Is kidluckee 33?

[sexdrugsmoney]

As a regular of SMP we get to "know" a little about our fellow posters through watching their posts or engaging with them, and we naturally develop a little "mental dossier" of sorts after a certain amount of time about certain posters and how they present themselves and their beliefs.

Ofcourse, our "mental dossiers" can always contain false information. We can deduce wrongly due to the nature of virtual communities, yet one would hope after x amount of time and x amount of discourse that our "mental dossiers" give a view that can at least somewhat reflect certain truths about the board member in question. (though a wise man will always watch and revise his "mental dossier" as time goes by, realizing that his original assumptions may have been incorrect and/or that people change as their axioms do)

That being said ...

kidluckee has recently said he was 33.

Q. Do you believe kidluckee is 33?

[Aytumious]

I think he's made many valid points regarding non-theistic views, with no glaring spelling, grammar, or logical flaws. Nothing in his posts made me think he wasn't at least in his 20's, so 33 certainly isn't out of the realm of possibility.

For what reason did you post this idiotic poll?

I hate bragging, but you seem to be forcing me into a position to do so. I don't think you want to get in a 'who's got a better resume' pissing contest with me, because I think there are very few on this board who will fair very well academically or professionally, even at my tender young age of 33.

[Jeff V]

I don't mean any dis-respest, but I would have thought you were younger.

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
I hate bragging, but you seem to be forcing me into a position to do so. I don't think you want to get in a 'who's got a better resume' pissing contest with me, because I think there are very few on this board who will fair very well academically or professionally, even at my tender young age of 33.

[/ QUOTE ]

You see this is why I don't buy that you're 33.

I seem to have a notion in my head, that by 33, a man should confidently know who he is and what he believes in, and the 'angst' of youth is beneath him.

I have clearly put you in a lower age bracket, 18-24 in my "dossier", placing your age around late teens early 20's max. (not that I've given it much thought though)

I saw recently BluffTHIS! seemed to think you were in high school, so obviously in his "mental dossier" he placed your age in a similar bracket (if not a lower one) to the one in my dossier. (as he is an SMP regular and has had observations and discourse with you)

Your postings have ranged from playful time wasting (Antweh - Gospel of Larry) to ignorant (the various *yawns* and so forth) to psuedo-plagarism (Poor Nietzsche and Einstein, let them rest!) and almost all are unobjective. (extreme disdain and bias seeps through)

You also (if compared to many other posters here) don't take the time in many of the posts I've seen to format in a style which is more consistent with one who is (in my mind) of the age of 33, with many of your posts not seeming eloquent in the slightest.

I know you were raised a Christian and you believe your family are ignorant, yet you in your constant attacks on Christianity here, have shown that for someone so dogmatic that they are right, you are ignorant about many concepts. (you admitted you have not read the whole Bible)

When you dogmatically state there is no God you let Nietzsche do most of the talking for you when you are serious, and at other times coming across as someone who is as I have said before, youthful to put it nicely.

Then your username, which you claim is only a 'poker name', yet you registered on this site on 06/02/05 08:33 AM, so you were either 32 or 33 when you decided to use that name for this forum.

Is a 32/33 year old really a kid?

Then there is this current post of yours, with things such as:

[ QUOTE ]
I hate bragging, but you seem to be forcing me into a position to do so.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is not a 33 year old a man? Who can force a man to do anything? (let alone a simple poll which clearly is only to see how the "mental dossiers" place your age?)

[ QUOTE ]

I don't think you want to get in a 'who's got a better resume' pissing contest with me, because I think there are very few on this board who will fair very well academically or professionally, even at my tender young age of 33.

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps the kicker? You obviously pride yourself on your achivements (which are an alleged pending doctorate) at a 'tender' age (though how "tender" the meat is at early 30's is debateable) but you also seem to believe that many others here (I assume you include Sklansky also) aren't as academically bright or haven't achieved as much as you in their professional lives?

All this, leads me to believe that you are not 33, but closer to BluffTHIS!'s view, that you are in high school or late teens-early 20's. (my view)

However, I must admit errors on my part.

1) In my mind, I have a perception of what a 33 year old should be, based on my own experiences in life. Clearly this is wrong. Everybody is different. You may be 33, after all, it's just a number right?

Yet at 33 I merely assumed one would have enough life experience and have accumulated enough information, to not act in the way(s) I have pointed out in this post.

