value of parent run autism organizations, through proven effective organizations like the Autism Society of America, but it's not professionally appropriate to not apply the same principles of endorsement to other organizations, when the same standards are attained, and objectively evidenced.
It they don't endorse autism speaks that is fine, but it is not a professional practice to openly criticize an organization, with non-merited criticisms. It's really not an appropriate practice for any non-profit charitable organization to target other reputable non-profit organizations to discredit them. The ASAN non-profit organization is the only autism advocacy organization that I have seen do this.
The ASAN organization is now a non-profit organization in the same classification as autism speaks and ASA. They will likely be analyzed by the charity navigator organization in the coming year, scrutinized by third party evidence in the same way. While they might not provide an effective avenue to answer constructive criticism in the public arena, at this point in time, they will likely soon be subject to it, in the near future, as comments are open the general public, per those watch dog group organizations like the charity navigator organization and the BBB.
The ASAN organization is coming along nicely and does great things for individuals with autism in their advocacy efforts, but what seems like a personal issue with autism speaks, may reduce their credibility as a professional organization by anyone who peruses this fact sheet that offers non-merited criticism on autism speaks.
ASAN is viewed as a respected organization that is trusted by many autistic individuals. They are a role model of sorts for individuals that are part of autistic online communities. It can only benefit the organization as well as those who trust the organization to hold the same level of standards in providing a professional representation of the facts, like other non-charitable organizations, particularly when it concerns other advocacy organizations, whom have the same overall intentions of helping individuals with autism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
vermontsavant
My father 1934 to 2010
Joined: Dec 08, 2010
Age: 37
Posts: 1779
Location: Bellows Falls,Vermont USA
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 6:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| aghogday wrote: | | danyalukin wrote: | | Perhaps autism speaks could gain a lot by putting at least one non-neurotypical person on their board of directors.... |
It wouldn't be possible, unless someone with an autism diagnosis was interested in being on the board of directors. John Elder Robison, who is a member of the Scientific Advisory board, has added much for input into the organization, but has received mostly criticism from the autistic community, including being censored on at least one website.
It is rarely acknowledged that he exists as an active member in the organization, when the organization is criticized, as it is on the ASAN organization's website, and he is usually minimized as a factor when mentioned, as a token individual with autism.
Beyond this, there is no evidence that there isn't anyone with an autism diagnosis on the board of directors. It's not a requirement that anyone broadcast that information. The organization has already stated in the interview quoted in this thread that they employee individuals with autism in their organization. It is illegal to identify these individuals by name, because of medical privacy laws, as it would be illegal to identify members on the board of directors, if any of them had a diagnosis of mild autism. .
It is an established fact that several board members have children with an autism diagnosis. This is the case among most organizations associated with autism. There are some individuals with autism in the higher positions of very small organizations, but not indicated as such in larger organizations like autism speaks.
There are also no individuals with autism identified as such on the American Society of Autism's board of directors that ASAN endorses as an organization, in the same fact sheet that they endorse ASA, that receives the same standards of review on the charity Navigator organization, donates less money to direct family services, and has a sister organization the Autism Research Institute that has recently absorbed the Defeat autism now organization that recommends chelation as a treatment for individuals with heavy metal poison with autism.
Autism Speaks was criticized for having a link to the Defeat Autism Now certified doctors on their website among thousands of other resources, clearly disclaimed as a recommendation by Autism Speaks for potential services.
Note the credentials of the board members, linked below, which are much like what one sees in any large charitable organization. The credentials are a requirement to be part of the board on any large charitable organization. If there are any individuals with a diagnosis of autism with those type of credentials they certainly could be a candidate for a position on the board. But it's highly unlikely, and would not be fair if the credentials were waived for anyone regardless of disability or minority status, whether it is a specific disability, race, gender, religion, or national origin.
http://www.autism-society.org/about-us/board-advisors/board-of-directors.html
Part of the story is usually told, but rarely is the full story told.
