CDZ Intergenerationality

[Michelle420]

Doesn't matter.

I strongly disagree.

You basically made a thread asking about sex education, gaming and leaving kids alone in a park. Then you discussed about talking privately online with a minor.

ChrisL is the one who brought up that discussion. It certainly wasn't in the OP.

You said under the guise of shared common interests. I said well if it's an innocent conversations and platonic you have nothing to worry about and you don't.

And I said you're mistaken. These things tend to fix themselves though.

If you want to talk to someone and it's innocent and private nobody but you and that person will know.

Unless someone pesters you about the possibility that you talked privately until you reveal it just to get them off your back about it -.-

I don't really relate to wanting to talk to a 14 yr old

You probably don't like anime...

I don't like anime,

Just as I suspected .

I have nothing in common with 14yr olds in fact they get on my nerves

Laugh . Anyone can get on my nerves, they don't have to be 14 .

Do whatever you want just don't break the law

Thanks.

Anyone can get on my nerves too. But I especially don't like young teens.

I see, laugh . I can't say the same. That doesn't mean I converse with them often though. In today's day and age, about the only ones who do are their parents and teachers of one stripe or another. I was briefly a teacher in Mexico, but it was short lived. The pay's not exactly great there. I came back to Canada and work at a charity now.

Well I guess there is nothing more to say about it.

 

[Holos]

Maybe I should just start with the first- what does "athletic subtety is physical prowess" mean to you?

Sports can be played and excelled within arbitrated games, friendly games and beyond to the alternation of any game and game type, especially when the physicality required is not so importing as the including awareness of all components the games includes and also can come to include. This is both in the preparation (training) for games and in games already undergoing a campaign or competition.

The goal should always be subtlety so that more components can be integrated, in contrast to a restricted two-way (receiving and delivering) attention followed and preceded by exaltation of athletes individualized by their differentiating achievements (but not by the singularity of the matches they participate in and set themselves to participate in the future).

Leisure is completely unnecessary, and actually only occurs in training or within ongoing games if the athletics used are rash, abrasive, carelessly eager, forceful and exclusive.

Leisure, and not defeat, should be the standard comprehension of what failure consists of, as well as the standard comprehension for successive activities, both in the perspective of the individual, training athlete, and in the perspective of the competing athlete holding in their attention themselves, their partners and their opponents.

 

[phoenyx]

Maybe I should just start with the first- what does "athletic subtety is physical prowess" mean to you?

Sports can be played and excelled within arbitrated games, friendly games and beyond to the alternation of any game and game type, especially when the physicality required is not so importing as the including awareness of all components the games includes and also can come to include. This is both in the preparation (training) for games and in games already undergoing a campaign or competition.

The goal should always be subtlety so that more components can be integrated, in contrast to a restricted two-way (receiving and delivering) attention followed and preceded by exaltation of athletes individualized by their differentiating achievements (but not by the singularity of the matches they participate in and set themselves to participate in the future).

Leisure is completely unnecessary, and actually only occurs in training or within ongoing games if the athletics used are rash, abrasive, carelessly eager, forceful and exclusive.

Leisure, and not defeat, should be the standard comprehension of what failure consists of, as well as the standard comprehension for successive activities, both in the perspective of the individual, training athlete, and in the perspective of the competing athlete holding in their attention themselves, their partners and their opponents.

I think you are saying that you're not a fan of competitive sports. If that's the case, I'd like to say that neither am I. I've never been a fan of having winners and losers when it comes to sports. This isn't to say that a given individual's athletic abilities shouldn't be appreciated. There are physical activities that can provide people with exercise without the need to compete with each other. Hiking, building things, farming, horse back riding, swimming all come to mind. I'm not sure I understand where you're going with this talk about leisure. Perhaps you are suggesting that failure is when people don't want to exercise at all?

 

[Holos]

Maybe I should just start with the first- what does "athletic subtety is physical prowess" mean to you?

Sports can be played and excelled within arbitrated games, friendly games and beyond to the alternation of any game and game type, especially when the physicality required is not so importing as the including awareness of all components the games includes and also can come to include. This is both in the preparation (training) for games and in games already undergoing a campaign or competition.

