School Proxys

[CezeN]

Didnt I say they used to block sparknotes. According to school, going to sparknotes used to be considered messing around on the computer. Im not talking about whethor the class is important, Im talking about the book. That individual book is not. Good students go through the work of finding a good proxy to bypass the blocks on sparknotes.

I know this is not substantively contributing to this thread, but this makes me want to cry.

Seriously? You think you're a good student because you waste your time trying to find a way around the rules to cheat? Really? Honestly?

I managed to take 6 AP classes and still get all my reading done. And if I didn't finish something, I sucked it up and took my lumps. It was my fault for not finishing. I deserved all the grades I got because I did the work that I was supposed to.

Is someone a good student because they managed to find a pre-written essay that isn't listed in turnitin.com? Because they went through the work to find one? Or are they a bad student because they cheat well enough to look like a good student? I am inclined to think the latter.




I hate academic dishonesty and I tend to think very, very, very little of people who do it. And EVEN LESS of people who try to justify it. At least have the decency to feel bad when you cheat.

so you really thought I was serious *shakes head* It was a play on words. He said good students do their work, so I said I went through the work of finding a good proxy. C'mon now

Syphon the sun- Im actually sixteen. I said Id been using the proxy for a year and a half at least. We didnt need proxys in middle school. I also mentioned books like the LIfe of Pi and The Scarlett Letter, which 14-year olds would not read yet. Also, I talked about my AP and pre-Ap classes. In fact AP U.S. HIstory. Do you really think IM that smart to be taking them in the 9thgrade??? Or were you not thinking at all. *shakes finger* What did I tell you about assumptions. Assumptions only prove your ignorance which only disproves your ability to give good advice about the situation that your ignorant about. Therefore, I say that any reasoning you try to give me is "inherently flawed". Especially, since its fueled by the superiority of cliches to actually knowing the situation that your giving lectures about. Your right, I dont know everything. You apparently seem to think you do. Maybe, you never realized how ignorant you were at my age, and think Im the same way. Trust me, Im not you. I didn't feel invincible and jack up the schools computer system, that was you. I wont become the prude that you all want me to be though, thats why Im not "listening to a damned" thing that you all teachers and you are saying.

[Mich]

Even more ridiculous would be how trusting you are in cliches and stereotypes. You seem to have the whole "I was a kid before, Ive done what you done" complex about you. Thats also what Peterparkers uncle said to him, yet his experience was nothing similar to Spidermans. Theres a reason people dont trust stereotypes, they are a generilizations and assumptions about the terms of a specific group or situation. You cant give lectures and say Ive been where you have based on assumptions

I figured this was being handled pretty well by everyone else, right up until you tried to use comics to defend yourself. And what did you do? You used the comic as a counterpoint. That's just cold, man. I believe the whole point of the comics, movies, cartoons, etc. was that Uncle Ben was right. It's amazing, I know, but most people just try to avoid using clichés merely because they're annoying, not necessarily because they're wrong.

Not that it matters. As Syphon said, what, two pages ago, you clearly think you're invincible, whether he means in terms of getting caught or in terms of losing any kind of debate, so the point is entirely, inextricably and without fail, moot.

[VelvetElvis]

Derailments aside, I don't think any members will contribute to the deliquency of a minor. Sorry.

This thread could do with a hosing down or a locking, not sure which would be best.

[Syphon the Sun]

My aren't you clever. "Oooh, he said I was fourteen in an obviously joking way, everything he says is wrong!!! I win!!!" Give me a break, here. I don't care how old you are. I used fourteen because, well, because I thought it was funnier. Great, you're sixteen. Whoopty doo. So, what exactly does that disprove, again? But whatever. You sure showed me. You know what the administrators are looking at, how they're doing their jobs, what kinds of punishments (if any) the school would dole out, and everything else having to do with the situation. Except, you don't.

And neither do I. You could be right; maybe they don't monitor students' usage at all. But I know how other school districts operate (and a good many of them, at that). And I know that from both sides of the issue. But what do you know? You know that you haven't heard of anyone getting caught, yet. You know that the librarians (people wholly unrelated to the administrators) don't seem to care. You know that twice the proxy server you were using that used to work stopped working. You can blast us all for being ignorant of your personal situation, but you're certainly just as ignorant of it yourself.

