Dangerously Chloe 13-03-17 Onto Sometheeng Beeg

Discuss EC/MC/DC here!

Moderators: Dave Zero1, Don Alexander, Giz, midgetshrimp, Cassandra

User avatar
FuzzyFace
Posts: 281
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2014 11:39 pm

Re: Dangerously Chloe 13-03-17 Onto Sometheeng Beeg

Post by FuzzyFace » Thu Mar 16, 2017 12:36 am

Gotoh wrote:
Cortez wrote:Regardless, you can't ignore that Teddy himself stated that the boys never hit him.
Which is why I said their statements contradict each other.

It'd be like someone bragging that they torched some other guy's house, but the alleged victim says it never happened. They both can't be telling the truth, 'cuz either it happened or it didn't.
One of them is said aloud, and one is an inner thought. If they contradict, you might say that what was said aloud was a boast, although the situation doesn't make it seem like boasting. It is hard to see how you can come up with a plausible alternative for an inner thought. Or you can say that they don't contradict except that you are choosing to interpret "pounded" in a way that makes them contradict. Since the simplest resolution is clearly to interpret "pounded" in some other way than hitting, Occam's razor demands that we do so.

Gotoh
Posts: 3498
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 9:18 pm

Re: Dangerously Chloe 13-03-17 Onto Sometheeng Beeg

Post by Gotoh » Thu Mar 16, 2017 1:37 am

FuzzyFace wrote:It is hard to see how you can come up with a plausible alternative for an inner thought. Or you can say that they don't contradict except that you are choosing to interpret "pounded" in a way that makes them contradict.

Since the simplest resolution is clearly to interpret "pounded" in some other way than hitting, Occam's razor demands that we do so.
Except the context in which it was used doesn't make any other interpretation seem plausible.

You say Teddi has no reason to lie, but neither does the jock since he was talking with his friends about an event they were a part of. So if they didn't actually pound him (as in, hitting), wouldn't one of them correct him by saying, "no, we didn't"?

User avatar
wiseguy
Posts: 4029
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 7:34 am
Location: California

Re: Dangerously Chloe 13-03-17 Onto Sometheeng Beeg

Post by wiseguy » Thu Mar 16, 2017 1:47 am

so if all of them didn't see "pounding" as actual hitting, would there be a reason for any of them to say "no, we didn't hit him"?

you have decided to assume that pounding HAS TO mean "actual hitting"
ImageImage

User avatar
tau neutrino
Posts: 336
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2015 7:28 am

Re: Dangerously Chloe 13-03-17 Onto Sometheeng Beeg

Post by tau neutrino » Thu Mar 16, 2017 1:55 pm

Gotoh wrote:
Cortez wrote:Regardless, you can't ignore that Teddy himself stated that the boys never hit him.
Which is why I said their statements contradict each other.

It'd be like someone bragging that they torched some other guy's house, but the alleged victim says it never happened. They both can't be telling the truth, 'cuz either it happened or it didn't.
DaveZero1 explained it.
Gotoh wrote:
Cortez wrote:Nah, that's just your poor excuse. Especially since no siblings act this way.
Dexter and his sister, Didi, say "hi". So do Ross and his sister, Monica. Or Doug and Judith Funny, who didn't get along with each other 'til Disney took over the series and aged them up. Or how 'bout Linus Van Pelt and his sister, Lucy? :-\

So yes, you're determined to take a comical situation seriously.
Cortez wrote:You realize that people have been arrested for abusing their siblings in real life, right?
What abuse? Name one thing Gabrielle's done to Naomi that she can be arrested for.
Drugging her (for the purpose of publicly humiliating her)? None of the examples you give rise to the level of malice Gabrielle has shown.

Gotoh
Posts: 3498
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 9:18 pm

Re: Dangerously Chloe 13-03-17 Onto Sometheeng Beeg

Post by Gotoh » Thu Mar 16, 2017 7:46 pm

tau neutrino wrote:DaveZero1 explained it.
Which means I had it right, because it confirms that they hit him.
tau neutrino wrote:Drugging her (for the purpose of publicly humiliating her)? None of the examples you give rise to the level of malice Gabrielle has shown.
That's your idea of "malice"? :-\

And yes, the examples I mentioned have done worse than anything Gabrielle's done to Naomi.
  • Didi, for example, repeatedly barges into Dexter's lab and trashes his inventions for sh*ts 'n giggles. Which is why he's declared his lab off limits to her, yet she still does it anyway.
  • Ross tricked his sister into thinking she had a phonecall from her boyfriend, so Monica revealed she had misplaced her diaphragm; not knowing it was their mother on the other end of the line. It ends with Ross doing a troll dance, while his sister chucked fruit at him.
  • And do I need to bring up the stunt Nina pulled by highjacking her sister's body to go on a date with her sister's boyfriend? Which was premeditated, on Nina's part.
If you honestly sitcom siblings don't behave that way, you haven't watched enough of 'em.

User avatar
Don Alexander
Dr. Ebil SithMod
Posts: 27522
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2008 11:26 am
Location: Under the arms of the ancient oak, where daylight hangs by a lunar noose...

Re: Dangerously Chloe 13-03-17 Onto Sometheeng Beeg

Post by Don Alexander » Sun May 07, 2017 3:59 pm

And in this thread we discuss... mostly other things. :P

I had my own theory concerning the "pounding" thing, but, hm, DaveZero1's explanation kind of nixes it: Continuity error. Though, even then it's a bit peculiar that Teddy does not seem to think what the jocks did to him was "hitting".
ImageImage
Sithlord of the Sithling and best customer of McLovecraft's Image, in the business of keeping the little Platypus in business
Moderations in GREEN and signed by the DAMNed. I am not anonymous! Also, MODSMACK!! Image
Winner of the... 2010 Kilopost FRANKIE; 2010 Mad March Nom Off; 2010 Joker Cleavage Contest; 2010 Fan-Thing Contest; 2010 Mimic Contest (tied); 2011 Joker Cleavage Contest; 2011 Contest-for-the-next-Contest (tied)

Post Reply