Sesame Street Big Birdies

About: we

Scientists, politicians, the American people, liberals, conservatives & global climate change fanatics assumed as agreeing with one's point of view are all birdies.

Comments

Mark de LA says

seth 2014-09-22 08:56:53 17778

choy 2014-09-21 12:52:59 17778

seth 2014-09-21 11:59:45 17778

Well agreeing helps evolve our society ... otherwise we just get people holding to their peculiar conceptions within their garden walls and not cooperating with others, no progress possible. It definitely is in my network.

But hey, mock agreeing, you never do it with me ... yet to live in this world at all, you must make agreements ... er, what was the price of the last loaf of bread you ate? So, what's in your wallet? ... what network are you agreeing with? Incidentally that would be the network that you are encouraging, building, and making stronger. Taking sides is a bitch, eh?

This is NOT about agreeing it about you thinking others agree with you for the purposes of Ethos. In fact what you are putting forth is probably just your own opinion. As I have already published GW's comments when you use the word "WE" (see about link) "What do you mean WE, son, got a TURD in your back pocket?
PML

yep, when you use the word "we" you are proposing that people are agreeing with you ... for whatever purpose. It is a great world that has such as we call "we" withing it ... the turd in your back pocket notwithstanding PML

Yep, I think the etymology dictionary does it one better with the term wegotism

source: ...
we (pron.)

Old English we, first person plural pronoun, "I and another or others," from Proto-Germanic *wiz (cognates: Old Saxon wi, Old Norse ver, Danish vi, Old Frisian wi, Dutch wij, Old High German and German wir, Gothic weis "we"), from PIE *we- (cognates: Sanskrit vayam, Old Persian vayam, Hittite wesh "we," Old Church Slavonic ve "we two," Lithuanian vedu "we two").

The "royal we" (use of plural pronoun to denote oneself) is at least as old as "Beowulf" (c.725); use by writers to establish an impersonal style is also from Old English; it was especially common 19c. in unsigned editorials, to suggest staff consensus, and was lampooned as such since at least 1853 (see wegotism).

...

Yep, we have a first-person plural pronoun.

source: ...
wegotism (n.)

1797, from we + egotism; "an obtrusive and too frequent use of the first person plural by a speaker or writer" [OED].

...

Mark de LA says

Liber Legis II,32 - Also reason is a lie; for there is a factor infinite & unknown; & all their words are skew-wise.

for the other than logical.

Mark de LA says

seth 2014-09-22 10:37:36 17778

Einai 2014-09-22 10:35:43 17778

seth 2014-09-22 10:32:00 17778

Re the over use of the word "we" ... aka "wegotism".

Have you noticed that people use "we" just when they are attempting to increase the agreement within a group of people? Now, I do understand how it sounds like a bad thing to hear in one's ear, just when one doesn't want to agree ... and i expect that symptom will reoccur frequently ... just like tinnitus ... if that is a person's habitual tendency.

In this case, i'm glad here that i don't have to feel your pain

Are you under the egotistical delusion that you can force me to agree with you just by using the pronoun WE or bully me into agreeing with your disagreeable sarcasm? I don't have any pain. I laugh at your birdie (see the about link above).

nope, it is always a proposal ... like i have said at least 3 times here.

You seem to have a knack for talking sideways to everything. You asserted I had pain to feel. Enjoy your birdies & wegotism. Nothing new, dates back to Beowolf, eh?

Mark de LA says

seth 2014-09-22 12:44:25 17778

Einai 2014-09-22 12:39:23 17778

seth 2014-09-22 12:36:08 17778

Einai 2014-09-22 12:29:09 17778

seth 2014-09-22 10:37:36 17778

Einai 2014-09-22 10:35:43 17778

seth 2014-09-22 10:32:00 17778

nope, it is always a proposal ... like i have said at least 3 times here.

You seem to have a knack for talking sideways to everything. You asserted I had pain to feel. Enjoy your birdies & wegotism. Nothing new, dates back to Beowolf, eh?

well i talk sidewise to your distinctions which are not in my network, notwithstanding my attempts to hear what you say about them. Perhaps we could agree that is better than just contradicting and mocking them.

You network is sideways to my network - what a surprise?

not completely ... just those parts for which we cannot agree.

Well since "not in my network" is just an artful way of saying I disagree who knows, who cares, whatever.
We have now arrived at another indistinct moment - I shall call it the Whatever Moment signified by & the feeling that whatever there was here before has dissolved into ennui:

Mark de LA says

seth 2014-09-22 12:36:08 17778

Einai 2014-09-22 12:29:09 17778

seth 2014-09-22 10:37:36 17778

Einai 2014-09-22 10:35:43 17778

seth 2014-09-22 10:32:00 17778

nope, it is always a proposal ... like i have said at least 3 times here.

You seem to have a knack for talking sideways to everything. You asserted I had pain to feel. Enjoy your birdies & wegotism. Nothing new, dates back to Beowolf, eh?

You network is sideways to my network - what a surprise?

Mark de LA says

seth 2014-09-22 13:47:28 17778

yep, "not in my network" is another way of saying that we are not agreeing.

As you no doubt know by now i place a great deal of value in people agreeing and cooperating where they can ... and for this reason: "agreeing helps evolve our society ... otherwise we just get people holding to their peculiar conceptions within their garden walls and not cooperating with others ... no progress being possible."

so I have taken sides ... and it is not we, who have arrived at a "Whatever Moment" ... it is just you there in your walled garden with that on your agenda.

I have noticed that Seth doesn't really play the RWG he plays mostly the I am always right game &/or more specifically We are always right game. Toodle..oo

Mark de LA says

seth 2014-09-24 06:59:42 17778

Einai 2014-09-23 16:30:54 17778

The challenge with the WE thingy is simple. When you use WE in speaking to me, primarly the only reader other than myself on this blog, you include ME in such group. When you use the editorial WE you are using the authority of a group with 2 members of which most of the time I do not agree - even if what you say rings true to you. It would be easier for you to step up and use your own authority by using phrases like "I say ...", IMHO, Bozo says ... or Seth says ....
If you are speaking for some other group like SpeaktoMe catalog then it makes more sense to identify which group you are speaking for. You could even say things such as "as a Liberal, I think, say ....." or even as an American I say.... or even as an American I believe that ......"

Otherwise when I see the word WE .... I feel like I am talking with:

or in strong disagreement with:

Well your complaint should goes away as soon as you actually do accept that every time i use "we" in that context, i am just proposing that you are in a group of people who do assent to the stated proposition.

That such assent is voluntary is not even something that needs to be said.

But if that is not sufficient for you to hear what i am saying, then simply just fuck yourself!

OK - I'm beginning to ignore you now .... maybe talk in ming if I want to say something or maype just post more pictures & memes

IamanI says

Maybe we need a emotey that looks like this "W":

Sesame Street Big Birdies

About: we

Tags

Comments

Liber Legis II,32 - Also reason is a lie; for there is a factor infinite & unknown; & all their words are skew-wise.

for the other than logical.

See Also