Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
They have my sympathy, but not my grief.

No one is asking for it. I'm not grieving either.

I wouldn't say he was a terrible actor, just not a great one. Princess Dianna is a bit different, in that she was much more well exposed to the public, and her status as Princess is a little different than that of an actor.

 Ahtman wrote:

Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
They have my sympathy, but not my grief.

No one is asking for it. I'm not grieving either.

I wouldn't say he was a terrible actor, just not a great one. Princess Dianna is a bit different, in that she was much more well exposed to the public, and her status as Princess is a little different than that of an actor.

Speaking of which, about a week earlier Mother Theresa died. There would likely have been some kind of international recognition of her and her works except that Diana then died and the woman who had spent her life helping the poor of India got pushed sideways for the celebrity death. It's human nature unfortunately.

Well now you've moved on to temporal issues as well as assigning qualitative factors. How long were we supposed to mourn Mother Theresa? Recognizing a Princess is different than an actor isn't saying one is more deserving than another, just different. As for why it took up more space a week later well, a car crash, ostensibly caused by the press, is more sensational than an elderly woman passing away after years of health issues.

Paul who?

Sad that he is dead, but ive never heard of him until now.

 sebster wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
According to most of the articles I've seen on him, he was 40... which is by no means "early" in life.

I'm guessing you're not in your 30s...

Nope. But, by the time most people hit 40, they are well established, if not entrenched within a particular career field/path. It is by this point that most workers have moved up beyond the "floor" of their job and should be wearing ties to work. Certainly in some circles, such as acting 40 can still be considered "young" due to many people working into their 80s and 90s, and because some actors dont find their first key role until this late any how, but to us average joes... not early. I mean, there's a reason why when we hit 40, most people are supposed to start having "mid-life crises" and go buying motorcycles or fishing boats and whatnot.

cadbren wrote:

Speaking of which, about a week earlier Mother Theresa died. There would likely have been some kind of international recognition of her and her works except that Diana then died and the woman who had spent her life helping the poor of India got pushed sideways for the celebrity death. It's human nature unfortunately.

Helping the poor? Hardly. Mother Theresa was not the selfless heroine she wanted the world to believe...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WQ0i3nCx60

 Ahtman wrote:

Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
They have my sympathy, but not my grief.

No one is asking for it. I'm not grieving either.

It was a response to the guy that said we're all sociopaths if we express our indifference.

That sucks.

I've never understood the motivation behind the behavior on dakka behind where, a famous or semi famous person dies, someone posts up a thread, and people are drawn, if by invisible force, to enter that thread (knowing what the subject matter is from the thread title) and make sure everyone knows just how little they care about the subject matter being discussed. I mean, what do you get out of doing so? Besides the fact it's been a rules violation previously (I guess now it's OK though), what do you get out of it? Is it just the teenage, too cool for school thing whereby pretending the only emotion you have is apathy is de riguer? Truly, I wish to know.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go to the Flames of War, Battlefield Gothic and Infinity boards. I'm not really into any of those games and I need to make sure everyone there knows it.

 Ouze wrote:
I've never understood the motivation behind the behavior on dakka behind where, a famous or semi famous person dies, someone posts up a thread, and people are drawn, if by invisible force, to enter that thread (knowing what the subject matter is from the thread title) and make sure everyone knows just how little they care about the subject matter being discussed. I mean, what do you get out of doing so? Besides the fact it's been a rules violation previously (I guess now it's OK though), what do you get out of it? Is it just the teenage, too cool for school thing whereby pretending the only emotion you have is apathy is de riguer? Truly, I wish to know.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go to the Flames of War, Battlefield Gothic and Infinity boards. I'm not really into any of those games and I need to make sure everyone there knows it.

For myself (as I cant speak for anyone else here) I don't normally post in these sorts of threads unless they affect me in some way (so if someone posted a thread about a soldier type person dying in a warzone, or something to that effect)

The main reason I posted here, was because I disagreed with the poster who said that Mr. Walker died young. It doesn't change that I don't really understand how people do get worked up over someone they really don't know, especially when it doesn't change anything for them personally, and has no possibility of really affecting them personally. To me, this is very much unlike an event such as the numerous shooting incidents that have made their way onto the OT here; People should care about those because the Gov't was trying to make sweeping changes in reaction to them.