I never claimed to know everything. I don't know how your school's administrators do their jobs (or don't do their jobs). But neither do you. And I've got the knowledge of how a significant portion of others doing the same job do it. However, I really am curious about all of these supposed "clichés" I keep getting accused of repeating, nevermind that you merely use the word to not have to actually, you know, address the issues presented.

And this will probably be the last time I'll ever tell you this, but you're right: you're not me. When I was your age, I knew my faults. I knew that I didn't know how the administrators did their jobs and that it was guesswork on my part. I knew that doing something against the rules was, you know, breaking the rules, not merely bending them. I knew that while I had moral justification for some of my actions (like removing Google from the filter, for instance), I was still breaking the rules. And that even though nobody had ever been punished for what I was doing, it didn't mean nobody ever would be.

But have your fun. Keep breaking the rules so you can do what you want. Until you actually post something worthwhile, I'm done with you. Just don't come begging us to do your research (for proxies or anything else) for you. We're not spark notes; for once in your life, you actually have to do your own work. What a concept.

[CezeN]

Even more ridiculous would be how trusting you are in cliches and stereotypes. You seem to have the whole "I was a kid before, Ive done what you done" complex about you. Thats also what Peterparkers uncle said to him, yet his experience was nothing similar to Spidermans. Theres a reason people dont trust stereotypes, they are a generilizations and assumptions about the terms of a specific group or situation. You cant give lectures and say Ive been where you have based on assumptions

I figured this was being handled pretty well by everyone else, right up until you tried to use comics to defend yourself. And what did you do? You used the comic as a counterpoint. That's just cold, man. I believe the whole point of the comics, movies, cartoons, etc. was that Uncle Ben was right. It's amazing, I know, but most people just try to avoid using clichés merely because they're annoying, not necessarily because they're wrong.

Not that it matters. As Syphon said, what, two pages ago, you clearly think you're invincible, whether he means in terms of getting caught or in terms of losing any kind of debate, so the point is entirely, inextricably and without fail, moot.

Actually Uncle Ben had no clue what Peter was going through. What was his advice that he gave Peter that was right????
What I think is that due to you alls longer experience you all are annoyed that a teen has the nerve to debate with you all. Therefore, you say to yourselves that he must think he is invincible. Thats just my two cents.

Syphon the sun-
Most everything you say is wrong. The fact that you think you know what your talking about, despite the fact you are making assumptions, which if you dont know, are based on nonexisting evidence, seems kinda illogical to me.*shrugs* But I guess its just me.

LOL. I also know that the proxy was mostly used on my math teachers computer since he let us fool around. Yet nothing has happened, to him. Dont you think hed get fired for breaking these school rules??? Yet he hasn't. That tells me that your paranoia is unfounded. Yeah proxys will get discovered. Thats what happens. Im not ignorant of that, yet your obviously ignorant of what happens to the students that use them.

You may not claim to know everything, but you sure try to act it. At the very least, you act like your advise is solid, because you "think" you have been where I am, and know the reprecussions. Basically, you know what they say. Age is just a number. Yet you seem to consider it proof of the superiority of your advice. And that in itself is a cliche. The whole "adult smart, knows best, teen dumb, thinks knows best". Despite the confidence in yourself, you dont know best. You just know that you like cliches, and according to them you know best.

When I was your age, I knew my faults.

Seems to me you grew worse with age. Since apparently you dont see the big holes in the logic surrounding you giving me advice. You seem to think that your "invincible" now. I disagree, and think you should degenerate back to the humbleness you said you had as a kid. Probably, at that time right now you would be admitting that in actuality, you shouldn't be the one giving a lecture on this foriegn situation that you are making assumptions about.

From my point of view, your ignorance is just appalling with this last paragraph. All these assumptions that you have made about me. Me not being a good student, and only reading sparknotes. Me never doing my own work. The worst part being, how you act like your "assumptions" are right. Could be evidence of a big ego. LOL. Youve been posting trash the last two pages, I would say you telling me to post something worthwhile is hypocritical. Maybe by worthwhile, you mean long pointless post that will take a long while to read. Though when you started, I was planning to try to make an uberlong one to see how you would react. You do know its quality over quantity??? Your post can be long, but it won't make what your saying, the advice your giving good

[Wil]

*precognition*

Blah blah immature blah blah wrong blah blah.

