I figured it would come down to requiring a definition. That is why I said at the outset that you know a loser when u see one. We could get bogged down for about 12 pages before we even get close to a definition. Besides, that is not the purpose of my orginal post.
Everyone has their own definition and criteria for what constitutes a loser.
My own personal notion (as opposed to definition which can easily be picked apart) of a FLIT is a ne’er do well who is happy just pissing his life away with no purpose, earning only just enough to support a pathetic existence. FLITs only care about themselves, never have any meaningful relationships, and have been fired from numerous companies/schools because they just can’t handle even the slightest level of responsibility.
Of course, these are not scientific criteria that one could apply to a person to decide if he was a loser or not, but I think we all recognize the character I described above.
Soddom, I concede your points, but whether or not I wish to feel superior to FLITs is actually not directly relevant to the task at hand. What I want, and what I feel we need, is a name.
‘FLIT’ just isn’t that great. As for ‘ACTR’…“He’s an ACTR!” …naaah, just doesn’t have a ring to it. If ‘Spack’ catches on, then so be it!