So posting a bulbous, banal, five line gush is a good way to demonstrate that there is more to life than pedantry?
I’m not convinced.
Now that you mention it, who did who on Gilligans Island?
Well, I think the Professor was probably doing both Ginger and Maryanne, seeing as how their only other options were two old guys and Bob Denver. How else do you explain how he could build practically anything out of coconuts and palm fronds, but couldn’t fix the damn boat?
Maeglin
Yeah, whatever.
Maybe we’re not all blessed with wonderful prose, I suppose I should start looking up to you and the fine examples of the genre that you regularly grace the boards with.
OTOH I could care less, but looking at the two threads in the pit with a significant TR contribution is certainly enough to convince me.
Does anyone have a serious dispute with what I said in the OP? Does anyone disagree that when I say “A is to B as C is to D”, and someone claims that I think that A equals C, they have misunderstood me? Where did this “just because they disagree with you, that doesn’t mean that they don’t understand you” come from? That statement implies that I have no reason other than disagreement for believing that the other person has misunderstood me, when in fact I presented a quite different reason. Do really dispute that, given that someone has comitted the fallacy described in the OP, they do not understand my position? I said nothing that depends simply on someone disagreeing with me.
Veb:
Is it “anal” to complain when someone completely misrepresents your position?
Which I followed.
Which I’m trying to share.
Which is hindered by people who don’t understand what an analogy is.
Which was the intent of this thread: to enlighten people as to what an analogy is.
If you have a problem with my post, why don’t you actually present it (i.e., enlighten), instead of just making snide comments (i.e., obscure)?
And Jodi, you’re one to talk, when it is obvious to any reasonable person that you did misunderstand me.
In the BSA thread, that is.
[sup](k- I got no shame and no sense of board propriety- I had a sense of propriety once, but it got away…-)[/sup]
Dude-
Relax some- not everybody is disagreeing with you. I personally think your arguments are extremely if sometimes over-reasoned. (This doesn’t mean I always agree with you, but sometimes I do. And lots of times it don’t matter- who the fuck cares whether I agree with you on what Jodi said 8 threads back, 1/2 way up? Do you see what I’m saying?)
The thing is, I can only get so far following you before I fall asleep, fall off my chair, and hurt myself. Yes, you are nice and succinct sometimes, but man, sometimes…
It’s a virtual forum, it’s not you in a courtroom, arguing against a life sentence…
I’m guessing you haven’t yet tried my suggestion to try typing naked.;)[sub](<<<now THAT’S gotta be a first- winking at The Ryan??? I’m just jockin yer strap…)[/sub]
Protesilaus
If I still drank or stoned, I’d like to meet you in a dark alley some warm fine night, with a bottle of good whiskey or a trusty bong and a few good tops of fine Amsterdamnian Indica, find some nice cardboard to sit on…
Ahh god, you need to post more, k?
You know, I just reread Magdalene’s post. The first time I read it, I was like “Why is she being such an anal retentive bitch?” She’s usually so nice and reasonable, and always makes an effort to understand and respond to the person’s underlying meaning. Why then is she responding line for line, playing little word games and being an insufferable twit? Why would she do such a thing? What’s up her butt?
Then of course, the rubber sledgehammer banged into my skull…
AAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH,
The great irony of course is that the impersonation was so deadpan perfect, nobody picked up on it.
Somehow I’m not even tempted to do a “quote each word and rebut” response because you’ve already overused the tactic so much it’s impossible to parody. Besides, you’d probably just take it as encouragement.
Given the previous post devoted (if that’s the word) to you here in the pit over your endless, dreary pettifogging posting habits I can’t help but view your latest lesson in denial as anal. Some people lose the forest for all those trees; you seem can’t seem to focus beyond toothpicks. People can understand you just fine and still disagree. Assuming ignorance on their part–and pedantic superiority for yourself–was arrogant, not to mention begging for a renewal of hostilities.
“Snide”?! You post this in the PIT, already, it’s greeted with blatant ridicule and you zero in on snide?
You’ve said your piece. I’ve said mine. This ain’t GD. Our discussion is done. I’m not about to indulge you in the kind of endless, fruitless exchange you seem to thrive on.
Veb
P.S. The boat didn’t get fixed because the Professor was boinking MaryAnn, Skipper was sneaking off with Mrs. Howell and Gilligan so inept he could cause a sand shortage at the beach.
