What is in a name ?

sugarpuff · Post by **sugarpuff** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 4:57 pm

Does anybody know how forum garden got it's name ?...

We seem to chat more about horses then the garden ...

If you own a site what would you call it and why ? ...

If I owned a forum .. I would name it ...

Be yourself

The reason I would call it that ... I always disliked phony people and snob ...

I laugh at people who put on the airs and own nothing ..

FG-administator · Post by **FG-administator** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 5:18 pm

Owning nothing is an ideal state.

ForumGarden was so named because the first owner, Tombstone, had an image of tending an online garden, pruning and cleaning and letting its members blossom. He had artistic tendencies and his roots seem to bear a San Francisco influence.

sugarpuff · Post by **sugarpuff** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 6:08 pm

Thank you .... F G for the response ... it makes sense to me now why it was called

forum garden ..

Why did you say ..... Owning nothing is an ideal state.

Is that just for you or in general ...

FG-administator · Post by **FG-administator** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 6:22 pm

sugarpuff;1471030 wrote: Why did you say ..... Owning nothing is an ideal state.

Is that just for you or in general ...

It's a philosophical proposition which I would happily generalize.

Why would a person prefer to own something rather than hold it in common with everyone? Isn't it axiomatic that we would all, on average, have access to greater resources in a world where ownership was unknown? And that those disadvantaged by changing to such a system would be overwhelmingly outnumbered by those who would benefit?

What puzzles me is the patriotic brainwashed upstanding have-nots who support the present system to their own disadvantage, it's like watching a religious cult.

Lady J · Post by **Lady J** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 10:22 pm

FG;1471031 wrote: It's a philosophical proposition which I would happily generalize.

Why would a person prefer to own something rather than hold it in common with everyone? Isn't it axiomatic that we would all, on average, have access to greater resources in a world where ownership was unknown? And that those disadvantaged by changing to such a system would be overwhelmingly outnumbered by those who would benefit?

What puzzles me is the patriotic brainwashed upstanding have-nots who support the present system to their own disadvantage, it's like watching a religious cult.

A person would prefer to own something rather than hold in in common cuz it gives them control....just like you like to have control over FG and rant your bullshit and FG powers to make others feel small. Johnny Spot....nothing has changed.

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Thu Jan 08, 2015 12:32 am

It's a philosophy that is rather paradoxical, for a man who has nothing has everything, which means he has something.

Ahhh... Grasshopper...

Fuzzy · Post by **Fuzzy** » Thu Jan 08, 2015 1:42 am

Well, I reckon Forum Garden should really be renamed to Weird **** Garden. As Lady J stated, there's some bullshit being spread around. I don't mind it, it's good for the garden.

Makes things grow well.:wah:

FG-administator · Post by **FG-administator** » Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:09 am

Lady J;1471034 wrote: A person would prefer to own something rather than hold in in common cuz it gives them control....

The ideas were discussed at length during the English Civil War, the Common Wealth of Man is scarcely a novel concept. Everyone, Cavalier, Parliamentarian, Leveler or even me, would agree entirely with your comment. The debatable issue is whether the control of which you speak is desirable to the community at large.

Post by **LarsMac** » Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:50 am

Owning stuff is useful. I mean, how can you be a carpenter if you do not own a hammer? But when you are so attached to that hammer that you let it define you as a carpenter, and you can be nothing else, then the hammer owns you.

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Thu Jan 08, 2015 10:18 am

LarsMac;1471061 wrote: Owning stuff is useful. I mean, how can you be a carpenter if you do not own a hammer? But when you are so attached to that hammer that you let it define you as a carpenter, and you can be nothing else, then the hammer owns you.
You could always rent it.

Post by **LarsMac** » Thu Jan 08, 2015 10:37 am

FourPart;1471078 wrote: You could always rent it.

Nah. Having a hammer is pretty cool. Mine usually just sits in the tool closet until I feel the need to smack something with it.

Now a chain saw, on the other hand, that is better to just rent if you need one. Otherwise, a guy could get into a lot of trouble.

http://images.wisegeek.com/man-with-cha ... -trees.jpg

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Thu Jan 08, 2015 12:03 pm

FG;1471056 wrote: The ideas were discussed at length during the English Civil War, the Common Wealth of Man is scarcely a novel concept. Everyone, Cavalier, Parliamentarian, Leveler or even me, would agree entirely with your comment. The debatable issue is whether that control is desirable to the community at large.

It's a debate that still goes on.

From A Declaration from the Poor Oppressed People of England: 1649

We whose names are subscribed do in the name of all the poor oppressed people in England declare unto you that call yourselves lords of manors and lords of the land that in regard the King of righteousness, our maker, hath enlightened our hearts so far as to see that the earth was not made purposely for you to be lords of it, and we to be your slaves, servants and beggars; but it was made to be a common livelihood to all, without respect of persons: and that your buying and selling of land and the fruits of it, one to another, is the cursed thing, and was brought in by war; which hath and still does establish murder and theft in the hands of some branches of mankind over others, which is the greatest outward burden and unrighteous power that the creation groans under. For the power of enclosing land and owning property was brought into the creation by your ancestors by the sword; which first did murder their fellow-creatures, men, and after plunder or steal away their land, and left this land successively to you, their children.

The putney debates are as relevant now as they were back then, inthe scottish referendum debate "people" were horrified at the notion the crown estate be taken off the crown.

Which has bugger all to do with the thread but I don't care.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Thu Jan 08, 2015 12:18 pm

FourPart;1471078 wrote: You could always rent it.

