This is one thread, buddy, not your private little fucking robot think tank. If you don’t want me referencing the overall conversation, start your own damn thread.
C’mon now. Everyone has an emotional tantrum now and then. When they’ve worn themselves out and are willing to actually address you, I’m sure they’ll let you know.
Again, you’re obviously arguing with someone you’ve dreamed up besides me. So I’ll leave you to your imagination where emotion is a useful problem solving tool.
That can be a problem in real life, too. Someone might always be pleasant around you or me, but be a horrible racist (etc.) when we aren’t around, and we may never know. And then they get attacked, and we think, “Joe?! But he’s always been so nice when I’ve been around him.”
But when someone brings the receipts, do you still go “But Joe is such a nice guy”? Or do you say “Well, looks like I was mistaken about Joe”?
No, we can all see the reaction you’re having. So very “not that emotionally involved”.
BTW, this absolutely screams “all one has to do is reason about it”, in case you thought that was just imagination.
Honestly, it depends. How well do i know Joe, and how well do i know you? How much do i LIKE Joe, emotionally, and how much do i owe him? How long have i had to think about it?
Woah, there. Can’t go having emotions, gal. Emotion fucks with you and clouds your judgement. You have to get past it to deal with something effectively.
Yeah, well, I’m only human.
Funny, I don’t see it. Even if I were terribly emotionally involved, I wouldn’t recommend responding in an emotional state. Since that was my original position in this thread, your response is pretty baffling.
Sure, buddy. I’m always a condescending dick when I have no emotional involvement, too.
Seems you’re a condescending dick in this thread at every turn, to be honest.
Well, you’d know, as the saying goes.
I must say, the two of you certainly seem emotionally invested in this exchange, although only one of you persists in arguing that that’s necessarily a bad thing to have come through.
It’s interesting you’d say that to him after you misunderstood something he’d posted, took it way too personally, and told him he was having an emotional tantrum. But you feel good about calling him a condescending dick, huh?
I would say that I gave as good as I got in the name calling exchange - because yeah, we’re both condescending dicks, I just don’t seem to need to get angry to be one 
.
In the case of my misunderstanding, I’d say they could have made that post a lot more clear. They start using “you” apparently to personally refer to me at the beginning of that paragraph. If they’re going to switch who they’re referring to using the same pronoun without making that clear, I don’t feel that I’m to blame for the misunderstanding.
I was using the generic “you” throughout that first post.
And happines is an emotion, too, Mr Smiley. In fact, we have a word for people who get happy from being condescending dicks.
Yes, but you were quoting and replying to me, so that was terribly unclear. You’re unaware of the pronoun “one”?
I’m aware of it, you condescending fuck, but I generally only use it when I need to distinguish between general and specific in the same post. When it’s all one thing, “you” is a perfectly valid usage. Using “one” feels needlessly pretentious.
Only to someone looking for a fight, apparently.
Woah, time travel.
Sure, valid, but open to misinterpretation.