TVeblen said
I can’t resist a challenge! (“Put the Anal in analogy”. <snicker> Good one!)
Define “I’m”. Since it’s a relative term, it could mean “me” depending on who’s speaking, and I want nothing to do with your arguement.
Webster’s defines amazed as “to affect with great surprise or wonder”. Is that truly the word you mean? Wouldn’t “astonished” be more appropriate? How 'bout “wonder-filled”. Or did you mean something closer to “aghast”? Let’s discuss your choice of words.
**
My favorite number is 3. Three. III. ‘5-2’. It’s a good number. Odd, yet not offensivly odd like the dreaded 13. And did anyone else ever think the number 8 seemed a trifle sinister somehow?
**
This is obviously plagerized from the Gettysburg Address where Lincoln says “and that government of the people. . .by the people. . .for the people. . . shall not perish from the earth.”. I truly respect Lincoln and am horrified that you would plagerize him this way. Oh, sure. You removed a “the”, but your intent was clear. Plagerizer.
**
You’re not being specific enough in your arguement. Surf board, Ironing board? What board, specifically do you mean. The fact that you’ve used the completly ambiguous word “this” proves nothing.
**
I believe the correct term is “differently abled”. Unabled is simply a clunky phrase and politically incorrect.
**
Two? Too? This word, by itself stands out as an almost perfect, shining beacon to the reader. But once there, the reader is left muddled. A bad word choice.
**
Cite please?
**
You realize that you’ve just contradicted yourself. Earlier you used the word “the” to refer to “the number” but here you use it to refer to “the concept”. Which is it. It’s self-evident it can’t be both.
**
**
Here you have a perfect example of a prepositional phrase.
**
Self evidentally untrue. Captain Amazing gave a very brief lecture on mass and thrust, and I for one, applaud him.
**
There’s a song by the Peanut Butter Conspiracy called “It’s a Happening Thing”. This phrase reminded me of that song. I though I’d share that. I will now go listen to "The Peanut Butter Conspiracy since all this {quote}{b}{/b}{/quote} stuff is making my pinkies ache.
Fenris
Fenris, have I told you lately that I love you?
I, for one, would love to see TVeblen elected “Poster of the Millennium” for his CORRECT use of the word “pettifoggin.” BTW, TR, that really does mean “Mickey Mouse” in a bad way.
TVEBLEN?
HIS??
Have I been not paying attention?
Whoops. Make that “for her” & thanks.
I’d like to take a shot at this also, so without further ado,
Wow, that was tough. [sub]I feel so dirty now.[/sup]
Ahhh, laugh and learn. Gotta love it.
No. You haven’t. You’ve been…distant…lately. Be honest. Is there [sub]someone[/sub] else?
<kidding, of course>
Thanks!
Fenris
When reading posts by The Ryan, I often get this image in my my head. It’s bj0rn who’s eaten to much candy, sitting behind his computer, foaming from the corners of his mouth, eyes wide open. He’s avidly reading a dictionary and posting at the same time. By some weird twist of coincidence, he happens to hit the shift key at just the right times.
I guess I’m the only one who sees the similarities between the modi operandi of these two guys, right? Sure, the packaging is different. But the tactics are identical.
Wow. I truly get the impression that you are not the “favorite” poster here. For myself, I must admit that when I read threads, I just read the posts. I don’t read who posted it unless I find the post particularly something (funny, insightful, nasty, whatever). Therefore, I don’t really know you through your posting style.
I bring this up because I actually did respond to your OP in a serious way. Without vitriol.
If you missed it, it might be because I didn’t come across very well. It might also be because you read nastiness in it, because you expected nastiness in it. I must wonder why this might be so. Perhaps you are so used to being blasted that you anticipate it (not invite it). This must be based on your posting style that apparently bothers others.
I’m not saying that you should change posting style, nor am I suggesting that you do something drastic as a name change/re-inlist, but I guess that when people see TheRyan they expect something and look for it (thereby finding it - self fulfilling prophecy here).
I have no advice; you didn’t ask for it. I agree with you that making the “C is to D” part of an analogy does not mean that you agree with C or D, but, as I stated earlier, one must be careful in the selection of C and D. (not to suggest that you aren’t)
Damn, I sound wishy-washy.
<insert pit-required profanity here>