You would be renting from someone who owns it, so why can't that someone be you?

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Thu Jan 08, 2015 1:18 pm

AnneBoleyn;1471085 wrote: You would be renting from someone who owns it, so why can't that someone be you?

A hire shop without the payment. A central store of tools that can be used by anyone within the community at need and returned afterwards, all owned collectively by the community.

It would certainly require a mindshift for it to work but, given that mindshift, it would probably be more cost and resource effective that individual ownership.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Thu Jan 08, 2015 1:42 pm

How about we start with public utilities being jointly owned and go from there ?

Sewers and water supply, gas and electricity , throw in a health care system................sound good ?

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Thu Jan 08, 2015 3:07 pm

Bruv;1471091 wrote: How about we start with public utilities being jointly owned and go from there ?

Sewers and water supply, gas and electricity , throw in a health care system................sound good ?

Sounds excellent

sugarpuff · Post by **sugarpuff** » Thu Jan 08, 2015 4:27 pm

I dislike it when people think they own you ...

they try to push their way of thinking on to you ...

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Thu Jan 08, 2015 4:32 pm

As usual, the idealistic solution is that of Communism. If only it could work in practice.

FG-administator · Post by **FG-administator** » Thu Jan 08, 2015 4:33 pm

sugarpuff;1471123 wrote: I dislike it when people think they own you ...

they try to push their way of thinking on to you ...

You're talking about employers?

along-for-the-ride · Post by **along-for-the-ride** » Thu Jan 08, 2015 5:55 pm

LarsMac;1471061 wrote: Owning stuff is useful. I mean, how can you be a carpenter if you do not own a hammer? But when you are so attached to that hammer that you let it define you as a carpenter, and you can be nothing else, then the hammer owns you.

High Threshold · Post by **High Threshold** » Thu Jan 08, 2015 10:22 pm

sugarpuff;1471025 wrote: Be yourself

Very few people know who that is. "Sugarpuff - is that the real you?

sugarpuff · Post by **sugarpuff** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 4:45 pm

High Threshold;1471142 wrote: Very few people know who that is. "Sugarpuff - is that the real you?

lol I hope not because the name sugarpuff is a cereal ...

If you're asking.. if I am showing my genuine character .. yes I am ...

at least I am trying too ...

Like this thread title is .. What in a name ??...

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Sun Jan 11, 2015 3:55 am

sugarpuff;1471353 wrote: lol I hope not because the name sugarpuff is a cereal ...

If you're asking.. if I am showing my genuine character .. yes I am ...

at least I am trying too ...

Like this thread title is .. What in a name ??...
"A rose by any other name would smell as sweet".

(W. Shakespeare - Romeo & Juliet)

High Threshold · Post by **High Threshold** » Sun Jan 11, 2015 7:47 am

sugarpuff;1471353 wrote: lol I hope not because the name sugarpuff is a cereal ...

If you're asking.. if I am showing my genuine character .. yes I am ...

at least I am trying too ...

Like this thread title is .. What in a name ??...

Are you certain of your own character? I am under the distinct impression that sugar puff suffers an identity complex hence, the compensation name of Honey Monster Puffs.

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Sun Jan 11, 2015 9:48 am

I was plagued at school because of Sugar Puffs, and their advertising character at the time - Jeremy, the Sugar Puff Bear. Ever since then I go by the name 'Jerry'. It was only ever my Mother that used my full name - and even then, only when I was naughty (which was very rare) or, going up the scale of naughtiness - full name, with surname, and then (next thing to capital punishment), full name, with surname AND middle name.

High Threshold · Post by **High Threshold** » Sun Jan 11, 2015 10:45 am

:wah: Too bloody funny! :yh_rotfl

sugarpuff · Post by **sugarpuff** » Sun Jan 11, 2015 11:56 am

High Threshold;1471388 wrote: Are you certain of your own character? I am under the distinct impression that sugar puff suffers an identity complex hence, the compensation name of Honey Monster Puffs.

You are so right :wah::wah::wah::wah:

I like that name much better ...

Honey Monster Puffs ....

and it is so cute ...

sugarpuff · Post by **sugarpuff** » Sun Jan 11, 2015 12:01 pm

FourPart;1471397 wrote: I was plagued at school because of Sugar Puffs, and their advertising character at the time - Jeremy, the Sugar Puff Bear. Ever since then I go by the name 'Jerry'. It was only ever my Mother that used my full name - and even then, only when I was naughty (which was very rare) or, going up the scale of naughtiness - full name, with surname, and then (next thing to capital punishment), full name, with surname AND middle name.

Awwwwwwwwww four part ...that wasn't nice of them ...

I have to agree with threshold

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Sun Jan 11, 2015 12:13 pm

Jeremy the Sugar Puffs Bear,

who loves his honey has left some there,

to bring his friends,

and have a Sugar Puffs picnic.

I'll leave you to work the tune out for yourself.

FG-administator · Post by **FG-administator** » Tue Jan 13, 2015 1:15 pm

Lady J;1471034 wrote: A person would prefer to own something rather than hold in in common cuz it gives them control....

In the probable event that Billy Bragg hasn't become familiar to many Americans I thought you and your compatriots on ForumGarden might enjoy this. I even have the CD somewhere, still packed from the move.

It's relevant to the discussion as well as a hair-tingling performance. The lyrics, if you'd like to sing along, are at http://www.billybragg.co.uk/music/album ... &songID=36