I think he uses them as a hoppity hop now.
A commitment to the ‘gotcha’ game is pretty much my take on it too. I thought his initial request had a subtext of “Yeah right, no way you’re going to stick to that diet,” and that his follow-up was, “You didn’t stick to it, did you? Did you?” I’d debate whether there’s nothing creepy about caring so much about a ‘gotcha’ against an internet stranger, though.
But I could be wrong. Who knows on the internet? Perhaps his real ‘tone’ was merely dryly academic, requesting information. Whatever his motives, I didn’t mind answering. I find low-carb an interesting topic and am always up for sharing my experience with it.
I lurk much more than I post. It’s kind of bizarre that one of the few times I do wade into a thread, it turns into this. 
None. Don’t really care… Or didn’t, until very recently: my hips are starting to go, it’s affected my gait. Pain and immobility may prove quite motivating.
As I have stated a number of times, I long ago lost the desire to fight off all the extra weight, because I have carried it too long and I don’t want to be a sack of skin, and without a sex life it doesn’t really bug me that much at this point, not emotionally. But I think I would be noticeably more mobile and comfortable if I could get rid of another 40 pounds.
This. It’s much more fun.
Duly noted and logged into my Creepy Internet Stalker calendar. Will be checking in next year. Until then try not to break any of my Internet Rules. You really don’t want to be on my Internet Ignore List.
Not really, since it’s pretty much accepted that it’s reasonable to informally ask people questions in online discussions for purposes of getting information. Particularly when those people volunteer information.
With weight loss, there is often a mismatch between short term and long term results. So it’s completely reasonable to follow up with people after a while.
Which you know perfectly well, which is why you have taken a “concede nothing” approach.
Lol, nice combination of weaseling and strawmanning. Here’s what you said before:
. My bolding.
Clearly you were trying to make hay from the perceived fact that I had focused on “one person.” When you learned that fact was wrong, you of course didn’t change your mind or apologize.
Instead, you pretended that you had said something different from what you actually said. i.e. you weaseled.
Anyway, I don’t engage with people who engage in this sort of dishonesty.
Welcome to my shit list.
Goodbye, liar.
Nonsense, it’s a topic in which the person volunteered information. Since I’ve started my informal research I’ve never asked anyone online about their weight loss efforts who hadn’t raised the issue.
And as noted above, I don’t single people out – I ask follow up questions of a lot of people. So you can apologize any time you like.
Also nonsense – as I alluded to earlier, I simply was re-reading an old thread I had participated in to see if there were any new developments.
I’ve lost count . . at least 10 I think.
Because you are engaging in dishonest behavior and making unreasonable assumptions.
I wasn’t quoting you, I was simply defining a “poll” to show how it is similar to what you have accused me of.
Do you agree that I did not use quote marks or the quote feature? If so, I expect a prompt apology for your false accusation.
Also, now that you know that I do in fact ask these sorts of questions of multiple people, do you agree that any argument that I’ve singled someone out is wrong?
I was obviously being sarcastic. Now please apologize for your false accusation and answer my question.
Consistent self-monitoring of weight: a key component of successful weight loss maintenance
Successful weight loss maintenance.
Behavioral strategies of individuals who have maintained long-term weight losses
I think this is also consistent with logic and common sense. As John Walker pointed out, body weight is a negative feedback system of sorts. If it’s working correctly, over-eating results in a loss of desire to eat and under-eating results in an increased desire to eat. So that weight and energy balance is maintained.
In obese people, that feedback system is not working properly; regular weighing provides feedback which can help correct the problem.
Come the fuck on. This is a pit thread. This is a “look at the fatty, haha, she failed her diet” pit thread. You created the thread because you caught her asking about donuts. Can we stop pretending that there’s some high road to be taken here, that you’re just a disinterested observer interested in people’s success stories with weight loss?
I’m pretty sure he’s the only one pretending. The rest of us have been debating precisely what species of troll he is.
Not exactly, but I do agree that part of the reason I started this thread was bust on Stoid a bit.
In the case of Zuzu, that’s all it is. You will note that even with Stoid, I congratulated her on the success she apparently experienced.
Anyway, why is it so important to you to attack my motivations? Why is it so hard for you to believe that I am genuinely interested in hearing other peoples’ experiences with diet and weight loss? (Admittedly, in the case of Stoid I hold somewhat less interest since due to her arrogance and dishonesty.)
P.S. Why do you think I went through the trouble of finding multiple studies regarding self-weighing for btthegreat? Is it really so difficult for you to believe that I am genuinely interested in discussing these things?