Here is the fact sheet from the ASAN organization.
http://autisticadvocacy.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Autism_Speaks_Flyer.pdf
The criticisms are invalid, per their endorsement of the ASAN organization on the same fact sheet, which is reported with a similar mission that autism speaks does per stated mission goals, same overall rating and element rating per stars awarded by the charity navigator organization, no identified diagnosed individuals with autism on their board of directors, the fact that autism speaks provides more money for family services than any organization endorsed on that "fact" sheet, and as you can see referring to John Elder Robison as a token, not even naming him as a hardworking individual with autism contributing valuable input to the organization's scientific advisory board.
Autism Speaks marketing words are taken out of context in the paragraph that suggests that autism speaks portrays autistic adults and children as burdens that must be eliminated from society as soon as possible. Autism speaks has never suggested that any living human being be eliminated from the population.
And ASAN suggests that autism speaks funds are dedicated to the prospect of prenatal testing that autism speaks has already made clear that they are not funding, and there is no evidence that they are funding it in the publicly available research grants that they have awarded.
Perhaps more disturbing is that Autism Speaks will an email if one has constructive criticisms, but the ASAN organization at will can refuse to answer criticism to these invalid assertions, either in the public arena or through e-mail.
There is no method for an individual to provide comments or interact with the organization, other than those whom the organization personally selects, other than personal e-mail that they are under no obligation to respond to.
One of the reasons I mention the organization is they have provided constructive criticism to the autism speaks organization in the early days of the organization; autism speaks responded by altering elements of their marketing campaign that were suggested as being offensive, and now the organization is rewarded by answering to that criticism and responding in a reasonable manner, with criticisms that have gaping holes in them, easily evidenced with a cross analysis of the organization they endorse on the same page.
I think it is great that ASAN is finally acknowledging the value of parent run autism organizations, through proven effective organizations like the Autism Society of America, but it's not professionally appropriate to not apply the same principles of endorsement to other organizations, when the same standards are attained, and objectively evidenced.
It they don't endorse autism speaks that is fine, but it is not a professional practice to openly criticize an organization, with non-merited criticisms. It's really not an appropriate practice for any non-profit charitable organization to target other reputable non-profit organizations to discredit them. The ASAN non-profit organization is the only autism advocacy organization that I have seen do this.
The ASAN organization is now a non-profit organization in the same classification as autism speaks and ASA. They will likely be analyzed by the charity navigator organization in the coming year, scrutinized by third party evidence in the same way. While they might not provide an effective avenue to answer constructive criticism in the public arena, at this point in time, they will likely soon be subject to it, in the near future, as comments are open the general public, per those watch dog group organizations like the charity navigator organization and the BBB.
The ASAN organization is coming along nicely and does great things for individuals with autism in their advocacy efforts, but what seems like a personal issue with autism speaks, may reduce their credibility as a professional organization by anyone who peruses this fact sheet that offers non-merited criticism on autism speaks.
ASAN is viewed as a respected organization that is trusted by many autistic individuals. They are a role model of sorts for individuals that are part of autistic online communities. It can only benefit the organization as well as those who trust the organization to hold the same level of standards in providing a professional representation of the facts, like other non-charitable organizations, particularly when it concerns other advocacy organizations, whom have the same overall intentions of helping individuals with autism. |
what website censured john robison.also what is the ASA
_________________
Abstract concepts are for those who dont know there facts.Liaison for the political forum.Please contact if you have any questions or problems |
|
| Back to top |
|
aghogday
KATiE MiA
Joined: Nov 26, 2010
Posts: 4736
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 9:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| vermontsavant wrote: | | aghogday wrote: | | danyalukin wrote: | | Perhaps autism speaks could gain a lot by putting at least one non-neurotypical person on their board of directors.... |
It wouldn't be possible, unless someone with an autism diagnosis was interested in being on the board of directors. John Elder Robison, who is a member of the Scientific Advisory board, has added much for input into the organization, but has received mostly criticism from the autistic community, including being censored on at least one website.
It is rarely acknowledged that he exists as an active member in the organization, when the organization is criticized, as it is on the ASAN organization's website, and he is usually minimized as a factor when mentioned, as a token individual with autism.
