See, I'm not sure that's really what you meant. Your first example in particular made it very clear that you don't believe people will fly out to see their long-distance online lover. The way you phrased it was very dismissive (what, like they'll actually do that? right lol.) and didn't leave open the possibility that yes, some people really will fly out to see the person they love (you made it clear you don't believe that an online couple can be in love) and transform it into a "real" long distance relationship.

Your entire post was basically insinuating that people don't meet up, which is pretty much ridiculous.

Thanks for clearing it up. But if people are content just doing that (I know as a teenager I did that all the time...), you shouldn't hate on them if they're just having fun. 

Thanks for clearing that up.  I dated a guy online, and he was from another country, but we had intentions of meeting from day one.  And we finally did meet and had a great time.  The relationship didn't work out, and now I have decided I actually have to meet the guy before we start dating, but I have no problem with meeting people in chat rooms.  There's now someone else in my life who I met online, but we've agreed to wait until we meet irl to label ourselves as a couple.

Still going to get hated on this one. Even though I don't appreciate it personally, good luck.

@Viserys@xanga - but isn't a blog also an online journal? hence, the name 'blog' which derived from the word of web log?

calling an opinion factual is a contradiction. no opinions are factual. its like me saying that i like the colour red, because red is the best. there is no argument against that, because its what I, myself, personally think. its not a fact that red is the best; just an opinion.

that's where you're wrong. they're not excuses. it was how i translated the word of "online relationship", which was through literally. many people have different meanings of words. as a student studying law, i have studied many of the language rules that were required, and i came to conclusion that i, myself, translate words literally.

yes, scenario one is very clear, hence why words such as "supposedly" was used.
and also stating that some people say that they're flying out to see you when they're not going to, is also there.
you even said it yourself, quoting after me, calling it a scenario. scenario is a synopsis of a play; a prediction.
you're probably thinking that i'm lecturing you on English words, but i'm not. i'm just stating the obvious.

quite frankly, i think you're getting a little carried away with this. you're almost implying about what i can or cannot post.
i appreciate you speaking your mind about it, because that is what most people do, but i have to say that you're going slightly overboard on this situation here.

reason why i said 'it doesn't happen like that' was because of the way i pictured it.
person 1 flies to person 2, asks them out, then person 1 flies back from where they came, leaving person 2 to not see person 1 again, except for being online.

if you think that i'm making these so-called excuses up, then i'm sorry that you fail to believe me.

Well, I guess you're off the hook.

@retardtm@xanga - There are a few typos in my post, but that's not one of them. "Factually incorrect misinformation" is redundant, but it's not a grammatical double negative.

I don't care what you post, I'm just saying if you post something inflammatory (I looked at the original on your blog, which was edited down a bit after submission), don't act surprised when people react to it. You're entitled to your opinion, but (whether you intended to or not) you stated something as fact, called it opinion, and then tried to clarify what you meant.

The statement "Online relationships never work out" is not an opinion. It is a statement that is either verifiably true or verifiably false. You're welcome to post why you think they're a bad idea (for the most part, you did) but you did so in an inflammatory fashion with little evidence to support your claims.

As far as me going overboard - in my opinion, the original post on your blog is out of line and overboard. I didn't say that though, because you are welcome to post it. What I did say was that if you're going to react negatively to people (who might disagree) commenting, then don't post.

A blog is a virtual journal, sure, but if you make it public then you are inviting the world to scrutinize it.

@retardtm@xanga - No, if a statement is verifiably true or false, it cannot be opinion.

My hair is brown. That's a fact - it's verifiably true.
2 + 1 = 7. That's verifiably false. It's not an opinion, it's just wrong.

Saying that "online relationships never work out" is wrong. It's verifiably false. You stated it as a fact (By literally saying "Online relationships never work out."). That's what I have been trying to point out for like 3 posts.

You also insinuated (but did not state outright) that love does not actually exist in online relationships. I haven't been attacking that point because you never said, literally "There is no love in an online relationship." You implied it, which bothers me (because it's wrong), but you did not say so explicitly, so I am more or less letting it slide.

edit to clarify - most of this argument (and the numerous replies to your first post) would never happened if you'd avoided words like "never" as well as using inflammatory language like "bullshit" and "pathetic" in the original post.

@retardtm@xanga - I have no need to give an example that is ambiguous, because that would mean it's not factual. Which, you know, is what I'm talking about.

The statement "Online relationships never work out" is factually incorrect. You can say it's "your opinion" all you want, but it's wrong. This is exactly what I've been saying all day.

This has nothing to do with the English language and everything to do with you ignoring what I'm saying. This really isn't getting anywhere and I'm getting tired of arguing over semantics (since arguing over the content of your post got nowhere as well), so let's forget it.

edit - since I probably won't be replying again unless you call me out on something, I want to thank you, at least, for being civil.

lol, you get pretty hilarious results when you look it up on online dating on urbandictionary.. teehee

online dating

A fairy tale, play dating that two partners (usualy teens) partake in
to get themselves ready for real life relationships. The false concept
of "internet love" is embraced all to easily and leads to more heart
ache *winkwink* and troubles for the more desperate person involved.
Cyber sex soon follows as the relationship gets "stepped up" to the
"next level"*winkwink*. Maybe he can get some pictures or phone sex out
of it if he's lucky, but he's not, she won't even tell him her last
name. He ends up jerking off to text whom he hopes is written by a
member of the female species(But he never knows) Not sweating it to bad
because she did show him that one blurry picture. The relationship
usualy ends as soon as it began and neither really cares, but they
pretend they do. She might even fake like she's crying. He might say
he's going to kill himself because she broke his heart. The truth is
one of them found a hotter or more intresting person to online date or
just got sick of the others daily sniveling. The cycle continues, rinse
and repeat. No feelings shared just words that people forgot faces
manipulated behind the scenes.

An OBR (Online Based Relationship) is a relationship between two people
who confess their love for each other online, but never talk in real
life.

Frank has to get on myspace, every night to see if
he's still on Sarah's top 8, that's how he tends to his Online Based
Relationship.

@snapeful@xanga - if there was a 'like' button similar to Facebook, i would have clicked your comment multiple times