Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Until I figure out how to un-close it, at least.

0 (0%)

So yeah.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 0

Voting closed: May 01, 2014, 02:06:40 pm

[smjjames]

I'm not seeing a whole lot of hatred towards Russia, condemnation, yes, but not hatred. Except from UR and other Ukranians here who would obviously be upset.

It depends on how far west it's going in Ukraine. And that's real. But it's stupid for me to try anything to prove to here auditory because it's absurdly biased.

Your lack of english comprehension is showing, not sure what you are getting at by proving anything auditory here?

[gogis]

Except the Crimean government itself claimed there was high participation even amongst Crimean Tatars and Ukrainians.

Well, high is not indicative of anything. It's not exact enough. And, actually, proves russian point

[smjjames]

Except the Crimean government itself claimed there was high participation even amongst Crimean Tatars and Ukrainians.

Well, high is not indicative of anything. It's not exact enough. And, actually, proves russian point

The Russian point being what exactly? Even if Ukranian and Tatar participation was high, still, 95% of all votes? Tell me, seriously, do you think that is even a realistic number?

[gogis]

Your lack of english comprehension is showing, not sure what you are getting at by proving anything auditory here?

I 100% understand of what being said or written. I know that because I had almost of year experience of work done via strict english communication in foreign country.
I can't write credibly because I have no idea of english syntax and sentence buliding. My english is purely came out of practice, not academic knowledge. Still, attacking comprehension or "your have a terrible english" is not infact argument of any sort.

[smjjames]

Your lack of english comprehension is showing, not sure what you are getting at by proving anything auditory here?

I 100% understand of what being said or written. I know that because I had almost of year experience of work done via strict english communication in foreign country.
I can't write credibly because I have no idea of english syntax and sentence buliding. My english is purely came out of practice, not academic knowledge. Still, attacking comprehension or "your have a terrible english" is not infact argument of any sort.

I meant the writing comprehension, didn't mean to attack your ability to understand english, which isn't what I was getting at, I was getting at how that sentence didn't make a whole lot of sense in the way you wrote it.

[Descan]

Gogis, I'm going to try to put this as simply as I can. This is not an attack, I am not a member of this argument, I don't care either way right now who is right or who is wrong. That said:

Your comprehension of english is not the problem. From what I can tell, you seem to understand what people mean fairly well. The PROBLEM is YOUR communication. The words you choose, the structure of your sentences, they make it extremely difficult to understand what your point is. When people say "I don't understand you," it is not an attack, it is them telling you "I do not know what you are trying to say and therefore cannot respond to your arguments."

People are not being grammar nazis, they are not nit-picking the use of "your" versus "you're" to attack you. They legitimately do not understand what it is you are trying to say, and because they do not understand, they cannot make a response to your statements.

And while you may be able to explain why your English-writing ability is lacking, being able to explain a problem does not make the problem go away. Even if we know why your sentences do not make sense, that does not mean they start making sense without any change.

[smjjames]

Gogis, I'm going to try to put this as simply as I can. This is not an attack, I am not a member of this argument, I don't care either way right now who is right or who is wrong. That said:

Your comprehension of english is not the problem. From what I can tell, you seem to understand what people mean fairly well. The PROBLEM is YOUR communication. The words you choose, the structure of your sentences, they make it extremely difficult to understand what your point is. When people say "I don't understand you," it is not an attack, it is them telling you "I do not know what you are trying to say and therefore cannot respond to your arguments."

People are not being grammar nazis, they are not nit-picking the use of "your" versus "you're" to attack you. They legitimately do not understand what it is you are trying to say, and because they do not understand, they cannot make a response to your statements.

Exactly, though I may have phrased the first part of that sentence earlier in the wrong way, I really was confused about that quoted sentence. 'not proving anything auditory here' what is he talking about by auditory.

[gogis]

Except the Crimean government itself claimed there was high participation even amongst Crimean Tatars and Ukrainians.

Well, high is not indicative of anything. It's not exact enough. And, actually, proves russian point

The Russian point being what exactly? Even if Ukranian and Tatar participation was high, still, 95% of all votes? Tell me, seriously, do you think that is even a realistic number?

Absolutely yes, if you substract 20% of Crimeans. 96% of 80% voted? Yes. If you don't believe it, you just never been in Crimea in first place. Sevastopol looks, feels and 100% like any other russian city.

[Owlbread]

I'm never very comfortable with the whole "territorial integrity of Ukraine must be respected" thing. I've spent the last three years arguing against the territorial integrity of the UK, Spain, Russia, Mali, Sri Lanka, China, the USA, Canada, France, Belgium... the list goes on.

Granted the Ukrainian Crisis is far more about "territory" and territory being annexed by another nation (Russia), not nationalist movements in favour of minorities like the Tatars.

[smjjames]

Except the Crimean government itself claimed there was high participation even amongst Crimean Tatars and Ukrainians.

