Again, you’re making no sense (and it’s pretty funny being called a tool by you, but I won’t go there). nobody’s talking about what constitutes a valid expression. We’re talking about what’s an effective expression and what’s a respectful, courteous expression.
You may be constitutionally incapable of understanding courtesy or respect, so I won’t bother trying to explain the concepts to you further.
Daniel
Then it’s a good thing no one did that.
well now the one thread I was trying to figure out your take on the tagger issue.
In this thread I am just having a poke at you 
but if we are to tie the two threads together, we are talking about opinions–and opinions about artistic endeavors. Now would you have appreciated it in that other thread if I had called you ignorant for even liking tags? I mean I am the Architect, the supposed expert on many aesthetic things.
Yet I didn’t do that. For one I was first trying to establish that we are talking the same thing. I could have told you that your world view was too narrow and you were too ignorant to understand that the taggers were ruining my great works of art. But the reality is there are few great works of art out there so I couldn’t honestly do that to you.
In the thread that started this–there was and still is a big difference of opinion. For example, is music industry what is played on the airways or is it what is the larger portion that is never aired? Your take on that is going to have a huge influence on whether you believe the other side is ignorant or not. But the thing is that it is all based on opinions—and the basis of those opinions is suspect.
Well, just a matter of interpretation, right?
I mean, you look at your post and see a reasonable and measured attempt to enlighten. I look at it and see something quite different.
I think i’m done in this thread. My main intention in coming here in the first place was to simply give my view of the situation. I did that, but then succumbed to the temptation to keep flogging the issue, which really did nothing but waste my time and yours.
What the fuck? I called MYSELF a tool. And your ad hominem makes no sense. What makes you think I’m ‘incapable of understanding courtesy or respect’? What evidence do you have for that? I disagree with you about what is appropriate in this situation, so now I’m a fucking monster of a human being who is incapable of courtesy? Oh, now I’m mad. Fuck a whole bunch of you with a rusty spoon, Daniel.
I misread your comment; my apologies.
Daniel
Yes . . . if by “matter of interpretation” you mean “putting words in other people’s mouths.”
It doesn’t. I said it doesn’t. I suspect you didn’t read my whole post before you fired off the above.
To quote a great man.
“Tact is everything when telling someone they have their head up their ass.”
You came off tactless and arrogant and as a bit of a snobbish jerk in your response. That’s my opinion. Others share it. Take the criticism for what it’s worth, or don’t.
I was just remarking on the semantic irony of the post I quoted wherein you were offering your credentials as one who does not offer credentials, by talking about people who consider you as an unpretentious polyglot.
No reflection on you, just semantic irony in the situation, like trying to deny an allegation that you deny everything.
Expert opinion? What are you credentials?
Sorry.
Who cares? Not me. It’s no specific phrase or anything, I’m just telling you how it came off IMO.
No. I think the criticism is valid, and the pile-on unwarranted. Ka-pea-chay?
K. And the “expert opinion” crack was a crack. So take some *whoosh *if you need it, although your response is a bit ambiguous, so I’m not sure either way.
Well, I’ll hardly turn down free whoosh. The weekend is coming up and I’m down to half a case.
Here. Since you’re buying you could use one to.
Lug high umm.
Well, I for one would like to thank you for this. No sarcasm or whoosh intended. I mean it sincerely. Your passion is obvious (as is your knowledge, the links you posted really are fantastic).
I’ve thought about this a lot before posting. While I ultimately tend to agree with LHOD (ie, don’t bother, just make your point and move on), I personally don’t always follow that advice. As for me, had you said something like:
“Wow, man, I can’t believe that you meant that to come across that way. I know you can’t find them on the radio, but there are tons of great female artists out there! Try here and here and here. If that doesn’t give you hope, then I guess we just have radically different tastes.”
IMHO, you still get some of the subtle satisfaction of pointing out that he/she probably doesn’t know what the hell they’re talking about, but chances are that he/she (and others) will still read the whole thing and not get pissy. They may even follow the links and get their collective eyes opened a bit.
Well, perhaps, as mhendo said quite well, it’s just different interpretations of the word “ignorant” (how often do arguments on this board boil down to semantics?).
To me, and I imagine to many, being called ignorant holds a bit more of an insulting tone than you ascribe to it. In which case, we’re just speaking the same language differently, and hey, that’s life I guess.
And, yeah, no one really needed a serious pitting; I just felt like this conversation didn’t exactly belong in CS.
To be fair, RealityChuck (and others, indirectly) was called ignorant. He, however, was not the one to post this thread, I was. Just to be clear.
As I said to Equipoise above, maybe it’s just that we’re ascribing different meaning to different words. But you keep saying “no one did any such thing,” and frankly, I think that’s bullshit. People were called ignorant. People were told that listening mainly to commercial radio makes their opinions worthless. People were told that they don’t really know anything about the issue because they listen to commercial radio.
What of these things did not happen, in your perception of things?
Or, since you’re interpreting rather than quoting me, you could say to yourself, “Hmm, I wonder if there’s another way to interpret what lissener actually said?” Rather than presuming your interpretation is a better indication of what I actually said than what I actually said.
It might be too late in the trainwreck for this, but if I can just ask one question: why do you assume that he hasn’t heard these artists? RealityChuck can sometimes be arrogant, but he is very seldom ignorant, especially when it comes to 20th century cultural history.
Learn something new every day.