Monday, August 25th, 2003Let's play the moral/immoral game, shall we? Round 1: (Some of you may have head this before)
The answer to this, of course, is moral, immoral, immoral. But that didn't stop me from doing (b) anyway. Option (c), though, is way past the acceptable line of evilness. Round 2:
The answer to this might be either moral, moral, immoral, or moral, moral, moral, or even moral, immoral, immoral, depending on whether your friend/ex-significant other has a sense of humor. No, wait, scratch that. If your friend or ex doesn't have a sense of humor then he or she deserves to be confused. Down with serious people! Round 3:
Now, this one has me stumped. Option (a) we can all safely conclude is moral beyond a doubt, because that way the person has a while to get accustomed to the idea, they can mull over whether they want to bid higher, or at least they hadn't had so long to think that they might win. And option (b), in theory, I can see as being moral because, hey, it's an auction, anything goes. But. This has recently happened to me. And I am not pleased. And I am seriously considering retaliating with option (c). Actually, I've already decided to do so, and I'm waiting until the last hour to put my one-dollar more bid in, just to piss this miserable person off. Damn them and their money! Damn them to hell! So it would really help me if you all could just agree that yes, in this instance, all of these options are morally just, or at least that both (b) and (c) are equally immoral, and that (b) warrants my doing (c) back. Thanks, guys! I'll remember this the next time you tell me you "accidentally" stabbeded that guy noisily chewing gum on the subway. He so deserved that!
|
|
Archives:
![]() Elsewhere: about links shop wishlist |