And that was wrong of me, a silly assumption obviously if you are telling the truth.

2) Furthermore I can say that a poll was a bad idea in hindsight due to the fact that it can be easily manipulated due to new registrations (of which I have observed there have been some in the time since posting the poll) skewing results heavily one way.

Ofcourse I'm not saying this has been done, (no "J'accuse!") but in Criminology the phrase "who benefits?" is often touted and given your pride and perturbation at this poll, it's not totally improbable to believe there may be some motive to manipulate.

You may think this is an attack on you, but it is not intended to be. All I am saying is that in my "dossier" of you, 33 is a suprise to say the least, as is the Phd and military career. (BTW did going vegetarian for that week have an impact on your military training or was it fine?)

Sociology has alot to say about virtual communities and whether accurate relationships (& portrayals of people) can be formed or not in cyberspace, so it's quite possible my "dossier" is erroneous. (I know BluffTHIS! is erroneous about me in his "dossier")

Yet, it's all I have of you from what you have presented here, and from that, it doesn't add up to (my belief of) 33.

Who Knows?

Cheers,
SDM

[ QUOTE ]
When you dogmatically state there is no God ...

[/ QUOTE ]

See, you never really read anything I wrote because I never said such a thing or even believe it. I have always been consistent questioning the objective evidence for a god, not stating that there is no god. Since you miss this very obvious and consistent point to my threads, it is easy to see how you miss the rest of it, too, and resort to oversimplifications and prejudiced dismissals.

[ QUOTE ]
Then your username, which you claim is only a 'poker name', yet you registered on this site on 06/02/05 08:33 AM, so you were either 32 or 33 when you decided to use that name for this forum.

Is a 32/33 year old really a kid?


[/ QUOTE ]

Presenting a false image at the poker table is nothing new. The majority of my poker playing names are "kidluckee" for this very reason, but I also have a screen name as "grannyann", will you think I am a grandma, too?

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When you dogmatically state there is no God ...

[/ QUOTE ]

See, you never really read anything I wrote because I never said such a thing or even believe it. I have always been consistent questioning the objective evidence for a god, not stating that there is no god. Since you miss this very obvious and consistent point to my threads, it is easy to see how you miss the rest of it, too, and resort to oversimplifications and prejudiced dismissals.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice try.

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Then your username, which you claim is only a 'poker name', yet you registered on this site on 06/02/05 08:33 AM, so you were either 32 or 33 when you decided to use that name for this forum.

Is a 32/33 year old really a kid?


[/ QUOTE ]

Presenting a false image at the poker table is nothing new. The majority of my poker playing names are "kidluckee" for this very reason, but I also have a screen name as "grannyann", will you think I am a grandma, too?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why the need for a second post? Did you not read my large post above properly?

EDIT: Also I don't want this to degenerate into a flame war, I just wanted to state that.

[ QUOTE ]
I know you were raised a Christian and you believe your family are ignorant, yet you in your constant attacks on Christianity here, have shown that for someone so dogmatic that they are right, you are ignorant about many concepts. (you admitted you have not read the whole Bible)

[/ QUOTE ]

My attacks are generally on flawed uses of deductive reasoning used by Christians, not on the principles of a religious lifestyle. For example, BluffThis claims that the premise "God created the universe" must lead to the conclusion that He is a benevolent god. This is false, whether I was Christian or not, I would loudly proclaim this as false. txaq007 made the claim that the similarity of each culture's moral system supports the premise that absolute morality is instilled in us by God. This conclusion is false and even if I was a Christian I would loudly point out that there are legitimate other reasons the moral codes across cultures may be similar. If these are such "attacks" that they are unwarranted, then I am wasting my time here. I am not dogmatic in my belief of any particular concept such as txaq007, BluffThis, and others have shown to be, because I don't subscribe to any unfounded beliefs to be dogmatic about. My dogma is strictly that one must weigh the question honestly and objectively rather than rely on predisposed prejudices or catchy fix-alls (such as "divine revelation" or "god's will" whenever you get backed in a corner). At times, my posts are more brash and meant as sarcasm to point out what I believe is a poster's failure to apply logic consustently. If this bothers you so, or causes you to assume I am 18, well that is beyond my control.

You are correct in that I stated I've read and reread the New Testament but not the entire Old Testament. Since I have not offered any posts regarding the specific content of any portions of the Bible for which I am not familiar, I feel the point is irrelevant.