You may want to reread the thread. I am not the one who dialed up the drama. In fact, compared to BE becoming unhinged, I was rather restrained. And that’s because I realize that if he hasn’t learned by this point in his life that it is incumbent upon him to apologize when he makes an error (especially if he flies of the handle and attacks someone for it), that it’s probably way too late. That’s what childhood was for.
But the fact that you choose to come after me is more comedy. It also indicates two things. One, it acts as further evidence that this board coddles their liberal own while it attacks conservatives. Two, Mr. and Mrs. Ekers weren’t the only ones that had some basic failures in the parenting department.
I rapidly and cheerfully acknowledged that I’d made an error, which means I’m better behaved in this thread than you and Dio are in numerous others.
The rest of my statements, though, I stand by, with hinges and handles intact. You’re an idiot and a homophobe, though I offer no adjectives to expresses the severity of the latter because I don’t care.
I can offer up a working definition of “homophobe” if you like, lest you assume I’m merely slapping on a label in knee-jerk liberal reflex.
So you acknowledge you made an error. That’s good. But that error caused you to become unhinged and attack me. Now I know that you don’t agree with me on SSM, and I know that for you, that translates that you think I’m a bad person and/or don’t like me. That’s fine, too. But here’s the thing that pulls the rug out from under your “oh magellan01 is so detestable I would never engage him civilly” schtick: we have been in plenty of threads (non-SSM) where we simply disagreed on the topic, with no personal attack.
So, what transpired in this thread is completely due to a simple error YOU made. and due directly to YOUR error, you flew off the handle. The apparent fact that you don’t think that you don’t owe me an apology is mind-boggling. It’s comical in and of itself (in a sad kinda way), but when you take into account that this very thread was started because someone else (Dio) confused Ibn Warraq with another poster (Valteron), it gets funnier. Dio did the right thing and admitted his error. And as much as I disagree with Dio and virtually everything, I believe that if his error would have caused him to attack a poster the way you did, that he wold have apologized—profusely—for doing so. I believe there are probably only a few posters who would not do that and take responsibility for not only their mistake, but the fallout from it. I will tell you, honestly, prior to this thread, as much as we’ve disagreed, I would have not included you in that small group.
That’ll have to be your error, unless you can offer up a definition of “unhinged” I’m unaware of.
Your second error. It’s not the objection to SSM as such, it was the claims that you had reasons to oppose SSM, yet when asked, your reasons were stupid and you clung to them despite their repeated demolition. Apparently some day in the next forty or so years, SSM will undermine society in some way that you cannot specify but are concerned about nonetheless.
If it’d just been a blunt “I oppose SSM because I hate fags”… well, that wouldn’t really have given me something to challenge and question.
I don’t have to engage you civilly in the Pit. That’s the point of the Pit. I have handily engaged you civilly in GD and could easily do so again, on SSM or really any topic of mutual interest.
So basically… what rug are you talking about?
Did I?
Pit, remember?
Yes, I’d noticed that too. Dio confused two posters whose views are radically different but whose behaviour is at times comparable jerkish (though I think Valteron is the bigger jerk overall), while I confused two posters whose views are pretty much the same, and of comparable jerkishness (though mswas was the bigger jerk overall).
I don’t think confusing you and mswas represents all that great a mental lapse.
I’m okay with letting Dio speak for himself on this manner. You’ve already made a number of self-serving and incorrect statements about me (uninged, really?), so I have no confidence in your statements about him.
Anyway, my error was admitted as soon as it was brought to my attention. There was no goalpost-moving or prevaricating in an effort to salvage the incorrect statement, and I’m a little proud of that admittedly minor display of character.
Fallout? What fallout?
You are and always were free to “group” me any way you wish.
Let’s recap, shall we? It started with you making a funny/snide comment about Dio:
[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers]
Yeah, well, everything negative to say about Dio has already been said.
[/QUOTE]
I, then, in our first exchange in this thread, riffed on your remark about Dio:
[QUOTE=magellan01]
Cite?
