eqo

Beginning from OP's post, I agree. This is a discussion board that is also utilized as a tool for learning (I assume). It's not a classroom or an examination. Any reputation related votes should be for posts that contain a reasonable amount of evidence that show the poster either a good or bad character; on terms of civility and in some cases morality (some of the forum laws are based around morality, I assume in the regulations it states that violent or threatening behavior is prohibited - why so? If it's because it's against the law, then again why so?). If it's judged on general knowledge and intelligence, then it's not reputation that needs to be altered, you would have chosen a different scheme of things such as 'Intelligence Meter' or 'Knowledge Pool'. It's not much of a problem for me personally, I don't judge people based on the forums representation of their character (reputation meter), but rather my own perception (i.e. I am the judge). I suppose it can be a problem for the poster, it's not polite, it's not civil or fair and it's only the, sometimes biased, opinion of the chain of command. It's not a big problem anyway, anyone with sense would look past it.

I see, cool. So essentially the Government were making the people who were on welfare the potential bad guys, by first removing all funds from the factors that helped them? Leaving people on welfare in a deadlock between poverty and opportunity? Hmm. War is then the primary focus for spending and through it the economy is growing, so it's classed as 'good' or 'plausible'? If so, it's quite obvious why people chose to do this, essentially serving the economy and thus putting the public under it instead of in plain view?

What is your opinion of secret organizations that play roles in the overall system of reality? Personally I feel uncomfortable, there are many reasons for this. I have a strong connection to trust, I cannot follow something blindly without firstly sensing an element of it. I don't like when things are committed behind the scenes, although I'm unaware of it I still do not agree with it occurring, especially when I'm involved with it's result and origin. Do you think that there are groups of people out there who control what you are allowed to know, and input false information into media streams to confuse or deter you from truth?

Respect is something that requires premise, a foundation of which man can follow. There can be off-springs of this foundation, different type-sets for different hiveminds. It is dependant on the social circle that one chooses to take part in; and the wants and needs of all of the people taking part. If we were all living in a "Scarface"-like social circle, then any respect made would be budding from our want for power and our need for money (to achieve power). I could kill 1,000,000 people and still receive respect from 'Tony Montana', for it had helped him receive profit - he's more powerful and I may have made him a bit of money. I define it as being respectful/careful to the wants and needs of others. You can gain it by being consistent and trustworthy (i.e. it's not just a one off happening, it defines you). I respect people through love and the branches of friendship, for many of reasons. It can even benefit myself mentally, spiritually, physically, present and future by simply respecting others truthfully.

On the grand scale of things I believe it is fair to say that modern science is wasteful, and overall a hinderence to our (humanities) total life span. What we do have is an oppurtunity, to live eternally under the natural forces that helped us evolve. Most scientists are taking full advantage of the claimed 'resource' and are using it to create (be creators, make their mark on the universe); resulting ultimately in mass consumption of vital "living power", for profits. I don't want to misuse the term profit, but it comes in many forms; knowledge, reputation or monertary based are the most common types of 'profit'. An unintelligent human could survive without the knowledge taught in schools, naturally. Thus, if all intelligent people left or 'stopped', the so called 'unintelligent' would be better off; for they're living naturally without human-created knowledge. This doesn't make scientists wrong or evil completely, in a purposive sense they are attempting to improve everyone's lives, I just don't think it's being applied correctly. Resource is vital to our survival, the lives of today need to think about the lives of tomorrow. This is just a rant in light of maybe persuading people to cut down on the waste they produce,.