No, the point was that there were tiresome things that one is “required” to do or “obligated” to do – these are your words – and you felt posting here was one of them. It isn’t. This doesn’t require me to “infer” anything; that’s what you said. One of the glories of the message board is that your words are enshired right up there, for everyone to see. You can try to change what you said, or say you actually meant something other than what you said, but there are the words in all their glory.
Because I felt like it. Is another stupid question the best that you can do?
It SOUNDED sneering. I am fully willing to take you at your word that you didn’t intend it to sound sneering, but it SOUNDED SNEERING. For fuck’s sake, what is so hard about this? Look, at some point, when people tell you how you are coming across, you no longer are reasonably entitled to defend yourself solely by saying that this was not how you intended to come across. Because it still is HOW YOU ARE COMING ACROSS. You sound like a sneering snot. And a hell of a lot worse than that. What you do with that information is up to you, but you can hardly pretend that you’re not in possession of it.
Another newsflash. :rolleyes:
Here’s another FYI for you: People who retreat to meaningless verbal diarrhea like “why the hyperbole?” or “oh, really?” or “that’s your opinion” instead of substantive responses reveal that they don’t actually have anything to say (or anything else to say) but that they lack the self-discipline to just stop posting. So if you can’t be a little more creative in your rejoinders, I’ll assume my point has been adequately , if not understood by you, and that our little chat is over.
No one owes you a satisfactory answer to a damn thing. The only error made in this thread was for people to actually answer your inquiry, not realizing you would take that as an invitation to sit in judgment on the sufficiency of their motivations.
I’m sorry you got pissed off. However that wasn’t my intent and I’ve yet to meet anyone who has successfully managed to please every person she’s met. I doubt I’ll be the first.
Actually in mine (and obviously his) opinion you did NOT answer his specific question. You answered the question you wanted to answer, but it was not the question he asked. As you stated above in this thread perhaps you thought you responded–but your words did not obviously do that. I do not believe the poster was trying to goad you–he was just stating that you had a pattern of behavior and this should be taken into account.
Every poster here has their past haunting them. That is the reality of a message board, especially one that you can do a search on the posts. Some folks have longer memories then others and some hold grudges and some don’t. That is life.
There are some posters I don’t bother reading anything they write–over time I have come to logical conclusions on the persona they have chosen to portray on this board.
There are others that I might not ‘like’ but they are good debators and are extremely good in arguments.
From what I have seen of Jodi for example–I doubt her and I see eye to eye on very many things–but she is very good at her arguments. Over time she has proven herself to me time and time again as knowing her shit. You will forgive me I find her more credible than you at this stage of your board involvement.
I personally find your ‘style’ off putting so far, but am going to withhold my personal judgement about you as a poster–but see that is what it is—my personal judgement. Do I care if you care – nope. Will I sleep fine tonight-- yup. As you stated above thread–we each use our own internal stuff to judge ourselves.
My opinion is that your style will prevent any message you are trying to put forth from being heard. I know it does for me–it comes off as santimonious and high horse/holier than thou. Including the vous
Take my advice or leave it–honestly makes no difference to me. Just my opinion based on how I perceive you style. You have to look internally to determine if you want to add it to your mental list.
Not exactly sure what you meant by the second bit. I make no pretense to be an expert on Buddhism. I know about the ideas of attachment and detachment and the take on expectations.
I’ve seen people manage to get meaning tangled before. This is just another case. I’m not going to reiterate ad nauseam. It seems that an example to illustrate something somehow gets tangled up with the original point.
Ok then. Doesn’t do much for your argument but whatever.
To you.
To you. Maybe a couple other people. Not the whole world. Likely not the whole board. And the issue in question was a two-letter word: um. Now if you can manage to get yourself completely apoplectic over ‘um’, may I suggest some yoga or maybe deep breathing?