2Fast 2Careless

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
2Fast 2Careless

2Fast, 2Soon, 2Inaccurate...

Paul Walker wasn't driving the car, he was a passenger.

 Alfndrate wrote:

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
2Fast 2Careless

2Fast, 2Soon, 2Inaccurate...

Paul Walker wasn't driving the car, he was a passenger.

I've seen 2Fast 2Flammable popping up around the place, that is probably the worst so far.

 Ahtman wrote:
Well now you've moved on to temporal issues as well as assigning qualitative factors. How long were we supposed to mourn Mother Theresa? Recognizing a Princess is different than an actor isn't saying one is more deserving than another, just different. As for why it took up more space a week later well, a car crash, ostensibly caused by the press, is more sensational than an elderly woman passing away after years of health issues.

People would have mourned Diana that way regardless of how she died. I think it quite clear that I was saying that Diana's death voided any public interest in the nun's death. Mother Theresa was a by-word for kindness, of over the top charity. If Diana had not died in the same period then she would have been afforded more acknowledgment from the media and thence the public. People like flashy stuff, big stars sells copy, people want to be like them or near them. That's why there's interest in people like Paul Walker dying, because he was famous, he was one of those people that the masses use to escape from everyday life.

A lot of allegations and facts have come to light in recent decades that indicate Mother Teresa wasn't the saint everyone believed her to be.

 Alfndrate wrote:

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
2Fast 2Careless

2Fast, 2Soon, 2Inaccurate...

Paul Walker wasn't driving the car, he was a passenger.

No jokes are ever 2 soon 2 laugh for me.

 Ouze wrote:
I've never understood the motivation behind the behavior on dakka behind where, a famous or semi famous person dies, someone posts up a thread, and people are drawn, if by invisible force, to enter that thread (knowing what the subject matter is from the thread title) and make sure everyone knows just how little they care about the subject matter being discussed. I mean, what do you get out of doing so? Besides the fact it's been a rules violation previously (I guess now it's OK though), what do you get out of it? Is it just the teenage, too cool for school thing whereby pretending the only emotion you have is apathy is de riguer? Truly, I wish to know.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go to the Flames of War, Battlefield Gothic and Infinity boards. I'm not really into any of those games and I need to make sure everyone there knows it.

Have an exalt on me.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
I've never understood the motivation behind the behavior on dakka behind where, a famous or semi famous person dies, someone posts up a thread, and people are drawn, if by invisible force, to enter that thread (knowing what the subject matter is from the thread title) and make sure everyone knows just how little they care about the subject matter being discussed. I mean, what do you get out of doing so? Besides the fact it's been a rules violation previously (I guess now it's OK though), what do you get out of it? Is it just the teenage, too cool for school thing whereby pretending the only emotion you have is apathy is de riguer? Truly, I wish to know.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go to the Flames of War, Battlefield Gothic and Infinity boards. I'm not really into any of those games and I need to make sure everyone there knows it.

For myself (as I cant speak for anyone else here) I don't normally post in these sorts of threads unless they affect me in some way (so if someone posted a thread about a soldier type person dying in a warzone, or something to that effect)

The main reason I posted here, was because I disagreed with the poster who said that Mr. Walker died young. It doesn't change that I don't really understand how people do get worked up over someone they really don't know, especially when it doesn't change anything for them personally, and has no possibility of really affecting them personally. To me, this is very much unlike an event such as the numerous shooting incidents that have made their way onto the OT here; People should care about those because the Gov't was trying to make sweeping changes in reaction to them.

Why must people be so detached from being a human being?

Someone died, it's okay to not be a jerk about it. It's also okay, if you liked his films, to show some regret. Acting calibre aside, it's the same as people saying 'man that sucks' about Heath Ledger. They're both still human beings that died. Walker was actually a pretty decent guy who spent some of his wealth helping people in disaster areas.

