Art as in the SEN forum I linked to.

... which has music in it.

Listing arbitrary bands is not at all interesting, especially since these are awards for SENners and not the members of said bands. I'm pretty certain they could not care even the slightest about getting some mythical award from a StarCraft fansite.

Listing arbitrary bands is not at all interesting, especially since these are awards for SENners and not the members of said bands. I'm pretty certain they could not care even the slightest about getting some mythical award from a StarCraft fansite.

Notice I'm specifically referring to people not of SEN? People were nominating bands and artists... like Brontobyte nominated Eminem.

Also, for future reference, it may be more helpful to ask me to clarify than to blatantly say "NO UR RONG".

When was Ez and I fighting?

Notice I'm specifically referring to people not of SEN? People were nominating bands and artists... like Brontobyte nominated Eminem.

Also, for future reference, it may be more helpful to ask me to clarify than to blatantly say "NO UR RONG".

Artist as in art. Musical artists are not even the slightest relevant to SEN.

Art as in the SEN forum I linked to.

Artist of the year: Eminem

It would have worked better if I actually quoted and pointed out what I was referring to... but that post was probably just random while reading the topic. Hopefully now there is no more confusion in what I meant, and there is no need to drag this on further (which, as I said on MSN, you are obviously trying to do, Devilesk.)

So my suggestion for future reference is that you quote who you're responding to especially if it's not about the post directly above yours. If you're not going to quote because you're referring to many posts then you should make your post even more explicit because there's no quote to provide context.

There is no need to discuss it further as it is off-topic and has been resolved. Perhaps there is a little insecurity as I am frustrated by it.

EDIT: Unless someone removed one, I only find Bronto's before my post... Devourer's post is edited and right above mine. That is all I can think of, otherwise I would have put it in my post directly above his.

Now you appear to be specifically going off-topic. I have no further things to say on the issue as it is resolved and you appear to just be spamming and are not being helpful at all.

EDIT: I'm not going to quote something right above my post. >.> Not usually, unless I am responding to a specific statement and not the post as a whole.

You're right! Let us tear down the walls of strict on-topic discussion! We could better ourselves by discussing the underlying philosophies of our errors!
(lolol random urge. Seriously, though, I'm done.)

Post-Conventional

The post-conventional level, also known as the principled level, consists of stages five and six of moral development. Realization that individuals are separate entities from society now becomes salient. One's own perspective should be viewed before the society. It is due to this 'nature of self before others' that the post-conventional level, especially stage six, is sometimes mistaken for pre-conventional behaviors.

In Stage five (social contract driven), individuals are viewed as holding different opinions and values. Along a similar vein, laws are regarded as social contracts rather than rigid dictums. Those that do not promote the general welfare should be changed when necessary to meet the greatest good for the greatest number of people.[8] This is attained through majority decision, and inevitably compromise. In this way democratic government is ostensibly based on stage five reasoning.

In Stage six (universal ethical principles driven), moral reasoning is based on abstract reasoning using universal ethical principles. Laws are valid only insofar as they are grounded in justice, and that a commitment to justice carries with it an obligation to disobey unjust laws. Rights are unnecessary as social contracts are not essential for deontic moral action. Decisions are not met hypothetically in a conditional way but rather categorically in an absolute way (see Immanuel Kant's 'categorical imperative').[13] This can be done by imagining what one would do being in anyone's shoes, who imagined what anyone would do thinking the same (see John Rawls's 'veil of ignorance').[14] The resulting consensus is the action taken. In this way action is never a means but always an end in itself; one acts because it is right, and not because it is instrumental, expected, legal or previously agreed upon. While Kohlberg insisted that stage six exists, he had difficulty finding participants who consistently used it. It appears that people rarely reach stage six of Kohlberg's model. [11]

But yeah, I found it funny no one mentioned the fight Moose and I have had going for years now. I'm not as important to ANYONE as I had originally thought.