Blah blah blah NO U! blah blah blah!

Blah blah nobody is making you reply blah blah.

Blah my topic blah blah I'll reply as much as I blah blah want to reply blah!

Blah when will you learn blah blah you're wrong and blah blah!

I think we ALL get the order of events now. Move on people, nothing to see here!

[CezeN]

LOL that was kinda funny

[Syphon the Sun]

You're still flat-out refusing to address any of the issues, I see. I can't say I'm surprised. When I say worthwhile, I mean actually discussing things. As opposed to you plugging your ears with your fingers screaming "lalalala!" It almost appears as the extent of your vocabulary is: cliché, stereotype, and assumption. Because that's the only thing you've been parroting this whole time. I don't really blame you, though; after all, it's so much easier than actually responding. And we all know you like the easy way.

I find it incredibly amusing that as someone who has been continuously saying people are putting words in your mouth, you're so quick to do the same. But if you think it will help you sleep at night, or pick up women, or whatever silly reason you have for doing it: by all means, have fun, keep pretending I'm saying stuff I'm not. Just let me know when you want to stop living in that silly fantasyland.

And for the record, I never said I wasn't making assumptions. The difference is that my assumptions have some actual experience behind them; whereas you're banking on your lack of experience ("I don't know anybody who has been punished!") to prove your assumptions true. Doesn't matter, though. Because you're so convinced you're right, you'll warp your entire reality until you make it fit your preconceived notions. Nevermind that the intelligent thing to do is to err on the side of caution.

Have your fun. Don't both doing your reading assignments, don't bother trying to learn the language you speak. Find a super-awesome proxy so you can check out if you're in somebody's Top Eight, instead. I'll be here waiting for you figure out that proxy servers aren't discovered by a room full of monkeys randomly hitting keys, but rather by administrators monitoring the behavior of their users. Just remember: it's easier to eat crow while it's still warm.

[zeroguy]

And since you've been in a similar situation, you should already know that it's exactly what they would not be doing in a vast majority of schools.

See, I disagree. Sure, they won't be spending the majority of their time on it, but they're still watching for fishy behavior. If they catch someone (or someones) using a proxy, I simply cannot believe they wouldn't pay a little more attention to them.

Maybe they would if they weren't underfunded and understaffed. Many places don't have even a single full-time admin; just someone that cycles through several schools during the week.

And "catch" them how? Either just by happening to see it on someone's screen or something (okay, but that wouldn't seem like it'd happen too often, and it's very unlikely if the kid is being careful), or by monitoring network traffic. Automated searches for certain strings would bring up a ton of false positives, and it'd be likely that they don't have anyone with the time to go through reading such logs all day....

And they certainly did not do stuff like that at my (non-underfunded, wrt tech staff) school, at least at the level of the school itself. If there was certain content that was marked as "bad" it was simply dropped/rejected/whatever depending on the protocol in question.

My first guess would have actually been a list handed down from higher-ups. But even CeZ seems to be indicating that's not the case.

And they would have gotten the list, where, exactly? I find it hard to believe that it could have been random when it seemed to have worked for quite a while, as Cez admits.

From a third party; research org, some government division, or just some company they pay for stuff like that. And they could have gotten it at least partially from monitoring activities of kids, but it wouldn't be at the school.

The only thing ridiculous was how long your post had become, thankfully you stopped.

*rolls eyes* I don't want to squander any more of your precious time that you could be doing.. what is it 14 year olds do again? Give me a break. If you don't like my responses: don't read them. Don't respond to them. But complaining that I am taking the time to respond to you is silly. "Oh, no, you're actually responding!!"

Well, your posts do seem to be consisting more and more of complaining about CeZ himself. The post immediately above this one could have the exact same value when lacking the first two paragraphs.

[Dr. Mobius]

Mike just like to hear the sound of his own voice.

