| | Of course I don't know all the background on the Newton thing, Ted. Thats why I said it was an opinion and that I didn't want to kick up any old drama by mentioning that it did affect me.
I certainly didn't intend to proceed with some sort of clearing the air in this thread, but you know good and well that its you who pissed me off. It wasn't because you were right and I have some sort of compulsion to win (if you read them you'd find that in the posts in question I tend to agree with at least one of your points and fairly frequently at least acknowledge that you often know what you're talking about). You pissed me off because you went for the personal ad hominem way early in that particular discussion.
For example, is there really a need to start a thread like this to make a veiled point, when you could just say "look, your really pissing me off" on the original thread? I did say that there. Along with a lot of valid points you were too busy flipping out to address. Seeing as how you've freaked out recently over anything that even looked like someone was assuming a reason you started a thread or posted a quote, please don't assign a motivation to why I started this one. My motivation is exactly what I stated. I notice a lot of people don't stay around here, and i'm curious about opinions. Again, since bringing points or argument from another thread is such a problem for you (obsessed stalking? I don't like doctor who that much) , why exactly are you bringing this from your previous thread into mine
I suggest you consider whether some of the conflicts in which you find yourself may have more to do with your own desire to win, win, win in every fight than a stand on principle.
"Pot, this is kettle. He's black" I'll admit to being the most tenacious A-hole in 3 states, but regarding tenacity and straight up forum scrapping the student has met the master here. And just because you think I'm wrong, doesn't mean I'm not applying or attempting to ascertain principles.
I certainly did not start this thread to attack you. As a matter of fact, until the last post I never even mentioned you, and then only to say someone had irritated me but that it wasn't my motivation. Hell, I didn't even go for any kind of half assed attack like "some people are beligerent and abraisive and are running others off the site". That honestly wasn't my intent, I don't even think that is the answer to the question I raised. If I wanted to follow you around and attempt some sort of "Ban Ted" campaign, I wouldn't do it like this. I would post a thread linking how many times you made a personal attack on Robert across multiple threads. I have no interest in getting anyone banned. I know we're all egoists here, but you don't have to see your reflection in everything, Ted. You aren't even near the top of the list of people I don't like on RoR.
And if really actually do you think you were standing on principle like, say, the principle that pointing out terroristic threats is worse than actually making terroristic threats or the principle that it's alright for you to use sexual idioms to berate others, but not for others to do so to criticize you, then maybe you should reopen those debates and try to settle them. Maybe the person with whom you were having a conflict is still quite willing, even itching to go there, but he has until now been willing to let you have the last word. But ask others first if they really want to see that.
As if it needs to be rehashed (bringing those past threads into another again), everyone here knows that Robert screwed up there but he wasn't seriously advocating anything. And I didn't say anything to you about pointing it out. I said something after a tremendous number of posts were made just to keep the thing going and further hijack that thread (it was about the FCC, not goading someone you don't like). As to the dick measuring thing, let me be the first to apologize if you took that as anything sexual or even berating. If I'd known it would piss you off as much as it did (since you held that in and brought it into another thread) I would have been more straightforward with the plea to stop the tedious and dangerous posting rather than trying to point out the problem while still making light of it.
I think a policy of "if I can dish it out, I can take it" is best. Maybe it's time to , "whoa," follow your own words and "man up" to the fact that this person is your biggest competition because he is in many ways just like you. Maybe you could just deal with the fact that no matter how annoying this person is, at least he doesn't lie about the plain meaning of his own words, and at least he points out bullshit when he sees it, even if maybe he is caustic or graphic and annoys people he otherwise respects. You may ask yourself, if he is such a monster, why he hasn't felt the need to start a new thread to attack you? Has he ever started a thread to attack anyone?
I think I've taken in pretty well. No emoraging, certainly no ragequiting. Simple irritation, and I've posted in quite a few of your threads since and theres certainly been no attempts to start anything. I don't consider you to be in competition with me for anything. If anything the most straight up insults and compliments/encouragement I've gotten on RoR have been from your direction.
Not sure if the lieing comment was directed at me or just a behavior you don't like, but If I have said I meant something a certain way, thats how I meant it. And I've never called you a monster, at worst (that I can remember) I've called you a child when you were acting childish and even then contrasted it with the more agreeable side of you. My brand of sarcasm rarely runs to the "tell someone he's smart to call him an idiot" style. If I say "erudite intellectual" or "often correct" thats exactly what I mean.
You may ask yourself, if he is such a monster, why he hasn't felt the need to start a new thread to attack you? Has he ever started a thread to attack anyone?
I have no idea. I'm not party to the Keer archives. I doubt it on the grounds that I seriously doubt that you would need a whole thread. I think the Manfred incident adequately displayed what Ted can do in one post when properly motivated. Nor have I that I can think of. This was not a "screw Ted" thread.
In the end, expecting others to submit when you yourself absolutely refuse to do so just really isn't realistic. Maybe the best lesson is just to learn to disagree.
The last thing I expect is submission from anyone on here. I can't imagine being anything but tenacious during debate. Why bother otherwise? Any irritation I've felt has nothing to do with anyone not admitting I'm right, its straight up ad hominem. When I've posted anything inadvertently that were taken that way, let some slip through into posts in the heat of the moment, or deliberately responded in kind I'll say it was a mistake to do so. My apologies.
PS - I'll say it again for the record. This thead was started for the purpose stated in the OP.
-Edited to remove spelling and syntax errors that also irritated me.
(Edited by Ryan Keith Roper on 10/03, 6:30am)
|
|
