mkeiyd wrote:@tycho and @ annti christy, You two should open your thread and get on with your elitist views.You have a way of trivializing threads to diction.
Whether Bill Gates draws satisfaction from his philanthropy, that's for him to care about.
All i know, his money has and is changing millions of life.
Are you against his satisfaction? Are you also against his satisfaction from Microsoft?
If all you can give to the world is semantics, open a thread for that and GIVE from the bottom of your brains.
My comments were based on a conditional. Looking at the relationships and assumption behind an action isn't wrong. I may not be as rich as Mr. Gates, but I have also been into 'giving'! Even now 'I give' and I am finding great reward in looking at myself through this conversation.
I know you are saying that as long as there is something to receive from Mr. Gates there's no need to ask how you've come to receive. But there are many instances in which knowledge of the giver's thinking or knowledge would change your mind from receiving! (Even the beggar expects to be given out of some value(s).
So why get hostile when I seek to know even for myself? Shouldn't I question even my self satisfaction?
If 'semantics' means 'meaning' then you are right that I am bringing in questions regarding meaning. But if it has some negative connotation then it means you don't want my being, and even if you are a 'giver' you are also a 'muzzler'.