[CezeN]

You're still flat-out refusing to address any of the issues, I see. I can't say I'm surprised. When I say worthwhile, I mean actually discussing things. As opposed to you plugging your ears with your fingers screaming "lalalala!" It almost appears as the extent of your vocabulary is: cliché, stereotype, and assumption. Because that's the only thing you've been parroting this whole time. I don't really blame you, though; after all, it's so much easier than actually responding. And we all know you like the easy way.

I find it incredibly amusing that as someone who has been continuously saying people are putting words in your mouth, you're so quick to do the same. But if you think it will help you sleep at night, or pick up women, or whatever silly reason you have for doing it: by all means, have fun, keep pretending I'm saying stuff I'm not. Just let me know when you want to stop living in that silly fantasyland.

And for the record, I never said I wasn't making assumptions. The difference is that my assumptions have some actual experience behind them; whereas you're banking on your lack of experience ("I don't know anybody who has been punished!") to prove your assumptions true. Doesn't matter, though. Because you're so convinced you're right, you'll warp your entire reality until you make it fit your preconceived notions. Nevermind that the intelligent thing to do is to err on the side of caution.

Have your fun. Don't both doing your reading assignments, don't bother trying to learn the language you speak. Find a super-awesome proxy so you can check out if you're in somebody's Top Eight, instead. I'll be here waiting for you figure out that proxy servers aren't discovered by a room full of monkeys randomly hitting keys, but rather by administrators monitoring the behavior of their users. Just remember: it's easier to eat crow while it's still warm.

I totally agree with the person above.
I don't see an issue with the proxy. Yes cliche, stereotype, and assumptions are all Im telling you because that from my opinion fully describes your character. Which is the issue I have been discussing. THe fact that you are trying to give me advice, based on assumptions and stereotypes is the issue that I have been discussing. Theres a reason people dont like stereotypes OR getting stereotyped.

And we all know you like the easy way.

Is that why Im taking AP and PreAP classes?? Is that why I only read the sparknotes when I dont have time to read the book??? Or did you forget that in your attempt at making me look bad or whatever you were trying to do with your first two paragraphs.

Not only are you making dumb assumptions about the situation, but about my character. It seems after I mentioned myspace and sparknotes, thats the only thing you can talk about. The things that youve been "parroting". Youve already assumed that I never read any of the books in english and that Im mostly going to use the proxy for myspace. Your last paragraph is just proof of that.

I think the essential problem is the fact that you cant accept the weakness of your own ignorance. Your ego is so inflated because of your age, that you assume that no matter the situation, if you know the general idea about it, you can make perfectly logical assumptions about it. You hear the term myspace and sparknotes and you make assumptions about how much I use both of them, and that they are the main reason I want the proxy. The fact that you dont see the problem with that is pretty depressing to me. Even now, I think to myself, the assumptions Im making about you aren't necessarily right, why can't you do the same???? Why can't you humble yourself from that exalted throne of age and supposed omnipotents??? The bible says something in a scripture, about how can someone pluck the plank out of theres brothers eyes and see tell him to see clearly, without first plucking out their own.

stop living in that silly fantasyland

LOL. YOU telling me that seems slightly hypocritical. Take your plank out first then I will take mine

But anyways, it doesnt matter. I can tell my message is falling on deaf ears. Probably plugged with a plank similar to the one on your face. You won't listen to what Im saying, because your older and therefore as the stereotype proves, must know best. And because of all this age and experience theres no faults in your logic or your mentality. Your ego's so big, you think whatever you say is right. And whatever you think is right. Though I could be wrong. I dont read people as good as you must be able to. Im sure your reply will be

bla bla bla *cliche*
Bla bla bla I know what Im talking about bla bla bla bla we know your lazy
bla bla myspace+assumption bla bla bla stereotype+assumption
Bla bla you wont listen, because you think your invincible. bla bla keep fantasizing bla bla bla its gonna be ironic when you get caught bla bla
bla bla bla *something that makes you look like a smartass*

Except it will be 100 times bigger, because you like to write huge essays on how your ignorance reigns supreme over the specifics and logic.

[lyons24000]

Honestly, I used proxies in school, too. At some point, they were all found out and blocked. Then we found three teachers passwords and didn't need 'em (the proxies) anymore!