There’s no point in making a substantive response to hyperbole. I did not ‘bludgeon’ anyone therefore there’s nothing to discuss. You’ve just admitted it was hyperbole for the hell of it. Fine if you like but it leaves me with nothing to discuss.
I took those words from your own post on page 2, which Sarahfeena has already quoted in its entirety. There’s very little interpretation, the words speak for themselves.
I think you’re full of shit in your proclamations that you simply want to understand why others engage in personal attacks. What the fuck is calling people “Juvenile,” “vultures,” “rude,” “arrogant,” “obnoxious,” “annoying,” “militaristic,” “obsecenely nasty” and “out of control” than personal attacks? You’re a pathetic hypocrite who can’t stop herself from bullshitting even more posts to a mess of a thread in which she already has made an ass of herself. To suggest that you meant no offense by saying all those things? Bullshit.
Don’t know the answer to that. But, I accept that some folks seem to not mind it, or even enjoy it in some strange way.
Search sometime for the Pit threads Liberal has started…there have been a lot of them. A lot. I am not saying this as a criticism of him but only as an illustration of someone that doesn’t seem to be bothered much by the atmosphere in the Pit. Anyone who didn’t want to make or receive personal attacks would simply not be the OP of so many, many threads in this forum. A lot of other people just simply seem to like the kind of discussion that goes on here. I don’t claim to understand it, but what’s the point in trying to change it, if so many people seem to get something out of it?
Go back and read all umpteen dozen posts. I did. Really.
I’m trying to avoid confusing the ‘you’ singular.
And too damn bad if people think it’s ‘sanctimonious’ to say ‘hey, guys, maybe you ought to be nice to each other’. Really, I can’t even begin to understand what would be up with anyone who gets upset over that.
Somewhere in here someone, I think Polycarp, said something about ‘people defending a right to hate’ (I hope I got that correct). And I don’t get that. Nor do I get why people have to do it vehemently.
'Damn it - nobody’s going to suggest to me that I should tone down my anger lest I have a heart attack. ’ Really, what is up with that? And what is ‘sanctimonious’ about pointing out that maybe viciously attacking a person isn’t the best way to deal with dislike?
All I’m seeing so far is people arguing for the right to brutalize others just because they don’t like them. And I’m trying to get some sense of why people would justify that or think it’s ok and I’ve got zip.
See, this is where I think you need to stop looking at the world only through your own lens. Is it completely unfeasible to you that someone else might not find this all that difficult on themselves?
Again, this is in YOUR mind. I have posted on message boards where the use of those two letters will get you an immediate warning…because there are a lot of people who find it to be quite snotty. Don’t you think it’s kind of a rude way to let someone know they missed something? From what I’ve seen, most of the time you use it, the person HASN’T missed something, for one thing. And for another, instead of saying “um,” as though you think the person missed the most blatantly obvious thing, it may be more to your advantage to take the high road and say, “maybe I’m not making my point too well, because I think you misunderstood what I was trying to say” (because that may be closer to the truth, anyway).
Oh, because a goodly chunk of my brain wishes people could just be nice to each other. A significant portion of heart, too.
Anyway, like I said, I’m trying to figure out why people do what they do and hoping to suggest to at least some people that anger and hostility might hurt them and that it might be worth considering trying to dial them back.
I’m talking physiology here. Links between anger and lowered immunity, higher blood pressure, overall bad mojo for your poor little fleshy shell.
Really? How odd. No board I’ve ever been on would do such a thing. They did, however, issue immediate bans for personal attacks.
Well, Sarahfeena, some people understand me and some not. It will ever be thus. Some people squik out at the word ‘moist’, others see red when they see ‘um’.
Others call posters like me whole strings of vile names but that, somehow, is not as bad as ‘um’. I think I’m on the other side of the looking glass.
Do you not acknowledge that you did call others a whole string of vile names in this very thread? I’m blown away by your ability to side-step and avoid responding to that fact. Have you somewhere explained how your behavior differs from that you find so distressing in others?
