| |
|
Trampetunia thank you for the post and the wonderful imagery (though personally I prefer a duck analogy as there is a lot of quacking on both sides, though it would mean we both had smaller penises).
And you must admit that sometimes you are unwilling to admit error or apologise. Just sometimes.
Undoubtedly, though I hadn't realised I had enough of a presence on Barbelith for that to be a feature of me as a poster.
Reid - Your posts aren't as unfounded, stupid or nonsensical as Haus seems to find them. But that doesn't mean that they're a bastion of rationality and good sense. You might do better just to go read your book, listen to some music and post in some other threads.
You're absolutely right however I do need something to do in my afternoon tea break and I suspect this has become one of these stupid and pointless male arguments that I don't really feel like giving up because I'm stupid, pointless and male, fits with your imagery in many ways.
I'm not really trying to set myself up as bastion of good sense and rationality and apologise if I come across that way. What I object to is Haus assuming the role of the ultimate arbiter of what can and can't be written in threads.
Just out of interest, how many people are reading this stuff all the way through and how many, like myself, are scanning it for the funny bits?
I'm so tempted to admit to this.
A successful lampoon is accurate.
Excellent, we're making progress; I wasn't even sure how successful it was.
Only, I have a feeling hir point was that what was happening here was not about "winning the argument" - it was about not giving in to avoid bruising other people's egos, and in doing so allowing bad behaviour to slide, so that when resolution was reached it was worthwhile resolution. Your mileage may vary, but it has to be your mileage, based on your reading.
And I thought I was just being stubborn, it's really very kind of you to say this.
Actually, this case is a case in which another person resurrected this thread in order to attack me
Come now. Critique you, which I thought the thread was for. You are one who's been using words like stupid, histrionic and a liar despite the fact that even if you don't agree with my reading of what went on I'm clearly not lying (Unless of course lieing, a word I have no knowledge of but as discussed I'm quite stupid, means something different to lying (an untruth), perhaps lieing is Latin).
Mistofelees, that's beautiful man.
Haus just out of interest can you think of any other posters who have to search through threads to find evidence of reasonable behaviour? Do you think that's normal? Are you the victim here?
Oh and you were doing so well:
Kay, Reidcourchie and others depend on people not questioning their assertions because they chime with their prejudices - in effect, people believing what was said last, as long as what they said last is in line with what they want to believe. Going along with this damages Barbelith, because it means that those who might otherwise have something useful to say have to spend our time separating the credulous from their unhealthy convictions.
Haus, haus, haus, are we going to be two geeks locked in disagreement for all eternity? Or words to that effect. You know full well that is what you do, you do it a lot, it only works if you assume you're smarter than everyone and if you then enforce it by telling people that they're not allowed to disagree with you. I have conceded everything factual you’ve said in this thread up to including semantic difference between what I said and what Flyboy said. What I object to is you setting yourself up as the arbiter of what is and what isn't allowed when very transparently what is allowed is what you agree with, and what isn't allowed is what you disagree with. You still have not explained in anyway shape or form why if two posters, one of whom is you, disagree you are not only right but automatically right.
Is it divine mandate? Go on say it is, I'll accept that. Because that is what you seem to be doing, from the above quote only you know, Kay can't see through my dastardly lies but you can. Special powers? And really it is thing like this that makes me want to ascribe the battle cry of the Greenland Posse "Can't you see! Can't you see!" but I won't because you've told me that sort of thing is bad. (Well okay I sort of did but at least I know it's wrong now.) Once again you can't seem to make up your mind whether I'm stupid or some kind of threat to Barbelith, which you've bravely stepped forward to defend. If I’m smart enough to get one over on Kay but if I'm stupid how stupid is he/she? (Kay please rest assured I don't think you're at all stupid.)
I'm not a big fan of autobiography, trampetunia, but I have a feeling that you and reid might not have been where I was and indeed where Flyboy was on and after the 7th of July last year.
Though you have brought it up again.
Reidcourchie ultimately responded as if he had said that Barbelith as a whole refused to offer any sympathy to anyone unless as a response to that person making sexist, racist or homophobic comments: his misrepresentation had to keep getting bigger and bigger to justify his continued threadrot. This would be poor form in the Conversation, but in the Policy it's unacceptable, because people are trying to talk about what has actually been said without dealing with what has not been said.
And we would've immediately had you not decided to take issue with it.
Oh but a break through!:
To me, that looks like grandstanding. It may be reading problems - Reid might be unable to understand the word "some" - in which case, as I said, we have to work out how to deal with that. If it is not a medical problem, we don't have to do that before deciding whether this is desirable behaviour.
Exactly Haus to you, to you. I disagree; other people have read it differently to both of us, yet you insist that yours is the only voice that matters. See like this thread you could have left it alone anytime you wanted or do you really expect people to just roll over when you're being unpleasant even if the reason for doing so is you can't understand the funny coloured English? You could just ask for help. Also why do you seem to double post so much?
Well, that's your right. On the other hand, no offence intended but we did just spend a page in Barbequotes talking about a post of yours which was if not homophobic in intent certainly remarkably open to being read as informed by homophobia, so I think we can also agree that one's own reading of text may not be the only available reading.
Lucky Trampetunia but silly boy/girl she's disagreeing with Haus so reference to another thread not to deal with the issue at hand but to attack his/her's validity as a poster, yet another juvenile and slightly underhand debating tactic. You do that a lot as well, why?
You are free not to find Reid's citing of the bombing of London in an apparent attempt to draw attention away from his misrepresentation of what Flyboy said - or possibly a medically confused response to what he saw as inaccurate responses to his delusional but sincere misreading of what Flyboy said, perhaps - as manipulative, but I think that only works if you assume the latter - that Reid is for some reason medically unable to understand written statements, even when the meaning of those written statements is repeatedly explained, and thus was sincerely but incorrectly responding to a perceived claim that Barbelith as a whole etc.
Haus you can shout this as over and over again it does not make it true. It's not a misrepresentation, we disagree on the reading but you are the only one that can be possibly right, judging by your argument, ...just because, or rather to disagree with you means you are a liar or having mental health issues or learning disabilities (I can’t believe you’re pushing that angle.)
The thing is I really struggle to see where you get your reading from, and I have done a number of times when you've responded to other people's post when you've seemed to be concentrating on the minutiae rather than the substance of the post and I couldn't for the life of me work out why. An idea occurred this morning, you're not looking for information from these posts are you? You're looking for mistakes.
Do you agree, like myself, that Bogart was robbed when he didn't win the Oscar for the Caine Mutiny?
Sometimes people are indeed wrong. If they spurn opportunity after opportunity to cease to be wrong, which involves expending more and more effort, unless their wrongness is the result of some form of cognitive disfunction, on maintaining their ignorance of the facts of the case, then after a while one has to start considering the possibility either that they are reading things wrongly on purpose, or that there is something wrong with them.
A cry for help? Oh you mean me? Really Haus your justification, relying on semantic minutiae aside which have already been explained (though it would seem not very clearly, even I have become confused by the bizarreness of Haus' claims) only work if we all agree with you apparently to the point where we live in Hausworld.
Incidentally whilst you’re having a crack at my grammar dysfunction is spelt with a Y sweeteness.
Anyway see you tomorrow. |
|
|
