@Human77 said in #10:
> The Beatles are losers. They should've kept their original drumma
Ringo is the 'Best' drumma ! - :]
> The Beatles are losers. They should've kept their original drumma
Ringo is the 'Best' drumma ! - :]
@Skittle-Head said in #11:
> Ringo is the 'Best' drumma ! - :]
Best is a loser. He got sacked from the Beatles.
> Ringo is the 'Best' drumma ! - :]
Best is a loser. He got sacked from the Beatles.
@Human77 - What a trumptorian thing to say, I suppose you don't like Sen. John McCain either. - :]
if you accept it, it is because you accept this destiny passively. if it's a life choice, it's because you don't know what life is.
@CSKA_Moscou said in #14:
> if you accept it, it is because you accept this destiny passively. if it's a life choice, it's because you don't know what life is.
Chosing to be a loser could be rebelling,saying i dont accept
Worlds meaning of life
> if you accept it, it is because you accept this destiny passively. if it's a life choice, it's because you don't know what life is.
Chosing to be a loser could be rebelling,saying i dont accept
Worlds meaning of life
I am secure in this opinion: becoming a loser generally happens from a series of repeated bad choices: it is not a destiny. And if those bad choices haven't gone too far (unfortunately, they sometimes can), even they can often be reversed with a change in attitude and behavior and a little faith.
Too many people to count have risen from horrid, simply awful beginnings. They were born into disadvantage, trouble and pain; but they kept making the right choices, over and over, even when -- indeed, especially when -- it was hard to do so and they could have given themselves an excuse to do the wrong things.
"Born" loser? Nah. No kid should ever feel that way about himself or herself. I'm not just being saccharine here -- each of us can live a worthy life, if we make up our minds to do so and don't give up. Perhaps the simplest and most truthful, if ungrammatical, way to put this is: "God don't make no mistakes."
But we should be careful how we define "winning" and "losing." One doesn't have to acquire fortune or fame to "win." Indeed, some (clearly, not all or even most) who DO acquire fortune and fame are, in some profound ways, "losers." If you roll your eyes at this, study more history or current events.
We can each find our own way to "win" -- to do something that dependably helps and brings happiness and not misery and suffering into the world, for ourselves and for others. Indeed, we can each find many different ways to win. There are a great many teachers who truly are "winners" even if they never become wealthy or famous, for example.
Furthermore, I'm thinking right now of an honest old couple I once knew who, together, worked as the live-in janitors for a large old church, working for a relatively low wage. They worked tirelessly and well, and were always kind, wise and giving. They left behind descendants who went on to soar in the eyes of the world. They were absolutely winners, and many came to recognize that. Long years after they passed, they were still talked about fondly by those who once knew them. They were winners, beyond doubt.
So yes, there are many ways to "win." One could, for example, draw the forum's attention to the glory and wonder of the lovely hippopotamus: that chess opening which is a fresh spring amidst a host of stale openings. It's a worthy (but dangerous) animal, too! Indeed, the hippopotamus, itself, is a "winner." (Although I sometimes fail to uphold its honor, over the board. But don't blame the hippopotamus for that).
Too many people to count have risen from horrid, simply awful beginnings. They were born into disadvantage, trouble and pain; but they kept making the right choices, over and over, even when -- indeed, especially when -- it was hard to do so and they could have given themselves an excuse to do the wrong things.
"Born" loser? Nah. No kid should ever feel that way about himself or herself. I'm not just being saccharine here -- each of us can live a worthy life, if we make up our minds to do so and don't give up. Perhaps the simplest and most truthful, if ungrammatical, way to put this is: "God don't make no mistakes."
But we should be careful how we define "winning" and "losing." One doesn't have to acquire fortune or fame to "win." Indeed, some (clearly, not all or even most) who DO acquire fortune and fame are, in some profound ways, "losers." If you roll your eyes at this, study more history or current events.
We can each find our own way to "win" -- to do something that dependably helps and brings happiness and not misery and suffering into the world, for ourselves and for others. Indeed, we can each find many different ways to win. There are a great many teachers who truly are "winners" even if they never become wealthy or famous, for example.
Furthermore, I'm thinking right now of an honest old couple I once knew who, together, worked as the live-in janitors for a large old church, working for a relatively low wage. They worked tirelessly and well, and were always kind, wise and giving. They left behind descendants who went on to soar in the eyes of the world. They were absolutely winners, and many came to recognize that. Long years after they passed, they were still talked about fondly by those who once knew them. They were winners, beyond doubt.
So yes, there are many ways to "win." One could, for example, draw the forum's attention to the glory and wonder of the lovely hippopotamus: that chess opening which is a fresh spring amidst a host of stale openings. It's a worthy (but dangerous) animal, too! Indeed, the hippopotamus, itself, is a "winner." (Although I sometimes fail to uphold its honor, over the board. But don't blame the hippopotamus for that).
@Oportunist said in #15:
> Chosing to be a loser could be rebelling,saying i dont accept
> Worlds meaning of life
in this case it would be a victory in the philosophical sense. is that there is a sufficiently valid reason and a choice that is not a defeat for the person.
> Chosing to be a loser could be rebelling,saying i dont accept
> Worlds meaning of life
in this case it would be a victory in the philosophical sense. is that there is a sufficiently valid reason and a choice that is not a defeat for the person.
I guess it depends on how one measures being a loser to not being a loser. :).
Never consider...
@LordSupremeChess said in #7:
> Being a loser is described by The Book Of LSC as "not having a girlfriend if you are LSC".
>
> I fit into that category.
haha most of us fits to it friend
> Being a loser is described by The Book Of LSC as "not having a girlfriend if you are LSC".
>
> I fit into that category.
haha most of us fits to it friend
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.