Frank Sinatra

[Metal Mario]

^I think I'll emulate you in yet another way and be deliberately vague while you try and work it out for yourself.

[Booyakasha]

I don't feel qualified to judge what kind of person Sinatra was. I do know he did mounds of charity work---like, to the point where he was officially recognised for it by foreign governments and such. Motion Picture Academy gave him a humanitarian award one year, too. And even aside from all that, he did some things that are just nice and classy. Like, when Bela Lugosi died, he was essentially bankrupt, and Sinatra stepped in behind the scenes and paid the funeral expenses out of his own pocket.

I mean, believe what you want about Sinatra, but take him all in all--- otherwise you're just cherry-picking.

[ZeldaGirl]

^I think I'll emulate you in yet another way and be deliberately vague while you try and work it out for yourself.

Well, I'm assuming you actually mean to refer to yourself. But, seeing as we DO interact and I can fairly say that based on those interactions, I can glean hints of your character, I figured you couldn't possibly be so daft as to actually mean it. :p

But whatever. I'm with Boo on this one. It'd be one thing to say you think his music 'sucks' (though I respectfully disagree on that account), but this whole thing just seems like a stretch.

[Rubber Band Man]

ZG is assertive. Frank Sinatra dove between more legs than the combined total of everyone in this topic ever will.....even the women. Next question.

[Apiary Tazy]

MM, when you troll, it's very obvious.

Telling us that you're trolling someone isn't helping.

Let us end on a Sinatra Video.

[video]KIiUqfxFttM[/video]

[Metal Mario]

I don't feel qualified to judge what kind of person Sinatra was. I do know he did mounds of charity work---like, to the point where he was officially recognised for it by foreign governments and such.

And Arafat won a Nobel Peace Prize. What's your point?

Well, I'm assuming you actually mean to refer to yourself. But, seeing as we DO interact and I can fairly say that based on those interactions, I can glean hints of your character, I figured you couldn't possibly be so daft as to actually mean it. :p

Could you say that again, coherently this time?

MM, when you troll, it's very obvious.

Yeah, heaven forbid we shouldn't all agree on everything.

[CaptHayfever]

^Translation for the implication-impaired: She actually converses with you on a semi-regular basis, from which she is able to make at least a partially-accurate determination of your character. You, on the other hand, don't actually know Frankie at all, making your determination of his character considerably more of a wild guess.

On a related note: Why do I always end up being the one to explain freaking obvious crud to people I partially agree with!? I really don't like Sinatra much; I was completely serious about Dean Martin being better at everything.

And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"

[Bomby]

It's true: Sicilians prefer Dean Martin.

[Speed]

@ Original Post: Sir, Go **** yourself.

[Metal Man]

I think what Metal Mario and some posters miss is that this is not about Metal Mario's status at VGF or what others feel about him, but rather what aspects of Frank Sinatra sucked. And not aspects we can only guess about, because otherwise, there may as well be a topic about square circles sucking.

...

*Starts a stopwatch to time how long it takes someone to take that literally and make a topic about square circles*

[Deepfake]

Well, that's what I was asking about. I'd like to know what anyone here has personally experienced about Sinatra, or at least witnessed.

[Apiary Tazy]

Yeah, heaven forbid we shouldn't all agree on everything.

Trust me, Disagreeing with any of us has barely anything to do with how obvious you are.

[Gumchum]

Frank Sinatra dove between more legs than the combined total of everyone in this topic ever will.....even the women. Next question.

[Kil'jaeden]

Well, even if no one can agree about Sinatra, at least we all agree on Hitler.

[Deepfake]

^ Questionable. I can agree to qualities of my knowledge of media pertaining to Adolf Hitler, but it's asinine to make blanket statements about a man I do not know. The demonisation of that single man as representing an entire regime is ludicrous, Hitler himself did not personally execute every single murder he is strung to.

I'm bemused to draw the parallel, but does the Pope personally molest every child affected adversely by the Catholic church, or is his disconnection too distinct to make that allegation?

At some point, we're not exercising our observation of the deeds of men so much as we are exercising our observation of our ability to draw connections between cause and effect. If there were no walls we were unwilling to break down, simply living is a crime and God is the culmination of all things you consider horrible.

[Gumchum]

Yeah, well I still think Hitler was a dick.

[Rubber Band Man]

Overruled.

[CaptHayfever]

^^^I think the difference there is that the fuhrer actually ordered those murders, whereas the pope did not order the molestations.

And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"

[Galefore]

Topic... i am disappoint.

[Deepfake]

^^^I think the difference there is that the fuhrer actually ordered those murders, whereas the pope did not order the molestations.

And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"

Correct, but it's only your perception of the knowledge digested that paints it so. Can you name a specific murder ordered by Hitler, and were you witness to original documents? You can invest your trust in assumptive sources, and I don't blame you, but it's honestly only your own vulnerability leaving you open to error. You cannot say without a doubt that Adolph Hitler was a murderer, you did not experience it first hand.

Moreover, it's only your personal preference that one is morally disconnected, and there is a social precedence defining your perception of that. The moral is also your personal preference, and is additionally defined by social precedence. That logic is circular in itself, anyway - being that you must already believe in some universal definition of good for good to be applicable to you. You could say that Hitler was not a good man, but you are using your own limited definition as it is preempted by your digestion of social interaction. The belief in the necessity of goodness stems from a belief in goodness at all. Without the necessity of goodness, there is no reason to believe in goodness.