Well, high is not indicative of anything. It's not exact enough. And, actually, proves russian point

The Russian point being what exactly? Even if Ukranian and Tatar participation was high, still, 95% of all votes? Tell me, seriously, do you think that is even a realistic number?

Absolutely yes, if you substract 20% of Crimeans. 96% of 80% voted? Yes. If you don't believe it, you just never been in Crimea in first place. Sevastopol looks, feels and 100% like any other russian city.

Don't ethnic Ukranians and Tatars make up like 40% of the Crimean population?

Also, getting votes from just Sevastopol is not representative of Crimea. New York City does not represent the whole of New York state when it comes to voting.

[gogis]

Gogis, I'm going to try to put this as simply as I can. This is not an attack, I am not a member of this argument, I don't care either way right now who is right or who is wrong. That said:

Your comprehension of english is not the problem. From what I can tell, you seem to understand what people mean fairly well. The PROBLEM is YOUR communication. The words you choose, the structure of your sentences, they make it extremely difficult to understand what your point is. When people say "I don't understand you," it is not an attack, it is them telling you "I do not know what you are trying to say and therefore cannot respond to your arguments."

People are not being grammar nazis, they are not nit-picking the use of "your" versus "you're" to attack you. They legitimately do not understand what it is you are trying to say, and because they do not understand, they cannot make a response to your statements.

And while you may be able to explain why your English-writing ability is lacking, being able to explain a problem does not make the problem go away. Even if we know why your sentences do not make sense, that does not mean they start making sense without any change.

Yeah I am ware of that problem. Problem is that any kind of way to learn english I found lately means grinding through all that simple words. But I know all that words for a decades, I know both american and  british pronouncing, actually, I just can't find a way to learn sentence structure and grammar and all that shit.

[smjjames]

Gogis, I'm going to try to put this as simply as I can. This is not an attack, I am not a member of this argument, I don't care either way right now who is right or who is wrong. That said:

Your comprehension of english is not the problem. From what I can tell, you seem to understand what people mean fairly well. The PROBLEM is YOUR communication. The words you choose, the structure of your sentences, they make it extremely difficult to understand what your point is. When people say "I don't understand you," it is not an attack, it is them telling you "I do not know what you are trying to say and therefore cannot respond to your arguments."

People are not being grammar nazis, they are not nit-picking the use of "your" versus "you're" to attack you. They legitimately do not understand what it is you are trying to say, and because they do not understand, they cannot make a response to your statements.

And while you may be able to explain why your English-writing ability is lacking, being able to explain a problem does not make the problem go away. Even if we know why your sentences do not make sense, that does not mean they start making sense without any change.

Yeah I am ware of that problem. Problem is that any kind of way to learn english I found lately means grinding through all that simple words. But I know all that words for a decades, I know both american and  british pronouncing, actually, I just can't find a way to learn sentence structure and grammar and all that shit.

Then ask for help!

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Some sociology. Note that it was taken before the events in Crimea
http://www.kiis.com.ua/?lang=eng&cat=reports&id=236&page=1

Now think how people would ask the same questions

specially for Gogis: note that 66% of the people who supported Maydan wanted to have friendly relationships with Russia. Friendly up to the point of customs union. Even more. 58.4% of Svoboda supporters (nationalists, BTW) wanted the same

Also, note that 41% of Crimeans  wanted to join Russia. Only 41%. In a poll taken one month before the "referendum"

Fixed an error, looked in a wrong column

[Knit tie]

Guys, the argument about gogis' english skills is exactly what has gotten the last thread locked. Please don't repeat it here.

[gogis]

Except the Crimean government itself claimed there was high participation even amongst Crimean Tatars and Ukrainians.

Well, high is not indicative of anything. It's not exact enough. And, actually, proves russian point

The Russian point being what exactly? Even if Ukranian and Tatar participation was high, still, 95% of all votes? Tell me, seriously, do you think that is even a realistic number?

Absolutely yes, if you substract 20% of Crimeans. 96% of 80% voted? Yes. If you don't believe it, you just never been in Crimea in first place. Sevastopol looks, feels and 100% like any other russian city.

Don't ethnic Ukranians and Tatars make up like 40% of the Crimean population?

Also, getting votes from just Sevastopol is not representative of Crimea. New York City does not represent the whole of New York state when it comes to voting.

There was TV and internet reports of ukranians(natives, not russians with passports) submitting vote for secession and explaining their rationale. It's just escaped western media and I don't see a reason to repost it, because it's going to be axed immediately as a propaganda. Hint - pension and average wage size.

We need to comply with the idea that both eastern and western media brainwash us equally. "West" somehow thinks they doesnt brainwashed at all and their media is crystal clean. It's not.
Problem is - I actually don't watch russian tv and I read news from both sides of story, and typical westerner don't have such a luxury. Let's put it bluntly - you are misinformed.

Take for example Russian-Georgian conflict. You have your side of story. Then ask me what's going to happen if you come to Abkhazia with "I am Georgian" sign strapped to you. Thats another part of story.