[/QUOTE]
And what was your response to this. Wait—before we get there, let’s ponder what would be the range of appropriate responses to my “Cite?”?
…ponder
…ponder
…ponder
…ponder
…ponder
Okay, now let’s look at what you did respond with:
[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers]
Oh, there are whole depths to plumb about you, you stupid sexist homophobe, for anyone who can stand delving into the slime that is the fucked-up way of your thinking. You’re such a such a fucking coward living in terror that somebody somewhere might get gay married or have an abortion and care nothing for your interference, dismissing it as the buzzing of a particularly insignificant and asthmatic gnat. Well, that time is coming, so just shut up and shed a silent tear as your fellow reactionaries die off all around you and at least you won’t be annoying in addition to being obsolete.
Idiot.
[/QUOTE]
I was more than a bit baffled by the tone of your response. While we vehemently disagree on SSM, we’ve been able to discuss it—and other topics—in GD AND the Pit without such unhinged personal vitriol. I let you know it was a joke, thinking that you might back away from it, but you kept up your deranged rant about me based on WHAT YOU THOUGHT I HAD SAID.
After a few more uncalled-for insults from you, you finally discover that you had me confused with another poster, mswas (who is pro-SSM by the way), who you had some unpleasantness with. So the reasons you gave for insulting me the way you did was the very exchanges that you and she (?) had. You even cited what she said to you. So, your insults to me were quite angry and unhinged. Never mind, unmerited.
Now here’s where it all stems from. When you ask for a reasoned argument for or against something, it doesn’t mean that you have to agree with those reasons. Or even think they’re good or important reasons. If you did, you might find them convincing and maybe even change your opinion. But you’re not liking me reasoning does NOT equal my having a reasoned stance on the issue. You might want to read that over nine million times, until it sinks in.
Also, this thread has NOTHING to do with SSM. It’s one thing to bring up a fight you had in a SSM thread that caused you to dislike the person because she was rude to you. But it’s something else entirely when you think someone’s stance on Topic A has any bearing on completely unrelated Topic B. Feel free to read that over a few million times, as well.
And this also goes to the heart of things. You have devised a neat little world where pro SSM=Sensible, Moral and Right, while anti-SSM=Unreasoned and/or Immoral. So, you’re fine with those who say they oppose SSM due to their religion. The feeling being, well, if they applied reason, they’d have to be for it. So my non-religious, reasoned stance fucks your world all up. You haven’t built a nice, neat box for people like me, so your stuck calling me a bigot and homophobe. Seriously, given my stance on gay issues in total, doesn’t t5hat feel a little dumb to even you?
Yes, we have had civil discussion in GD, with extensive back and forth. We have ALSO had similar extensive discussions in the Pit. So, just because one is in the Pit doesn’t mean they must necessarily hurl invective and insult with every post. YOU have just admitted as much. So, you CHOSE to attack me personally here. And why? Because YOU made a mistake.
Now, given how you’ve handled this whole thing thus far, I can’t say I’m surprised that you’ve attempted to find some protection or excuse for your behavior with this latest weak excuse. It just underscores your desperation at this point. But it seems it needs to be pointed out to you that while the Pit allows for vitriol, but* it does not disallow civility*. In fact, just the other day I made a mistake, in a somewhat heated pit thread, (with Lobohan, I think), and when it was pointe out to me, I owned up to it and apologized. Fully. Why, because I felt that it was incumbent upon me to do so. Such is the baggage of having character. How nice it must be to not be similarly burdened.
Yes. As I explained.
And one can still be civil, especially when they make a mistake and fly off the handle and attack the wrong person.
[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers]
Yes, I’d noticed that too. Dio confused two posters whose views are radically different but whose behaviour is at times comparable jerkish (though I think Valteron is the bigger jerk overall), while I confused two posters whose views are pretty much the same, and of comparable jerkishness (though mswas was the bigger jerk overall).