Beyond this, there is no evidence that there isn't anyone with an autism diagnosis on the board of directors. It's not a requirement that anyone broadcast that information. The organization has already stated in the interview quoted in this thread that they employee individuals with autism in their organization. It is illegal to identify these individuals by name, because of medical privacy laws, as it would be illegal to identify members on the board of directors, if any of them had a diagnosis of mild autism. .
It is an established fact that several board members have children with an autism diagnosis. This is the case among most organizations associated with autism. There are some individuals with autism in the higher positions of very small organizations, but not indicated as such in larger organizations like autism speaks.
There are also no individuals with autism identified as such on the American Society of Autism's board of directors that ASAN endorses as an organization, in the same fact sheet that they endorse ASA, that receives the same standards of review on the charity Navigator organization, donates less money to direct family services, and has a sister organization the Autism Research Institute that has recently absorbed the Defeat autism now organization that recommends chelation as a treatment for individuals with heavy metal poison with autism.
Autism Speaks was criticized for having a link to the Defeat Autism Now certified doctors on their website among thousands of other resources, clearly disclaimed as a recommendation by Autism Speaks for potential services.
Note the credentials of the board members, linked below, which are much like what one sees in any large charitable organization. The credentials are a requirement to be part of the board on any large charitable organization. If there are any individuals with a diagnosis of autism with those type of credentials they certainly could be a candidate for a position on the board. But it's highly unlikely, and would not be fair if the credentials were waived for anyone regardless of disability or minority status, whether it is a specific disability, race, gender, religion, or national origin.
http://www.autism-society.org/about-us/board-advisors/board-of-directors.html
Part of the story is usually told, but rarely is the full story told.
Here is the fact sheet from the ASAN organization.
http://autisticadvocacy.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Autism_Speaks_Flyer.pdf
The criticisms are invalid, per their endorsement of the ASAN organization on the same fact sheet, which is reported with a similar mission that autism speaks does per stated mission goals, same overall rating and element rating per stars awarded by the charity navigator organization, no identified diagnosed individuals with autism on their board of directors, the fact that autism speaks provides more money for family services than any organization endorsed on that "fact" sheet, and as you can see referring to John Elder Robison as a token, not even naming him as a hardworking individual with autism contributing valuable input to the organization's scientific advisory board.
Autism Speaks marketing words are taken out of context in the paragraph that suggests that autism speaks portrays autistic adults and children as burdens that must be eliminated from society as soon as possible. Autism speaks has never suggested that any living human being be eliminated from the population.
And ASAN suggests that autism speaks funds are dedicated to the prospect of prenatal testing that autism speaks has already made clear that they are not funding, and there is no evidence that they are funding it in the publicly available research grants that they have awarded.
Perhaps more disturbing is that Autism Speaks will an email if one has constructive criticisms, but the ASAN organization at will can refuse to answer criticism to these invalid assertions, either in the public arena or through e-mail.
There is no method for an individual to provide comments or interact with the organization, other than those whom the organization personally selects, other than personal e-mail that they are under no obligation to respond to.
One of the reasons I mention the organization is they have provided constructive criticism to the autism speaks organization in the early days of the organization; autism speaks responded by altering elements of their marketing campaign that were suggested as being offensive, and now the organization is rewarded by answering to that criticism and responding in a reasonable manner, with criticisms that have gaping holes in them, easily evidenced with a cross analysis of the organization they endorse on the same page.
I think it is great that ASAN is finally acknowledging the value of parent run autism organizations, through proven effective organizations like the Autism Society of America, but it's not professionally appropriate to not apply the same principles of endorsement to other organizations, when the same standards are attained, and objectively evidenced.
It they don't endorse autism speaks that is fine, but it is not a professional practice to openly criticize an organization, with non-merited criticisms. It's really not an appropriate practice for any non-profit charitable organization to target other reputable non-profit organizations to discredit them. The ASAN non-profit organization is the only autism advocacy organization that I have seen do this.