Ouze has a point - if you don't care, this isn't really a debate thread. There's no reason to come in and make sure everyone knows how much you don't care, because it just makes you come off worse.

Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
A lot of allegations and facts have come to light in recent decades that indicate Mother Teresa wasn't the saint everyone believed her to be.

You mean the woman who worshipped suffering did bad things? NO WAI.

Unfortunate. Reports of him committing random acts of kindness along with his charitable work are plentiful.

I shall be interested to see how this affects the franchise.

Ahtman wrote:

Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
They have my sympathy, but not my grief.

No one is asking for it. I'm not grieving either.

I wouldn't say he was a terrible actor, just not a great one. Princess Dianna is a bit different, in that she was much more well exposed to the public, and her status as Princess is a little different than that of an actor.

Paul Walker and his family get my sympathy far more so than Princess Diana. I didn't like Paul Walker as an actor; I thought he was pretty terrible. But he did not deserve to die in a flaming car wreck. However, I do think that any monarch who doesn't abdicate does.

 Soladrin wrote:

Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
A lot of allegations and facts have come to light in recent decades that indicate Mother Teresa wasn't the saint everyone believed her to be.

You mean the woman who worshipped suffering did bad things? NO WAI.

Not exactly, letters where found that showed she lost her faith ALONG time ago.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/letters-reveal-mother-teresas-secret/

hotsauceman1 wrote:

 Soladrin wrote:

Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
A lot of allegations and facts have come to light in recent decades that indicate Mother Teresa wasn't the saint everyone believed her to be.

You mean the woman who worshipped suffering did bad things? NO WAI.

Not exactly, letters where found that showed she lost her faith ALONG time ago.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/letters-reveal-mother-teresas-secret/

So she had a crisis of faith? Not a big deal. I'd be far more concerned with her relationship to Baby Doc Duvalier.

From the letters it sounds like it was like that until she died, and she just went n helping people because that is what she did.

 Ouze wrote:
I've never understood the motivation behind the behavior on dakka behind where, a famous or semi famous person dies, someone posts up a thread, and people are drawn, if by invisible force, to enter that thread (knowing what the subject matter is from the thread title) and make sure everyone knows just how little they care about the subject matter being discussed. I mean, what do you get out of doing so? Besides the fact it's been a rules violation previously (I guess now it's OK though), what do you get out of it? Is it just the teenage, too cool for school thing whereby pretending the only emotion you have is apathy is de riguer? Truly, I wish to know.

Everyone wants to have some kind of identity, and when you're young that's really hard to do, because you have so few choices of your own. So lots of kids identify themselves through what they consume - they aren't just a person who buys punk rock records, they are a punk rocker. But that only takes you so far, it isn't enough to identify just with what you like, you also have to hate the stuff you don't like. So you get all this carry on about how horrible Justin Bieber, or One Direction, or Britney Spears or whoever the pop idol of the day is.

Same thing here, I think. They don't care about Paul Walker, but they do care a lot about being the kind of person who doesn't care about Paul Walker, if you get my meaning.

But Justin Beiber is horrible. It is science.

My first thought was "the wine guy?"

Then I was like, "no stupid, that's Paul Mason."

This is the whisky guy.

Pages later, I lose.

 Ahtman wrote:
But Justin Beiber is horrible. It is science.

So was Britney. She was horrible in both a scientific and a religious sense

Goth For Christ Semi-amateur Journalist on Suicide Watch after writing "Five Reasons I'm Glad Paul Walker Died".

A few things:

1. WTF is a heterosexual life partner?
2. There are people that still call themselves goth after 30?
3. What kind of mail was she expecting when she referred to his death as an "early Christmas present". If you don't like heat don't throw flames.

 azazel the cat wrote:
Paul Walker and his family get my sympathy far more so than Princess Diana. I didn't like Paul Walker as an actor; I thought he was pretty terrible. But he did not deserve to die in a flaming car wreck. However, I do think that any monarch who doesn't abdicate does.

What?

Its an interesting view...

So, Prince Williams son (george? - I don't pay attention) deserves to die in a fire?