Rojo, You Are a Smoker.

brogan1 wrote:

I don't smoke but if I were at a wedding and somebody offered me a quality cigar I would probably try it. Does the potential intent to smoke a cigar make me a smoker?

Insurance companies would classify this as a "celebratory smoker" i.e. one or less cigars per month and you'd receive a non-smoker rate.

Truup wrote:

dbags wrote:

Completely agree. I just filled out my life insurance application and if you smoke even once every 2 years (occasions etc); they call you a smoker and your premium goes up.

Yep because Insurance Companies are the ultimate source of truth and reason.

You think insurance companies make their decisions randomly and illogically?

You are an infant.

Start by taking at stats class and maybe a finance class. You'll be less retarded.

You are welcome

800 dude wrote:

Would you call someone who runs a block to catch a bus once every few years a runner?

Would you call this person a professional athlete, but she considers herself one

Dusty Street wrote:

Why do you give a sh!t ..? The dude is just living his life; maybe get a life and see how that feels. Rojo’s only mistake was telling this board anything of how he spends his time.

I see you don't understand how health insurance works.

Rojo needs less smoking and more grammar.

runhills wrote:

The only thing I smoke is the pole.

Fixed that for you.

MeHereYouWhere?! wrote:

runhills wrote:

The only thing I smoke is the pole.

Fixed that for you.

Really? The original post sounded gay enough.

runhills wrote:

The only I smoke is my teammates every practice.

I love rojo bashing as much as the next guy, but this is a dumb thread.

Raysism wrote:

On this week's podcast, Rojo tried to argue that he's not a smoker, even though he admits he smokes once every few years at a wedding or other celebration. Just because you're not a frequent smoker doesn't mean you're not a smoker.

If you're truly not a smoker, it means either you've never had a cigarette (like me, Gault, and everyone else with a brain), or you've completely quit with no present intention to ever smoke again.

Rojo, look in the mirror and admit it to yourself: You are a smoker.

This is the sort of debate that is solely about the meaning of a word, not an actual idea. There's no disagreement about anything of substance. It's just what you think a word means versus what another person thinks a word means.

It's like debating about whether someone is "elite." Why do you think ESPN loves to play this game during low periods in the sports cycle? It's because different people have different notions of what the word "elite" means, thus it is guaranteed to produce a disagreement. Two people could agree completely regarding their ranking of quarterbacks, 1-32. They could still disagree on whether the #6 guy is elite.

These sorts of debates are stupid, and there's a reason philosophers define key terms at the beginning of a paper.

killermike wrote:

It's like debating about whether someone is "elite."

Nah, it's not even that interesting or important.

killermike wrote:

This is the sort of debate that is solely about the meaning of a word, not an actual idea. There's no disagreement about anything of substance. It's just what you think a word means versus what another person thinks a word means.

It's like debating about whether someone is "elite."

This is a horrible analogy. I'm talking about the definition of a noun; you're talking about the application of an adjective. Those are two totally different things.

Raysism wrote:

killermike wrote:

This is the sort of debate that is solely about the meaning of a word, not an actual idea. There's no disagreement about anything of substance. It's just what you think a word means versus what another person thinks a word means.

It's like debating about whether someone is "elite."

This is a horrible analogy. I'm talking about the definition of a noun; you're talking about the application of an adjective. Those are two totally different things.

The distinction isn't that rigid. Plenty of nouns convey normativity, like "prodigy." "Smoker" has plenty of room for interpretation, just like "elite" does. Clearly, someone who has smoked once and might possibly smoke again in 50 years is not a smoker. Someone who smokes every day is a smoker. But there's a lot of gray area in between, and the only disagreement here is where the line should be drawn.

i dont know how relevant it is, but it's funny wrote:

800 dude wrote:

Would you call someone who runs a block to catch a bus once every few years a runner?

Would you call this person a professional athlete, but she considers herself one

https://ironfatblog.files.wordpress.com/2019/02/run-slow.png

Well Rojo passes himself off as an elite runner and he clearly never was.

Raysism wrote:

On this week's podcast, Rojo tried to argue that he's not a smoker, even though he admits he smokes once every few years at a wedding or other celebration. Just because you're not a frequent smoker doesn't mean you're not a smoker.

If you're truly not a smoker, it means either you've never had a cigarette (like me, Gault, and everyone else with a brain), or you've completely quit with no present intention to ever smoke again.

Rojo, look in the mirror and admit it to yourself: You are a smoker.

Lol this is one of the funniest things I've read on this board in a while

Raysism wrote:

On this week's podcast, Rojo tried to argue that he's not a smoker, even though he admits he smokes once every few years at a wedding or other celebration. Just because you're not a frequent smoker doesn't mean you're not a smoker.

If you're truly not a smoker, it means either you've never had a cigarette (like me, Gault, and everyone else with a brain), or you've completely quit with no present intention to ever smoke again.

Rojo, look in the mirror and admit it to yourself: You are a smoker.

Smoking is bad for you, and definitely I wouldn’t advise it. I was never addicted to cigarettes or particularly like them, and I was one of the only drug addicts I know who wasn’t also a smoker, but I’ve definitely smoked some cigarettes before. Maybe somewhere in the realm of 25 or so in my 31 years of age?

Smoking is bad for you, but judging someone on if they occasionally smoke cigarettes, or thinking you’re better than someone else for what you have or haven’t ingested is a much more unattractive characteristic to me. And I would know, because that’s the type of person I was before I got addicted to drugs from being prescribed painkillers. I was a stuck-up, immature kid who looked at the world through very un-empathetic eyes. Drug addiction is the worst, and I don’t wish it on anyone else, but for helping me grow beyond that person that I was, I am thankful that it happened to me.

He is a smoker.... a joker ... maybe even a midnight toker.

knox harrington wrote:

I love rojo bashing as much as the next guy, but this is a dumb thread.

the video artist?

dbags wrote:

I just filled out my life insurance application and if you smoke even once every 2 years (occasions etc); they call you a smoker and your premium goes up.

you should challenge them on that. There can't be any data supporting claims of increased risk from two packs in your lifetime.

Nicotine intake causes an adrenaline release as well as the stimulating effect on the brain and body, could argue that it is a PED, likely helpful for shorter distances.

PS > I used to hate when someone would beat me in the 400 back in high school track days, then go light up a cigarette.