ST Alpha - "So you think Mel's "example" implies it wasn't with his consent? It's his consent and participation that makes it Darwin eligible. -- nm" (Reading a Post)

SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ

Login
Create Account

Search Dr. S. Talk
TT/ST Wiki
How Well Do You Know ...

RSS Feed

Hosting by DigitalOcean

Support ST on Ko-Fi

Down to Post

Backboards:

Posts: 152

In response to "mara's example is correct, yours is not. -- nm" by zork

So you think Mel's "example" implies it wasn't with his consent? It's his consent and participation that makes it Darwin eligible. -- nm

Posted by mara Jan 3 '13, 14:35

(No message)

Responses:

and he's not the one we're considering for the Darwin Award. - Mel Profit Jan 3, 14:41 4
- Ah, I had it backward. I say the dead guy gets the award. -- nm - mara Jan 3, 15:29
- No, he is. I believe it's generally a posthumous award. -- nm - tl Jan 3, 15:05 1
  - we don't have any proof that he initiated anything to cause his own death - zork Jan 3, 15:17
- just because it's not likely that she would reproduce, she is still capable. - zork Jan 3, 14:43

Post a message top

Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.