This isn’t that big a deal, but I’m really wondering what crawled up sailor’s butt and died. In this thread about the US postal service, several posters clearly discussed the elimination of the postal service. So I posted the following:
To which sailor snottily responded:
What makes this utterly stupid is that in a previous post, sailor said:
Now, I realize this particular statement is tongue-in-cheek, but if nobody in the thread had been discussing eliminating the postal service, then this statement would be a complete non-sequitir, wouldn’t it?
So, sailor himself in this post is acknowledging that people in the thread were indeed discussing eliminating the USPS, but then turns around and acts like a dick about it when I discuss it.
As I said, not the biggest deal, but he should just acknowledge that he’s being an idiot in that thread and move on.
I know this post is meant as a joke but, just to make it clear, that quote of mine is a joke and is from another thread so it is totally out of context. (And it makes no sense here anyway). As I say, I know it’s a joke but just so no one is confused.
Congratulations on still being an annoying moron. Here, again, is your initial response to me:
I’d call you a liar, but I can’t believe anyone would be so painfully stupid as to lie about something that’s currently posted in another thread.
You want people to be polite and have manners, yet you are snotty and rude to me in your initial response. You want my posts to be a model of clarity, yet somehow, I’m supposed to guess that “no one” means “no one in a position of power in the government.” And you clearly discuss eliminating the postal service, while at the same time claiming nobody in the thread discussed it. I’m beginning to think you have some sort of cognition problem.
Look, it seems you are having a bad day and I have no interest in this argument which seems to aggravate you so much. So, in case it is of any use to you and for anyone else interested I will explain how I saw it.
OP: the United States Postal Service is talking about cutting mail deliveries by one day a week
You:
Me:It’s good no one is considering eliminating the USPS quite yet then. (Obviously refers to those who are in a position to eliminate it.)
You: Try reading the thread. :rolleyes:
Me: Please quote exactly where does it say the USPS is considering closing down its operations. The OP says the USPS is considering cutting deliveries by one day per week.
You: In the thread, certain posters have proposed eliminating the USPS. This is obviously what my original post in the thread was in response to. :rolleyes:
me: yeah, rolleyes all you want but why instead don’t you just quote the “certain posters” as is customary on this board. That way we can know exactly what was said and in what context.
Then you quoted some posts and I responded specifically to those posts.
So, it seems to me we were initially talking about slightly different things, I was talking about the proposed measure and you were thinking about certain posts. But it seems you are having a bad day and had to go with plenty of rolleyes and with refusing to specify what posts you were referring to.
As I say, I have no interest in a fight here. If i misunderstood something I apologise. I do think you had an unhelpful attitude and you were the one who started with the rolleyes and being unhelpfully difficult. No problem. I do not take it personally. I take no offense and do not wish to argue or escalate this matter. I think it was just a misunderstanding and not worth getting upset over it as you seem to be. I’m ready to drop the matter.
I’m clearly not seeing the OP’s point. Why is it pedantic to note that no one is arguing for the elimination of postal service?
The internet usage doesn’t have any relationship on whether the same services get moved from the public to the private sector. sailor’s response had to do with the fact that delivery services for physical mail would exist whether private or public, so the internet usage question is irrelevant. That seems to be what was meant by no one is arguing for the elimination of postal service. . . physical delivery of mail.
And given the context of the thread (cutting delivery of mail by one day), the internet comment seemed a little snarky given that the thread had nothing to do with the elimination of physical mail delivery. It was about the reduction of services for one day and got sidetracked to whether it should be done publicly or privately.
On preview: I haven’t read sailor’s post yet. I was composing this as he posted it.
Given the reputations of these two posters on this board I am glad to not be on their side of the fence.
Again, I have no interest in offending anyone on this board and if I unintentionally do I have no qualms in apologising.
I believe we come here for a pleasant experience and to exchange knowledge and information. I have no interest in making enemies. Not even those who consider themselves my enemies.
I already posted the quotes in that thread. There were posters arguing for the elimination of the USPS.
Several people in the thread mentioned email as an alternative to postal delivery. I was just pointing out that we’re still aways from full email penetration.
This, I think, is a weird way to interpret my comments. I’m quite well aware that eliminating the postal service does not mean eliminating the physical delivery of mail. You couldn’t eliminate physical delivery anyway, unless you are planning on outlawing UPS, Fedex, and people walking across the street to hand their neighbor an invitation. Privitization is an elimination of the USPS, and no that doesn’t mean elimination of physical delivery, and there’s absolutely no reason to paint me as thinking that anyone had advocated for elimination of physical delivery.
No where in my post did I talk about elimination of physical mail delivery. This is something you are reading into my posts.
Other people started the sidetrack, I just merely commented on it, and then went on to post my view on the OP’s topic in the same post.
Sailor seemed a bit zealous in parts, but also noticed just while he started to tone it down, in particularly one of his latter posts to you; you seem to pick it back up, when I think most were hoping you would follow suit and let this go.
I don’t think this pitting was necessary. And you’re right, this isn’t that big of a deal.
You don’t have a reputation, Sailor. Having a reputation would mean some significant number of people trouble to read your posts. If prompted enough, a few Pit denizens might remember you as the douchebag who brags about deliberately causing delays in airport lines. I remember you as the douchebag who considers the Soviets “good guys.” To most here, though, you are nobody.
And who knows who’d win (whatever win means in this context)? There are any number of generally highly knowledgeable, logical, grumpy and abrasive posters on these boards. Many of them I’d rate as pretty damn useful, overall.
I would side with Sailor actually. Those two are just fucking rent-a-quotes, jumping in on whatever “side” gives them the most chance to get their name in the papers (so to speak).
