The person who wants Gauhar out the MOST IS

First Previous

Page

Next Last

Frequent Posters

Ayesha

@Camryn

Navigator

Posted: 11 years ago

#61

Originally posted by: tanya.91
LOVE U SANGRAM for being the number one enemy of this utterly disgusting vamp-gauhar.

Oops wrong name!! Let me correct it! Disgusting is only used for Tanisha! Girl get ur facts right!

Quote

738493

Suspended

Posted: 11 years ago

#62

Originally posted by: King-Anu

oh my God. what did you read

1- I did not mean you as in Moises I meant you as for a sangram fan. I don't even know if you are a sangram fan. What I meant by lame excuses was someone being anti Gauhar and therefore okay with actions of Sangram (as some have done here).

2- Me and a Gauhar fan? lol. Check my posts. I have supported Kushal though however this was about sangram and gauhar

3- Andy is a disgusting double dhol, fake and an idiot. That is my dislike. Here I am talking about (and that too sometimes) putting aside likes and dislikes and commenting on incident. Add to it my point that I am not looking for 100 percent objectivity and the fact that I am not such a person either.

I think you took it personally and therefore this. Rest assure I will never get personal without a reason. Even after this you don't believe me then let me take a cue from Sangram. I am sorry. I will be careful

relax..lol

Taking a cue from Sangram and saying sorry, huh? I'm glad... it's always a good thing to honor what is honorable and follow in the footsteps of the wise. 😛

I don't know whose fan you are. What you said sounded like you called me a Sangram supporter who was coming up with excuses and I was playing on the same logic and giving it back to ya. Never mind that but the whole 50% objectivity and 100% objectivity.. or was it 75% objectivity? concept is doing my head in. So which portion is subjective and which portion is objective? This is a madhouse like big boss and even todays lawyer, I'm sure, was not "objective" because plenty of people were miffed at him for letting Gauhar off easy. That's why I neither expect such thing and nor do I appreciate people who dismiss "anti-gauhar" opinions and think that they are being objective by sitting on the fence.

Not meant for you, but if someone comes up to me and tells me that he does not like what an idiot and dholebaaz Sangram is ...oh, and that he is being objective about it, it will make me chuckle and I will question that person's objectivity. Say what you gotta say and explain why you say what you say.. but don't bring in objectivity to the equation because I'm frankly not interested in how "objective" a member is.

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

Forever-KA

@Forever-KA

Rocker

+ 4

Posted: 11 years ago

#63

I talked about being objective when it comes to an event/incident and issue and not about objective in decision to like or dislike as there are many reasons people can like or dislike. However they can still be objective about commenting on an incident. Therefore the question of

"he does not like what an idiot and dholebaaz Sangram is ...oh, and that he is being objective about i"

does not arise. Hope this was clear. lol

Quote

738493

Suspended

Posted: 11 years ago

#64

Originally posted by: King-Anu
I talked about being objective when it comes to an event/incident and issue and not about objective in decision to like or dislike as there are many reasons people can like or dislike. However they can still be objective about commenting on an incident. Therefore the question of

"he does not like what an idiot and dholebaaz Sangram is ...oh, and that he is being objective about i"

does not arise. Hope this was clear. lol

No it's not... they both sound the same to me. But forget it.

Quote

Forever-KA

@Forever-KA

Rocker

+ 4

Posted: 11 years ago

#65

Many times people like a contestant for being from their country, ethnicity, religion, for being good looking, for other subjective reasons. Its not like they like them for their character or actions. There I can tolerate lack of objectivity

However when it comes to discussing issues, actions, events one can still speak for what is right and fair and that is objectively

This was my whole point here. Anyway lets move on

There is always a thing such as objectivity. What is not there is complete objectivity. Also If someone is not objective in coming to a decision of favoring one over another then that is okay with me as that is your like or dislike. However when it comes to incidents and events (issues) I expect, and I mentioned sometimes not always, people to be objective.

Edited by King-Anu - 11 years ago

Quote

738493

Suspended

Posted: 11 years ago

#66

... ok.

I've never been a fan of "objectivity" because I believe in voicing your opinion out loud and proud and taking account of your words instead of hiding behind the veil of objectivity. Who decides what's objective anyway? Thanks for trying though.

Quote

Forever-KA

@Forever-KA

Rocker

+ 4

Posted: 11 years ago

#67

Objectivity is putting a veil?

Generally, objectivity means the state or quality of being true even outside of a subject's individual biases, interpretations, feelings, and imaginings.

And I am separating being objective on likes and dislikes (so one can express opinion about others loud) from being objective on issues and events.

Edited by King-Anu - 11 years ago

Quote

738493

Suspended

Posted: 11 years ago

#68

Originally posted by: King-Anu
Objectivity is hiding behind a veil?

Generally, objectivity means the state or quality of being true even outside of a subject's individual biases, interpretations, feelings, and imaginings.

And I am separating being objective on likes and dislikes (so one can express opinion about others loud) from being objective on issues and events.

Yeah it is when you throw it around in BIG BOSS forum. If someone expresses his opinion and claims to be neutral, I will just go "yeah right" in my head and move on. Or call it out if I'm in the mood. 😛Objectivity doesn't exist here and if someone tells me that he's being objective while dissecting something, I will chuckle, no two ways about it. Excuse me for being cynical but that's how it is.

What's with applying objectivity to one thing and not applying to another though? The selective stuff truly does my head in. Shouldn't you be expecting objectivity everywhere if it's such a virtue? Why just in certain incidents and why not in personal likes and dislikes? What makes one thing more tolerable than the other? They're both the same to me.

Quote

Forever-KA

@Forever-KA

Rocker

+ 4

Posted: 11 years ago

#69

For example I liked Armaan. I created topics in hi support. He was not a likeable character by standard of majority of forum and yet I supported him. I was not being objective in my like. I was not favoring the most deserving

However whenever Armann abused and fought I did not support him. That was me being objective on the issue

Now I was not always that seedha.

On Andy I disliked him but was not objective on his good deeds as I ignored his good actions or did not speak up.

Point is I expect sometimes for people to come out of shell (armaan example) if not everytime (example andy)

1- Objectivity on issues can be there without being neutral. Very few are true neutral. However they can be objective.

2- I think it can be there. Cruiser is objective. He dissects things on merit. This is a great example

3- Yes we should be. However I myself said what you are saying. There is nothing ideal about it. However sometimes please do so. lol