I am going to say this: I doubt CeZeN will ever get in trouble for it. Too many kids at school use proxies for them to target just one. They'll just keep finding them and blocking them. It would be a waste of time for them to punish every single kid doing it.

However, just to teach a lesson, they may punish a kid or two but that's a chance you'll have to take. I like this example: A few years ago it came out that there were ten people in Texas being prosecuted for illegally downloading music off the internet. They would go to jail and pay $100,000 in fines. Well, of the hundreds of thousands to millions of people in Texas that download music off the internet only ten got caught. Your chances of not getting caught seem very good although you could still be one of those ten. I'm sure they thought they never would be.

But then you have to think about it. Downloading music is illegal for a reason. It hurts other people by taking away from their income. Not just the singers but the producers, writers, etc. Whether you like it or not, CeZ, your doing these things is hurting someone. It may be to a very small degree and you may never know who or how, but it is doing the damage.

I do agree with Syphon that it will show your maturity by whether or not you follow the rules and decide to stop now and quit breaking your signed agreement. While the internet usage agreement is not serious, there will be plenty of other signed documents that will be important in the future. Start obeying the minor ones you have now and it will be easier to obey the ones you have in the future.

[Syphon the Sun]

CeZ, Mr. Pot, what's going on? Did I mention you're black? Thanks for proving my point, though: you're absolutely unwilling to address anything I've said directly. Instead, you'll cast whatever label you feel like on it (stereotype, assumption, etc.). The only "issue" you're willing to address is that of the labels you cast out, except you won't even address them directly, just merely repeat whatever label you want.

I'm not trying to give you advice based on stereotypes or assumptions. I'm giving you "advice" on experience, possibilities, and actual risks, all of which you've discounted in favor of your own lack of experience and ignorance of both possibilities and risks. Which is fine; you're free to do that. But that doesn't make anything I've said any less valid. Yelling stereotype or assumption or whatever the hell else you want at the top of your lungs won't magically turn what I'm relating to you into the words. You're not Humpty Dumpty.

But you gave me a sliver of hope. You mentioned specifics and logic; I'm hoping you'll find the time to incorporate both of them into any further replies. I won't bet on it, though. So, here's the deal: you're so bloody sure I'm wrong, actually talk about that, instead of parroting your three catchphrases. I'll help by asking a few questions that have been at the heart of my responses:
1. What evidence do you have regarding the monitoring efforts (or lack thereof) of the network administrators?
2. How is it logically consistent that doing something specifically banned is not breaking that particular rule?
3. What did your analysis of risks and dangers of certain behavior rely on?

There are more, but if you can answer those, you might be on track to actually having a serious discussion. But if his past history is any indication, I have a feeling you'll instead choose to ignore this and throw out more unsubstantiated labels. Please, I beg you, prove I'm wrong on that.

Oh, and Zero, I guess we just have to disagree with how its done. We both have our experiences--both personal and from third-parties, I'm sure--and they're stark contrasts to each other. I'm willing to concede (as I was earlier) that his administrators could reflect my experience, or yours, or neither. When it happens to be an unknown issue, especially one where the evidence seems to point to either direction, I find it more reasonable to err on the side of caution. I find it more than a little silly to pretend that certain risks do not exist merely because they haven't (to your knowledge) happened, yet.

[Gravity Defier]

That poor horse...never stood a chance.



(Psst, Michael. Slowly back away from the horse and maybe Cez will, too. It's okay to give up sometimes.)

[Wil]

OH GOD, QUICK, EVACUATE THE TOPIC BEFORE PETA GETS HERE!

[zeroguy]

I swear I'm just going to say three things:

I am going to say this: I doubt CeZeN will ever get in trouble for it. Too many kids at school use proxies for them to target just one. They'll just keep finding them and blocking them. It would be a waste of time for them to punish every single kid doing it.

However, just to teach a lesson, they may punish a kid or two but that's a chance you'll have to take.

Excellently put! Everything actually relevant to the thread I wanted to say, right there.

We both have our experiences--both personal and from third-parties, I'm sure--and they're stark contrasts to each other. I'm willing to concede (as I was earlier) that his administrators could reflect my experience, or yours, or neither.