The ASAN organization is now a non-profit organization in the same classification as autism speaks and ASA. They will likely be analyzed by the charity navigator organization in the coming year, scrutinized by third party evidence in the same way. While they might not provide an effective avenue to answer constructive criticism in the public arena, at this point in time, they will likely soon be subject to it, in the near future, as comments are open the general public, per those watch dog group organizations like the charity navigator organization and the BBB.
The ASAN organization is coming along nicely and does great things for individuals with autism in their advocacy efforts, but what seems like a personal issue with autism speaks, may reduce their credibility as a professional organization by anyone who peruses this fact sheet that offers non-merited criticism on autism speaks.
ASAN is viewed as a respected organization that is trusted by many autistic individuals. They are a role model of sorts for individuals that are part of autistic online communities. It can only benefit the organization as well as those who trust the organization to hold the same level of standards in providing a professional representation of the facts, like other non-charitable organizations, particularly when it concerns other advocacy organizations, whom have the same overall intentions of helping individuals with autism. |
what website censured john robison.also what is the ASA |
I'll pm you on the website. The ASA is the Autism Society of America. |
|
| Back to top |
|
theimperiousdork
War resumes!
Joined: Jul 08, 2009
Posts: 5896
Location: Secret
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 12:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, I would just like to share some insights on this issue:
A leopard cannot change its spots.
A crow can never be white.
A pig will never stop wallowing in mud.
Crap will never smell like perfume.
In the same way, what is innately evil will remain evil.
_________________
And now, the war resumes. Bring it on, you! |
|
| Back to top |
|
Delphiki
Launchie
Joined: Apr 15, 2012
Age: 23
Posts: 1350
Location: My own version of reality
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 1:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| theimperiousdork wrote: | Well, I would just like to share some insights on this issue:
A leopard cannot change its spots.
A crow can never be white.
A pig will never stop wallowing in mud.
Crap will never smell like perfume.
In the same way, what is innately evil will remain evil. |
first 2 you can with spray paint. The third, take away the mud. Fourth, yes itcan.
How is it innately evil?
_________________
Trolls exist! They steal your socks, but only the left ones. I wonder what is up with that? |
|
| Back to top |
|
theimperiousdork
War resumes!
Joined: Jul 08, 2009
Posts: 5896
Location: Secret
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 5:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Delphiki wrote: | | theimperiousdork wrote: | Well, I would just like to share some insights on this issue:
A leopard cannot change its spots.
A crow can never be white.
A pig will never stop wallowing in mud.
Crap will never smell like perfume.
In the same way, what is innately evil will remain evil. |
first 2 you can with spray paint. The third, take away the mud. Fourth, yes itcan.
How is it innately evil? |
Well, I was just presenting an adage.
Spray paint is not indelible, and in a short time, it will fade away, revealing their real colours.
Oh, by the way, spray paint is toxic.
Even if you take away the mud, a pig will still make attempts, even going as far as wallowing in its own crap, to cool itself down.
And no, crap is still crap, so it will never smell like perfume.
In the same way, and as I always say, what is innately evil will remain evil.
_________________
And now, the war resumes. Bring it on, you! |
|
| Back to top |
|
vermontsavant
My father 1934 to 2010
Joined: Dec 08, 2010
Age: 37
Posts: 1779
Location: Bellows Falls,Vermont USA
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 8:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Delphiki wrote: | | theimperiousdork wrote: | Well, I would just like to share some insights on this issue:
A leopard cannot change its spots.
A crow can never be white.
A pig will never stop wallowing in mud.
Crap will never smell like perfume.
In the same way, what is innately evil will remain evil. |
first 2 you can with spray paint. The third, take away the mud. Fourth, yes itcan.
How is it innately evil? |
1.a leopard would maul anything that would try to spray paint it
2.the toxic fumes from spray paint would kill a crowe
3.the pigs would likely go ferrell and decimate all the natural recources around them
so imperiousdork wins points 1 through 3 but delphiki wins point 4 and here is why:
if you sprayed enough perfume on poop the alchohol in the perfume would kill off the bacteria and the poop would loose its foul smell
_________________
Abstract concepts are for those who dont know there facts.Liaison for the political forum.Please contact if you have any questions or problems |
|
| Back to top |
|
aghogday
KATiE MiA
Joined: Nov 26, 2010
Posts: 4736
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 8:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| theimperiousdork wrote: | | Delphiki wrote: | | theimperiousdork wrote: | Well, I would just like to share some insights on this issue:
A leopard cannot change its spots.
