Finding the SotT/QFG glossary
cholas said:
I have had this problem as well. I have tried playing with the text size but that doesn't seem to remedy the problem. What does seem to work though (as a short term solution, while "reorganizing" is taking place) is to highlight the entire text and then to 'copy-past' the text into a wordpad or microsoft word document. Hope that helps, and if that is not clear enough I will try and explain better.cholas said:
seeking_spirals
Padawan Learner
Cassiopedia Permission Error?
Hi, I was just wondering why some terms in the glossary are no longer available? Like "Shocks" and "Objectivity."
Hi, I was just wondering why some terms in the glossary are no longer available? Like "Shocks" and "Objectivity."
Cassiopedia Permission Error?
also any term referring to Lobaczewski like
asthenic psychopathy
characteropathy
conversive thinking
doubletalk
egotism
essential psychopathy
hysteria
hysteroidal cycle
ideology
indocrination
information selection
instinctive substratum
Jackal
moralizing [tactics]
pathocracy
macrosocial [pathological] phenomenon
paralogism
paramoralism
paranoid characted disorder
pathocracy
ponerization, ponerogenesis
ponerology
propaganda
psychopathy
skirtoid psychopathy
spellbinder
subconscious selection
upward social adjustment
Well, i wanted to get them the easiest way
I will earn them the hard way
also any term referring to Lobaczewski like
asthenic psychopathy
characteropathy
conversive thinking
doubletalk
egotism
essential psychopathy
hysteria
hysteroidal cycle
ideology
indocrination
information selection
instinctive substratum
Jackal
moralizing [tactics]
pathocracy
macrosocial [pathological] phenomenon
paralogism
paramoralism
paranoid characted disorder
pathocracy
ponerization, ponerogenesis
ponerology
propaganda
psychopathy
skirtoid psychopathy
spellbinder
subconscious selection
upward social adjustment
Well, i wanted to get them the easiest way
I will earn them the hard way
Cassiopedia Permission Error?
more readily an free-flowing dance of two peacocks, at least one of them has a heavenly bright plummage, the other - is greyishhh, albeit that doesn't deflect one's scope (beware of disguised rattlesnakes in grey)
Well, i'll put together ponerology terms the best i can, and be back
more readily an free-flowing dance of two peacocks, at least one of them has a heavenly bright plummage, the other - is greyishhh, albeit that doesn't deflect one's scope (beware of disguised rattlesnakes in grey)
Well, i'll put together ponerology terms the best i can, and be back
anart
A Disturbance in the Force
Cassiopedia Permission Error?
Odd that despite this being discussed previously ( http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=3647&p=3 ), here we are again.
Yes, communicative external consideration is NOT Azur's strong point - he tends to write to amuse himself, for himself. Unfortunately, CarpeDiem also tends to 'feed' that little 'i' of Azur's. Were it a private correspondence, that would all be fine and good - unfortunately on a networking forum it runs contrary to what we do.Keit said:
Odd that despite this being discussed previously ( http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=3647&p=3 ), here we are again.
Azur
The Living Force
Cassiopedia Permission Error?
Arghh.
I've been thinking about my latest post to Carpe, specifically what I thought I was seeing in his/her post, which evidently wasn't there and how such a "take" with regards to meaning on a situation keeps "sticking" even when not real.
Frankly, I have trouble understanding Carpe, as evidenced in the past. This is not his/her fault, language barrier or not. I fill in the blanks with what I think is being said, and go from there. The issue is that the blanks, once (incorrectly, or correctly, both with no assurance) filled in, lead to a conclusion. That's not a biggie. The biggie is acting as if the blanks filled in are solid info.
Carpe, I once again apologize for making assumptions as to the intent of your transmissions. It would be much better to simply ask for clarification, as opposed to making a charge with tenuous understanding.
I certainly took a wrong "read" here, but without others to point it out, I might still think I "saw it right".
Network and community has more eyes than any one does.
Arghh.
I've been thinking about my latest post to Carpe, specifically what I thought I was seeing in his/her post, which evidently wasn't there and how such a "take" with regards to meaning on a situation keeps "sticking" even when not real.
Frankly, I have trouble understanding Carpe, as evidenced in the past. This is not his/her fault, language barrier or not. I fill in the blanks with what I think is being said, and go from there. The issue is that the blanks, once (incorrectly, or correctly, both with no assurance) filled in, lead to a conclusion. That's not a biggie. The biggie is acting as if the blanks filled in are solid info.
Carpe, I once again apologize for making assumptions as to the intent of your transmissions. It would be much better to simply ask for clarification, as opposed to making a charge with tenuous understanding.
'Tis true. Not intentionally, but that's the point, and I'm working on trying to be succinct in addition to being a lot more lucid about what my thoughts are based on.anart said:
This little 'i' was pointed out to me a while back, and sure as snot, it was begrudgingly true in a some of things I had posted. Not all, but more than zero. This wasn't the case here, despite the massive brainfart in evidence.anart said:
I certainly took a wrong "read" here, but without others to point it out, I might still think I "saw it right".
Network and community has more eyes than any one does.