Yes yes, agree to disagree and all that, but to clarify, what I was suggesting with the incompetent/underfunded tech staff wasn't my experience at my school at all; they were quite competent and well funded. But it is quite an exception, from what I've seen elsewhere; okay, I guess that's still "my experience", but I just mean it wasn't my school.

I find it more than a little silly to pretend that certain risks do not exist merely because they haven't (to your knowledge) happened, yet.

I didn't say they never happened. They certainly did (just perhaps not found via those certain methods), but the odds are definitely on the side of the students.

[Syphon the Sun]

When I said that last bit, Zero, I was referring to punishments; I'm sorry for not clarifying that better.

It's silly to pretend that risks do not exist simply because you don't know of anyone being punished for it, yet.

[Young Val]

However, just to teach a lesson, they may punish a kid or two but that's a chance you'll have to take. I like this example: A few years ago it came out that there were ten people in Texas being prosecuted for illegally downloading music off the internet. They would go to jail and pay $100,000 in fines. Well, of the hundreds of thousands to millions of people in Texas that download music off the internet only ten got caught. Your chances of not getting caught seem very good although you could still be one of those ten. I'm sure they thought they never would be.

:::Raises hand::: I got caught.


In college. Detectives came to my apartment and seized my computer and everything. Because I was a student I was turned over to my college for disciplinary action rather than face jail time or pay fines. I was very lucky in that respect. I got put on academic probation FOR THE REMAINDER OF MY ENROLLMENT. I also had to do a bunch of community service, attend several diciplinary hearings, and write a 20 page research paper on the laws of music distribution and copyright.

My name is now on a federal list. And if I ever download anything illegally ever again, I go directly to jail. I do not pass go. I do not collect $200.

[CezeN]

CeZ, Mr. Pot, what's going on? Did I mention you're black? Thanks for proving my point, though: you're absolutely unwilling to address anything I've said directly. Instead, you'll cast whatever label you feel like on it (stereotype, assumption, etc.). The only "issue" you're willing to address is that of the labels you cast out, except you won't even address them directly, just merely repeat whatever label you want.

I'm not trying to give you advice based on stereotypes or assumptions. I'm giving you "advice" on experience, possibilities, and actual risks, all of which you've discounted in favor of your own lack of experience and ignorance of both possibilities and risks. Which is fine; you're free to do that. But that doesn't make anything I've said any less valid. Yelling stereotype or assumption or whatever the hell else you want at the top of your lungs won't magically turn what I'm relating to you into the words. You're not Humpty Dumpty.

But you gave me a sliver of hope. You mentioned specifics and logic; I'm hoping you'll find the time to incorporate both of them into any further replies. I won't bet on it, though. So, here's the deal: you're so bloody sure I'm wrong, actually talk about that, instead of parroting your three catchphrases. I'll help by asking a few questions that have been at the heart of my responses:
1. What evidence do you have regarding the monitoring efforts (or lack thereof) of the network administrators?
2. How is it logically consistent that doing something specifically banned is not breaking that particular rule?
3. What did your analysis of risks and dangers of certain behavior rely on?

There are more, but if you can answer those, you might be on track to actually having a serious discussion. But if his past history is any indication, I have a feeling you'll instead choose to ignore this and throw out more unsubstantiated labels. Please, I beg you, prove I'm wrong on that.

Oh, and Zero, I guess we just have to disagree with how its done. We both have our experiences--both personal and from third-parties, I'm sure--and they're stark contrasts to each other. I'm willing to concede (as I was earlier) that his administrators could reflect my experience, or yours, or neither. When it happens to be an unknown issue, especially one where the evidence seems to point to either direction, I find it more reasonable to err on the side of caution. I find it more than a little silly to pretend that certain risks do not exist merely because they haven't (to your knowledge) happened, yet.

I dont understand your first two sentences at all.
Quoting me

I don't see an issue with the proxy.

Take your plank out, then I might take out mine. You have still yet to address the issue of the faults in your stereotypes, logic, and advice.
(Quoting you now)

Thanks for proving my point, though: you're absolutely unwilling to address anything I've said directly

.