A crow can never be white.
A pig will never stop wallowing in mud.
Crap will never smell like perfume.
In the same way, what is innately evil will remain evil. |
first 2 you can with spray paint. The third, take away the mud. Fourth, yes itcan.
How is it innately evil? |
Well, I was just presenting an adage.
Spray paint is not indelible, and in a short time, it will fade away, revealing their real colours.
Oh, by the way, spray paint is toxic.
Even if you take away the mud, a pig will still make attempts, even going as far as wallowing in its own crap, to cool itself down.
And no, crap is still crap, so it will never smell like perfume.
In the same way, and as I always say, what is innately evil will remain evil. |
Can you provide an example of innate evil?
Would literally mean a child that is born evil, if we are talking about humans. For evidence one would have to present evidence of an evil baby.
Some people do suggest that people are born evil, but science has debunked that speculation.
Beyond that evil is evidenced as a human construct of abstract language, not an innate human characteristic. Some people will describe Hurricanes evil as well. It provides an answer of comfort to a capricious scary world, and some suggest that Hurricanes come to kill people perceived as sinning, another human construct, associated with the human construct of evil.
Other than that white crows exist, and are easily evidenced as such.
Pigs will not wallow in mud, when there is no mud, during a drought. Yes they will wallow in crap to cool down, that will mix with the sand as well as urine. If crap is crap, mud is mud as well. Mud is "a mixture of water and some combination of soil, silt, and clay". But crap and urine have a certain percentage of water so I guess one could argue the point that when mixed with soil it is mud and the rest of what make crap and/or urine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mud
There are perfumes marketed and chemically designed to smell like crap, for what one would hope is a joke, but as can be seen on the internet there are some perverse interests out there. Some people are disgusted by the smell of perfumes marketed to smell good.
While a leopard does not have the ability to change spots during the course of a lifetime, they are certainly born without very visible spots as Black Leopards/Panthers.
And finally, generalizations are usually easy to debunk, if one pursues the details. 
Beyond this Autism Speaks has a new CEO, that has a history of being strong on gun control; likely some see that as evil too, among those that might see hurricanes as evil as well. Interesting though, she was an independent republican in New York, one often doesn't match republicans with gun control, but that would be another generalization or stereotype.
I think it is only proper that we acknowledge the diverse nature of the Crow, and the Leopard.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
SixSeven
Emu Egg
Joined: Jun 29, 2012
Age: 43
Posts: 3
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 11:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chris71 wrote: | A sweeping statement indeed about a presumed dislike of an organisation
| Quote: | | But their also fully-funding a way to indentify if a foetus is autistic and then give their parents a choice whether to abort, they want to eradicate autistics from the face of the earth. |
Errm, there was a poll on WP asking if we would rather not have been born. Most responses were "yes".
I certainly wish I had been terminated before birth.
The pain, oversensory issues, not being able to enjoy social situations is a disability more than a special ability. Something that I, for one, am not proud of. |
No offense but that's a twisted way to look at what's essentially a gift. I am very comfortable with who I am and with the gifts and challenges that comes with being me.
Granted it took some time but by no fault of my own I was given a set of unique challenges to endure as I moved through life. With the tools I had at the time I responded the best I could and at 42 years of age I offer no apologies.
Sure we have a selective cross to bear and may see ourselves as unfortunate but in no way does that cancel out what this existence has to offer.
I decided a long time ago life was worth living. You use coping strategies to deal with things like hyper sensitivity and social awkwardness and you make the best out of what's left.
There is a place for everyone in this world. You don't give up or use hind sight to justify non-existence just because you're different. You embrace the challenge of being you.