The goal should always be subtlety so that more components can be integrated, in contrast to a restricted two-way (receiving and delivering) attention followed and preceded by exaltation of athletes individualized by their differentiating achievements (but not by the singularity of the matches they participate in and set themselves to participate in the future).

Leisure is completely unnecessary, and actually only occurs in training or within ongoing games if the athletics used are rash, abrasive, carelessly eager, forceful and exclusive.

Leisure, and not defeat, should be the standard comprehension of what failure consists of, as well as the standard comprehension for successive activities, both in the perspective of the individual, training athlete, and in the perspective of the competing athlete holding in their attention themselves, their partners and their opponents.

I think you are saying that you're not a fan of competitive sports. If that's the case, I'd like to say that neither am I. I've never been a fan of having winners and losers when it comes to sports. This isn't to say that a given individual's athletic abilities shouldn't be appreciated. There are physical activities that can provide people with exercise without the need to compete with each other. Hiking, building things, farming, horse back riding, swimming all come to mind. I'm not sure I understand where you're going with this talk about leisure. Perhaps you are suggesting that failure is when people don't want to exercise at all?

I apologize, the "Leisure" was a typo. I meant "Lesion".

Seems I have been working too much, hehe.

What I was saying was that I do appreciate competitive sports, but only when the game and the next games are the priority instead of their variable results of winning and losing. To win is to be able to play again. To lose is to be hurt or to hurt.

 

[phoenyx]

Maybe I should just start with the first- what does "athletic subtety is physical prowess" mean to you?

Sports can be played and excelled within arbitrated games, friendly games and beyond to the alternation of any game and game type, especially when the physicality required is not so importing as the including awareness of all components the games includes and also can come to include. This is both in the preparation (training) for games and in games already undergoing a campaign or competition.

The goal should always be subtlety so that more components can be integrated, in contrast to a restricted two-way (receiving and delivering) attention followed and preceded by exaltation of athletes individualized by their differentiating achievements (but not by the singularity of the matches they participate in and set themselves to participate in the future).

Leisure is completely unnecessary, and actually only occurs in training or within ongoing games if the athletics used are rash, abrasive, carelessly eager, forceful and exclusive.

Leisure, and not defeat, should be the standard comprehension of what failure consists of, as well as the standard comprehension for successive activities, both in the perspective of the individual, training athlete, and in the perspective of the competing athlete holding in their attention themselves, their partners and their opponents.

I think you are saying that you're not a fan of competitive sports. If that's the case, I'd like to say that neither am I. I've never been a fan of having winners and losers when it comes to sports. This isn't to say that a given individual's athletic abilities shouldn't be appreciated. There are physical activities that can provide people with exercise without the need to compete with each other. Hiking, building things, farming, horse back riding, swimming all come to mind. I'm not sure I understand where you're going with this talk about leisure. Perhaps you are suggesting that failure is when people don't want to exercise at all?

I apologize, the "Leisure" was a typo. I meant "Lesion".

I think you're saying that injuries, rather than defeat, should be what defines failure?

What I was saying was that I do appreciate competitive sports, but only when the game and the next games are the priority instead of their variable results of winning and losing. To win is to be able to play again. To lose is to be hurt or to hurt.

Based on what you said there, I think my guess was right . I agree that hurting and getting hurt are definitely things to avoid. But I also think that one can get in emotional ways as well as physical. I think that -some- areas need to be competitive, in a sense, because they lead to different paths- I'm thinking of ideas and political ideologies. In that realm, I'm a firm believer in the value of competition. Also, until we live a world that's completely peaceful, things like martial arts and even knowing the art of war will remain useful, and allowing for competing methodologies in this can be a good thing, in the hopes of getting closer to the best (with some caveats when it comes to the art of war). But for a long time, I've felt that most competitive sports aren't really doing anyone a favour, serving mainly to distract the global population from issues that are far more important, and instilling the harmful notion that failure is losing. It even goes beyond sports, to tv shows like "survivor" and "the bachelor/bachelorette". And then there's the job market. I certainly agree that productive workers should be rewarded and unproductive workers should be encouraged to become productive, but the issue of how we're defining productivity is something that should be settled first, as well as the methods of encouraging and discouraging people to be productive.