I don’t think confusing you and mswas represents all that great a mental lapse.
[/QUOTE]
And I’m willing to buy that. My first response to your attack acknowledged as much. Mistakes happen. But when they do, it is incumbent upon the person who made the error to own up to it and try to fix it. As I did in the Lobohan instance, for example. It all came back to character. That very thing you seem to have a difficult time grasping.
[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers]
I’m okay with letting Dio speak for himself on this manner. You’ve already made a number of self-serving and incorrect statements about me (uninged, really?), so I have no confidence in your statements about him.
[/QUOTE]
I have not done anything of the sort. That’s what YOU have done in this thread. YOU have been incorrect. YOU have been unhinged.
[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers]
Anyway, my error was admitted as soon as it was brought to my attention. There was no goalpost-moving or prevaricating in an effort to salvage the incorrect statement, and I’m a little proud of that admittedly minor display of character.
[/QUOTE]
Now that is a good start. But if that’s where it both begins and ends, as I said, your parents did a pretty shitty job.
The string of insults you hurled my way due to your error in thinking that it was I that said those things to you.
I went with one I’d been pondering for some time, but since I wasn’t going to seek you out just to write it (let alone start a Pit thread about you) I went for the gusto.
Was it, perhaps, disproportionate? Heaven forfend. It’s the Pit, you’re an idiot, I don’t like you for good and various reasons, them’s the breaks.
Now hitch up your dainty little skirts and scuttle off in redfaced horror before you get the vapours.
Too bad. You stand to benefit by it. It’s never too late to make up for those things that one’s parents dropped the ball on. And drop the ball they did.
But I guess I shouldn’t be surprised that someone with the character you’ve demonstrated here would choose to close his eyes to his own failings.
Sigh.
And thus, the curtain was pulled back on the poster who goes by the name of Bryan Ekers. A giant in his own mind, the character of a puny man was laid bare for all to see.
Ah, such pretentiousness. I can’t imagine anyone was fooled by the cunning facade you’re suggesting I’ve had all this time. Actually, I’d be surprised if one doper in a thousand had bothered to form an opinion of my personalty, good or bad, accurate or not.
But now they have more to go on. You’ve revealed your self.
So, those numbers, whatever they are, will be creeping up. Tonight, when you lay your head on your pillow, be sure to thank yourself for a job so astoundingly well done.
Actually you can begin to see the effects much sooner. Tonight, in fact, when you lay your head on that pillow. If you can’t sleep because you feel you’ve acted in a way that is less honorable than you see for yourself, you’ll have some trouble sleeping. If you’re happy with your conduct and think it will reflect positively on you, you’ll sleep like a baby. I don’t expect you to realize this, but you’ll be better off with not being able to sleep. It’ll show that you just let your mouth run away and then some short-term view of pride got in the way. Otherwise, you’re parents really did fail you.
But here’s something to chuckle about in all this: This person you think so lowly of, this person you see as a homophobic bigot, a detestable person, may turn out to be the very person who points out to you your giant moral failing, and spurs you to be a better person. It’s not too late. Just dial down the pride. And dial up the type of person you viewed yourself as on your best days.
Yeah, but it was a nothing criticism. He confused two users’ locations… even by Dio-pit standards, that’s weak. The other criticisms are pretty much just rehashes.
Of course, now I’m deeply curious about this “fallout”. I just hope it hasn’t already passed in the form of invisible neutron radiation, giving me just a few minutes to li
And thanks for proving my point with yet another “Waaaah, the mean wiberals are picking on me!” post. You’ve taken a fairly mild rant about Dio and turned it into the magellan01 show again. Drama queenery at its finest.
I’m sure it strokes your ego to no end to think that the reason that we think that someone who opposes gay marriage and advocates profiling Muslims might just be a bit of a bigot is because we’re all partisan zombies rather than because someone who opposes gay marriage and advocates profiling Muslims might just be a bit of a bigot, but don’t let us stop your little masturbation session.