What a dull and mediocre world this would be if we could genetically engineer babies in utero or throw away the ones that didn't live up to someones twisted standards for what a human being should be. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Delphiki
Launchie
Joined: Apr 15, 2012
Age: 23
Posts: 1350
Location: My own version of reality
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 12:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| vermontsavant wrote: | | Delphiki wrote: | | theimperiousdork wrote: | Well, I would just like to share some insights on this issue:
A leopard cannot change its spots.
A crow can never be white.
A pig will never stop wallowing in mud.
Crap will never smell like perfume.
In the same way, what is innately evil will remain evil. |
first 2 you can with spray paint. The third, take away the mud. Fourth, yes itcan.
How is it innately evil? |
1.a leopard would maul anything that would try to spray paint it
2.the toxic fumes from spray paint would kill a crowe
3.the pigs would likely go ferrell and decimate all the natural recources around them
so imperiousdork wins points 1 through 3 but delphiki wins point 4 and here is why:
if you sprayed enough perfume on poop the alchohol in the perfume would kill off the bacteria and the poop would loose its foul smell |
1 and 2 the leopard could have been tranquilized first, nothing said the crow had to be alive. The statements say never even if the leopard were to maul me I would have still spray painted it.
_________________
Trolls exist! They steal your socks, but only the left ones. I wonder what is up with that? |
|
| Back to top |
|
vermontsavant
My father 1934 to 2010
Joined: Dec 08, 2010
Age: 37
Posts: 1779
Location: Bellows Falls,Vermont USA
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 8:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Delphiki wrote: | | vermontsavant wrote: | | Delphiki wrote: | | theimperiousdork wrote: | Well, I would just like to share some insights on this issue:
A leopard cannot change its spots.
A crow can never be white.
A pig will never stop wallowing in mud.
Crap will never smell like perfume.
In the same way, what is innately evil will remain evil. |
first 2 you can with spray paint. The third, take away the mud. Fourth, yes itcan.
How is it innately evil? |
1.a leopard would maul anything that would try to spray paint it
2.the toxic fumes from spray paint would kill a crowe
3.the pigs would likely go ferrell and decimate all the natural recources around them
so imperiousdork wins points 1 through 3 but delphiki wins point 4 and here is why:
if you sprayed enough perfume on poop the alchohol in the perfume would kill off the bacteria and the poop would loose its foul smell |
1 and 2 the leopard could have been tranquilized first, nothing said the crow had to be alive. The statements say never even if the leopard were to maul me I would have still spray painted it. |
well,i guess you got me on that one.ha ha ha
_________________
Abstract concepts are for those who dont know there facts.Liaison for the political forum.Please contact if you have any questions or problems |
|
| Back to top |
|
theimperiousdork
War resumes!
Joined: Jul 08, 2009
Posts: 5896
Location: Secret
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 01, 2012 9:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Aghogday, whilst I agree with you on the premise that humans aren't innately evil and that there are indeed some who find the smell of crap pleasant (however perverse that must be), what I was trying to say is that no leopard nor crow can change their colour at will. (Actually, the picture of the "leopard" you offered was that of a black panther, a member of the cat family, to which the leopard also belongs. A white crow? Quite strange.) And I was not talking about humans -- I am talking about a group. Now in the spiritual sense, nothing, specifically humans, is innately evil, and that goes to Autism Speaks as well as to everyone else. But not in the moral sense. Autism Speaks isn't human -- it it a corporation. Autism Speaks was created for a malicious purpose, and even if they strive to change, no one forgets their highly offensive tactics, which to some may be "blunders," but vile ones nonetheless.
Delphiki, even if one would attempt to mask the smell of crap with perfumes, the very chemicals that cause the smell (which is composed primarily of sulfur-based compounds called thiols) are still existent, and the smell of crap will still be there, no matter what. As for the leopard and the crow, what I was trying to say is that they cannot change their colours at will. But you know what? You proved a good point. A leopard and a crow can have intervention to have their colours changed -- but then, they will never be the same again. Paradoxically, however, they still remain a leopard and a crow.
_________________
And now, the war resumes. Bring it on, you! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
