Siteadmin, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
125,794
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 29:
Line 29: − +
Talk:Emotional gambling (view source)
Revision as of 16:55, September 3, 2008
, 16:55, September 3, 2008→"meaningless": sig
:That seems to make sense, and I agree it is not simple to express. In any case a Presidential election, which can change the course of history, seems far to consequential to be an example of emotional gambling by that definition. Should that be removed from the article? [[User:MichaelR|MichaelR]] 12:37, 3 September 2008 (EDT)
:That seems to make sense, and I agree it is not simple to express. In any case a Presidential election, which can change the course of history, seems far to consequential to be an example of emotional gambling by that definition. Should that be removed from the article? [[User:MichaelR|MichaelR]] 12:37, 3 September 2008 (EDT)
:: I think people could still engage in [[emotional gambling]] with respect to a presidential election by exaggerating the significance of the outcome. But I agree with you that our entry needs to express the real point better, and not rely so much on political examples.
:: I think people could still engage in [[emotional gambling]] with respect to a presidential election by exaggerating the significance of the outcome. But I agree with you that our entry needs to express the real point better, and not rely so much on political examples.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 12:55, 3 September 2008 (EDT)