Theres a potential risk in anything. I know it, I ignore it. Take your plank out and I might discuss more on your issue. I dont have an issue with it.

[Syphon the Sun]

I can't address something that you're unwilling to actually discuss. Like I've said, you like to throw labels around, but that's all you're doing: labeling things. If you want me to talk about supposed stereotypes, or whathaveyou, you have to actually discuss them. You can't just say, "oMg, u HaZ sTeReOtYpEs!!1!!1!!one!!" I'm perfectly willing to talk about it, but only if you'll make the effort to actually discuss them directly. Find one or two (or ten or however many you can), quote them, and explain why you feel they're stereotypes, or wrong, or whatever. I can't explain why they're not if you won't even acknowledge which statements you feel are stereotypes.

And I'm unsure what your quote was supposed to prove. As I've repeated: we're not talking about morality, here. You find no moral problem with using proxy servers; great. Personally, I think there are moral issues to be addressed, but that has never been part of my discussion. So, what was that really supposed to prove?

Oh, my first line is a reference to the pot calling the kettle black, or vice versa. Hypocrisy isn't flattering in anyone, but especially not in those who are spending their time complaining about others' hypocrisy. Oh, and for the record, it's more than a little silly to insist on someone addressing your counter-point before you're willing to address their original point. But, I'm willing to do just that, on the sole promise that afterwards, my actual points will be addressed, rather than merely labeled and discarded.

So, what's it going to be? Are you going to have an actual discussion about it, or is it going to just be more of the same from your end? If it's the former, I have no qualms about continuing. If it's the latter, tell me now.

[CezeN]

I can't address something that you're unwilling to actually discuss. Like I've said, you like to throw labels around, but that's all you're doing: labeling things. If you want me to talk about supposed stereotypes, or whathaveyou, you have to actually discuss them. You can't just say, "oMg, u HaZ sTeReOtYpEs!!1!!1!!one!!" I'm perfectly willing to talk about it, but only if you'll make the effort to actually discuss them directly. Find one or two (or ten or however many you can), quote them, and explain why you feel they're stereotypes, or wrong, or whatever. I can't explain why they're not if you won't even acknowledge which statements you feel are stereotypes.

And I'm unsure what your quote was supposed to prove. As I've repeated: we're not talking about morality, here. You find no moral problem with using proxy servers; great. Personally, I think there are moral issues to be addressed, but that has never been part of my discussion. So, what was that really supposed to prove?

Oh, my first line is a reference to the pot calling the kettle black, or vice versa. Hypocrisy isn't flattering in anyone, but especially not in those who are spending their time complaining about others' hypocrisy. Oh, and for the record, it's more than a little silly to insist on someone addressing your counter-point before you're willing to address their original point. But, I'm willing to do just that, on the sole promise that afterwards, my actual points will be addressed, rather than merely labeled and discarded.

So, what's it going to be? Are you going to have an actual discussion about it, or is it going to just be more of the same from your end? If it's the former, I have no qualms about continuing. If it's the latter, tell me now.

My quote-You keep saying that Im unwilling to discuss the issue. I keep saying, I dont see an issue with the proxy. Im unwilling to discuss something nonexistant in my opinion. I dont see where I mentioned morality. I think I already explained the steretypes.

[Syphon the Sun]

Mmm, that's what I expected. Thanks for letting me know that it would just be more of the same, though; I don't have to bother with trying to get an actual discussion out of you.

If anyone actually wants to talk about something I've mentioned in here, feel free to PM me about it, because I won't be reading this thread further.

[zeroguy]

When I said that last bit, Zero, I was referring to punishments; I'm sorry for not clarifying that better.

Eh? I thought you were plenty clear. I was referring to punishments, as well; the odds are still way on the side of the students.

[Tcashon]

Cezen,

Couldn't you have just played around on Google and saved everyone from this extremely long (yet well written ) thread?

Kudos - to Syphon on his repeated attempts at real discussion.

[lyons24000]

TCashon,

You should have just left this thread alone to rot in the ground. I am very disappointed to see it back.

[Tcashon]

Where's the fun in that?

Rotting threads tend to smell funny.