From this thread tomndebb admonished me in Post 102:
I didn’t think I was. I viewed my comment as a creative way of telling the poster he was not being logical when he insisted that I held positions I did not hold. Even if I told him flat out that he was using badly flawed logic, I don’t think that runs afoul of the board rules at all. But I didn’t make any issue of it.
In Post 104 Tom then admonished another poster, marshmallow, for calling a poster a racist:
I’m a fan of doing this, so I pinged Tom and drew his attention to this post by Ibn Warraq, (Post 96) as one he missed that also, I thought, was referring to posters in the thread as racists:
While he does not single out a poster. It is clear form the context (note Marley’s “in this discussion”) that Ibn Warraq is referring to posters in the very thread. Tom replied in an email (which he already shared part of):
I thought that was, at a minimum, overly generous to Ibn Warraq. But that was the ruling, and that was the end of it. Then, in response to Blake, who made the same mistakes Ibn Warraq did and continued to ascribe positions to me that I do not hold, which he divined through faulty logic and the building of straw men, my Post 122 included a general statement of frustration with the what happens often in these discussions, here and elsewhere. Truth be told, I almost included a smilie at the end of the first line. I mean, we’re in a thread talking about intelligence and two posters were using grossly faulty logic in ascribing beliefs to me, one of them doing so repeatedly. (bolding added)
So, a few questions for tomndebb an Marley23:
given the context of Ibn Warraq’s original statement referring to racists, how ican you possibly comclude that he was NOT referring to posters in the discussion? I ask you to look to Marley’s statement which he quoted and was replying to.
how is it that Ibn Warraq’s comment is viewed as being not directed toward posters and mine is, necessarily so?
concerning my creative way of pointing out that Ibn Warraq was repeatedly using faulty logic in ascribing positions to me that I did not state and do not hold, what is the violation? As I mentioned, even if I had directly stated that his logic in ascribing positions to me was for shit, how is that even a violation. And what I did was gentler than that.
And, Yom, what was the point of your Post 149:
The time stamp says 8:43PM. My last posts in the thread were to Marley (which you were responding to) over 8 hours earlier. What was the point of your post? I had already followed Marley’s direction and dropped it. What do you think it would accomplish, other than making sure I posted here?