[QUOTE=christsimpson;18294571]bannable isn't a word [/QUOTE]

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/bannable

[QUOTE=christsimpson;18294571]bannable isn't a word[/QUOTE]

internet lingo exists, bannable is arguably a word due to the commonality of its usage, as well as the logicality of applying ban as an adverb.

[IMG]http://sputnikmusic.com/forums/image.php?u=452308&dateline=1291069955[/IMG] inb4 he says that bannable isn't listed [IMG]http://sputnikmusic.com/forums/image.php?u=452308&dateline=1291069955[/IMG]

[QUOTE=adb;18294579]hey you guys know individual vs collective societies right?

for being an individualistic nation, America sure is generic

my proof is facebook, look at how boring everyone is and generic

target

markets

seg
ment
ation[/QUOTE]
yo, you should probably coherently express the point you're trying to get across

because right now you're rambling in segments

[QUOTE=adb;18294579]hey you guys know individual vs collective societies right?

for being an individualistic nation, America sure is generic

my proof is facebook, look at how boring everyone is and generic

target

markets

seg
ment
ation[/QUOTE]

facebook is hardly an accurate representation of a personality of human.

also, what the fuck does being a marketing major have to do with going to bars?

sorry, but people aren't going to bars to see how much of a product they can sell

[QUOTE=witchxrapist;18294582]internet lingo exists, bannable is arguably a word due to the commonality of its usage, as well as the logicality of applying ban as an adverb.[/QUOTE]

uh no. then LOL and OMG are also words. they are not. lingo is lingo.


[QUOTE=Ron Barr;18294583][IMG]http://sputnikmusic.com/forums/image.php?u=452308&dateline=1291069955[/IMG] inb4 he says that bannable isn't listed [IMG]http://sputnikmusic.com/forums/image.php?u=452308&dateline=1291069955[/IMG][/QUOTE]

well what do you expect. you direct me to a dictionary entry that basically points out that bannable isn't a word.

[QUOTE]facebook is hardly an accurate representation of a personality of human[/QUOTE]

oh really? the burden of proof has now shifted onto you

facebook targets every market of an individualistic nation

you claimed people are individuals

[QUOTE=witchxrapist;18294586]also, what the fuck does being a marketing major have to do with going to bars?

sorry, but people aren't going to bars to see how much of a product they can sell[/QUOTE]

you like going to bars because you like drinking and hanging out

demographified

odamn

2 arguments at once!?

[I][U][B]FUCK YEA[/B][/U][/I]

edit: lmao jake
[QUOTE=christsimpson;18294587]uh no. then LOL and OMG are also words. they are not. lingo is lingo.[/QUOTE]
lol and omg are acronyms.

i mean, the main purpose of facebook IS to show you're an individual

but I'm saying the majority are not anything more than numbers, they are generic and like things targeted toward their audience MOST OF THE TIME

[QUOTE=witchxrapist;18294593]edit: lmao jake

lol and omg are acronyms.[/QUOTE]

ok, "to pwn" then. that's a word, according to your logic. and by your "people use it" logic, then misspelled words are in fact also words.

[QUOTE=adb;18294588]oh really? the burden of proof has now shifted onto you

facebook targets every market of an individualistic nation

you claimed people are individuals[/QUOTE]

because facebook is a site dedicated to networking, and in social situations people construe their identity to make it palatable to thier own sense of desired self-identity since people on a whole are not willing to describe their negative attributes, which contribute just as much to a personality as positive attributes, in a social setting where the target goal is making positive worthwhile connections.

there is a whole lot more to this subject, but seeing as how you're a reasonably intelligent (if not obstinate) individual i'll let you extrapolate upon that.

personality is like history, there is the truth of what is and isn't (or what did or did not happen) and then there is interpretations to create a narrative that isn't necessarily there in the first place.

actually, the main purpose of facebook is communicating to a social network

brent you need to realize people can't prove negatives already

[QUOTE=christsimpson;18294595]ok, "to pwn" then. that's a word, according to your logic.[/quote]
well yeah, it's a word

jenk is a word

[quote]and by your "people use it" logic, then misspelled words are in fact also words.[/QUOTE]
misspelled [B]words[/B]

<3

guys can we just agree already

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/8zgAy.png[/IMG]

:smash:

[size=7]I HAVE A FACEBOOK TO PROVE THAT I AM AN INDIVIDUAL[/size]

not because i don't have a cell phone

if people naturally want to represent their ideal self image over their actual self image that is why I can argue that people are generic and norms are present.

norms are collective

[QUOTE=xharles;18294601]guys can we just agree already

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/8zgAy.png[/IMG]

:smash:[/QUOTE]

rofl

[QUOTE=witchxrapist;18294597]actually, the main purpose of facebook is communicating to a social network[/QUOTE]

communicating to a social network is in itself networking. but i'm not arguing with you here mappy, because you are right, but that rightness doesn't negate what i originally said.

[QUOTE=adb;18294605]if people naturally want to represent their ideal self image over their actual self image that is why I can argue that people are generic and norms are present.

norms are collective[/QUOTE]

this isn't what anybody was arguing, nor does saying it make anyone here think you're smart

stop rambling in an argumentative manner, it's annoying and embarassing

[QUOTE=witchxrapist;18294608]why do you always claim that your point is something completely different than what it actually is when you finally realize your losing an argument?[/QUOTE]

why do you always use fallacies

my argument is the same

people are not individuals, they are collective in nature

[QUOTE]this isn't what anybody was arguing[/QUOTE]

uhh yeah it was

[QUOTE]annoying and embarassing[/QUOTE]

projecting

[QUOTE=adb;18294605]if people naturally want to represent their ideal self image over their actual self image that is why I can argue that people are generic and norms are present.

norms are collective[/QUOTE]

but that's implying that people have a high-level of self-awareness and can articulate their true personality which more often than not is not the case.

i never said people aren't generic i said they are more than demographics, and people are individuals. being generically individual is possible, since at the end of the day a person can decide whatever they want on anything, since there is no force that prevents them from having inner thoughts. but due to numbers the overall of their thoughts will have been thought before, but these numbers don't necessarily indicate that the person didn't come to the conclusion because of outside influence.

i'm sure as a business major you are aware that statistics can't tell you everything, so why are you making an argument otherwise?

slimeographics

SLIMED

[QUOTE=adb;18294611]why do you always use fallacies[/quote]

how the fuck do you not know what a fallacy is at this point?

also Brent (if I may call you that), how versed with are you in post-modern theories? i'm not saying they will change your outlook or that it is the correct outlook on life, but as an overall phenomenon i think it would serve to broaden your horizons.

[QUOTE=adb;18294611]projecting[/QUOTE]
who am i annoying? how am i embarrassing myself?