Because people being assholes under the guise of actually being decent human beings is one of my pet peeves. I wouldn’t care if you were just an asshole - it’s the dressup that annoys me.
WOO HOO! I made Brazil’s weird ignore list! I RULE!!! :D:D:D:):)
I bet all of you are jealous and I think any of you that haven’t at least tried to make his list are pantywaists*
*I don’t know if women can be pantywaists. If not, you chicks are all boxerwaists. That’s right, isn’t it? Boxers on girl=panties on a boy? I’m pretty sure that was one of Newton’s Laws of Physics.
If he was genuinely interested in knowing things about people, he wouldn’t be posting in a Pit thread. I don’t know why he keeps insisting that what he says somehow overrides his actions.
His rules exist for this purpose. He is deliberately disingenuous. He says one thing, in a context where it clearly means something else. If someone points out what he means instead of what he said, he says they are lying about what he said, and that gives him a chance to put them on ignore.
Which he can’t do just because someone annoys him. He has to add some holier-than-thou aspect to it, so he can justify in his mind ignoring people he doesn’t want to hear from. They are inferior, so it’s okay to ignore them.
He treats people like crap, and then wonders why no one believes him when he pretends to act like a decent person. He’s been told multiple times how people take what he says, but he insists they are lying rather than actually believe anyone.
Because he is brazil84. He is perfect in how he engages with people. And, anytime anyone possibly proves he might not be as perfect as he thinks, it’s because they’ve engaged in some impropriety.
When you are that type of asshole, no one takes what you say at face value.
Because people who are genuinely interested in people’s experience on a topic don’t create threads to bust on people for the same topic. You actually expect anyone to think you resurrected a contentious thread, in the Pit where you can make fun of people, just because you were casually interested in someone’s weight loss? In the same thread that was started to make fun of someone whose weight loss you didn’t think was going well?
You aren’t distancing yourself from the thread, nor apologizing. Why should anyone believe your supposed genuine intentions?
You whine about people saying things that you didn’t say, but you also do stuff like this, where your actions disagree with your words. Of course people don’t take you at your word. Of course people focus on the implications of what you say instead of what you actually say. That’s what happens when you refuse to engage on a genuine level.
This is a pet peeve we share.
Pro tip: Avoid Ayn Rand books.
Particularly those falling out of windows. And mind the impact crater.
BigT, I gotta say, this is completely…
insightful.
(!!!)
Agree. Good on ya, T.
brazil84; still a sad, broken little toy.
People volunteering information doesn’t make that information not personal. And asking a number of people doesn’t mean that you aren’t singling people out; so long as your questions as posed to specific people you identify based on some characteristic without anonymising, you’re still singling them out of the pack.
Your defense against the idea that you put in effort is that you went back to read an old thread (which you had to find) to follow-up on posts you remembered being within by posters you recalled to find out whether there had been any of the changes you asked at the time whether you could talk to them about later? Ok. This strikes me as effort beyond the norm. Not nonsense.
Not a particularly representative sample. Is it that low of a number because there are additional controls that you must put in place/must already be in place in order for your questions to have significance on a statistical level? Is your theory narrow defined so as to make a tiny sample size appropriate?
I am being quite honest; you do not appear to have discovered any point at which I have lied or misled or otherwise said or done something dishonest. You haven’t pointed out any of these unreasonable assumptions successfully yet, either.
Ah, I see, you weren’t quoting me. Let’s have a look at the posts in question, shall we?
[QUOTE=brazil84]
[QUOTE=Revenant Threshold]
You waited “a year or two”** to ask an unimportant question of a random person on the internet you know nothing about who you have no way to ascertain accuracy from about a person matter.**
[/QUOTE]
:shrug: It’s an important question to me. But I’m sure you also disapprove of polls, i.e. asking unimportant questions of random persons on the internet you know nothing about who you have no way to ascertain accuracy from about a personal matter.
[/QUOTE]
(my bolding) So, if I understand you correctly; the fact that your definition matched the words of mine aside from the point on which I took issue on (and my mispelling) isn’t because you were quoting me at all - it just so happened that those words turned out to be the same?
If you honestly wish to claim that this is so; I would be happy to apologise. Please claim it.
No. It remains correct. Singling multiple people out is not a contradiction. A good example of that might be the catcalling thread that’s also in the Pit right now; catcallers single out attractive people of their preferred sex to catcall, but they still catcall multiple people.
I confess I couldn’t tell! Would you like to avoid sarcasm in our future conversations, to facilitate communication?