Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 40

Thread: I Have A Confession To Make

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Fuckin' Bible belt....
    Posts
    1,356


    Default

    You have grabbed onto that one word, otherwise ignoring me saying that I only used that word, because I couldn't and can't think of the word I really want.
    What word did you mean to use, then? That's part of the communication problem, here, is that I can only judge what you say based on the words you use. I don't know what you mean, unless you say what you mean.

    Also, my opinion on your views ties closely in with my own views, which then leads me to discussing and ultimately arguing about politics, which, as I said, I hate doing. Wasn't that the whole point of this thread in the first place?
    So....what, your comment was completely pointless and you're not going to elaborate on it any further? I'm not sure what you're getting at.
    "I'm sorry
    For all the things that I never did
    For all the places I never was
    For all the people I never stopped
    But there was nothing I could do...
    "

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    4,122


    Default

    Tim, you are now being an ass. In my first post, I said, "for lack of a better word". I said the same thing in my second. And I further elaborated in my third, but here you are, acting as if you don't understand that concept and are trying to put me down with that "say what you mean" bull crap, despite me having said what I mean several times.
    Quote Originally Posted by Little_Miss_1565 View Post
    Or what? Or you'll leave as soon as someone returns your rudeness and delete all your posts? I'm so scared.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Fuckin' Bible belt....
    Posts
    1,356


    Default

    Tim, there is a relentlessness to the way you zoom in on minute areas of what someone says that one might term "extreme." You're clearly not a bad guy, but it makes engaging you a daunting task.
    I can see that. However, I really don't see that as a bad thing; a lot of people try to get off point and obfuscate during a discussion and it's useful to be able to keep them on point. Also, if I want to know something, oftentimes I have to ask four or five times before I get a straight answer (instead getting smart-ass comments, assumptions about why I asked the question, judgments about what I really meant, attempts to change the subject, etc.). So you could say it's a habit that comes naturally from dealing with dodgy people.

    Tim, you are now being an ass.
    No, I'm asking for clarification because your comment confused me, and you're giving me weird answers.

    In my first post, I said, "for lack of a better word". I said the same thing in my second. And I further elaborated in my third
    No, you didn't elaborate, you just said you didn't want to talk about it because it involves your beliefs and politics. If you didn't want to talk about it, why did you bring it up in the first place?

    but here you are, acting as if you don't understand that concept
    I understand the concept of "for lack of a better word." What I don't understand is what you mean by "extreme," since you say you didn't mean it in terms of its standard use; I just asked you for an example. If you don't want to press the issue, then fine. But if that's the case, why bring it up in the first place?
    "I'm sorry
    For all the things that I never did
    For all the places I never was
    For all the people I never stopped
    But there was nothing I could do...
    "

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Fuckin' Bible belt....
    Posts
    1,356


    Default

    It also appears to be that you're seeing "dodgy people" everywhere you go when the reality is that sometimes not everyone is going to be able to give you the conversation you're looking for due to things going on in their own life.
    What do you mean, "seeing dodgy people wherever I go?" Who are you referring to, exactly? The people I refer to as "dodgy" are the people who make principled-sounding comments, but when pressed for five seconds to elaborate can't do so. I call that "dodgy," not because "I don't get the conversation I want," but because if you don't understand what you mean when you say something, how do you expect me to understand it? Conversation is a two-way street; if you actually want to be understood, you have to be able to explain yourself. Otherwise you're just talking past me. If your goal is not to be understood but to just talk, that's fine, but at least be clear about that so I don't waste my time trying to understand it.

    It's not that you're asking four or five times before you get a straight answer; it's that you browbeat people with questions until you get the answer you want.
    I'm also not sure what you mean by "the answer you want." If by that you mean, the actual answer to the question that I asked, then yes, I'm decidedly forward. If I ask what someone means by x, and they instead give me a paragraph explaining why they don't have time/don't want to answer that question, then I might criticize that, but that person is in no way obligated to respond to me at all, so I don't see how I could really "browbeat" anyone in that sense. I really have no authority to do that even if I wanted to.

    You make it sound like I just tackle random people and interrogate them at gunpoint until I hear whatever I want to hear --- the "answer I want" is usually just a simple clarification of something they've already said. I really don't see what the big deal is. If you don't want your comments or beliefs to be criticized or analyzed at all, why do you say them? It's not "pushy" or "bad" to expect someone to actually back up what they are saying. It's my understanding that the entire point of a deeper discussion of different ideas, is that people explain their ideas; you say I'm being too pushy, but to me it's much pushier to simply throw your comments out there and expect them to be taken or left at face value.
    "I'm sorry
    For all the things that I never did
    For all the places I never was
    For all the people I never stopped
    But there was nothing I could do...
    "

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Fuckin' Bible belt....
    Posts
    1,356


    Default

    There's "can't do so" and "no longer want to do so because you seem weirdly aggressive." You don't seem able to accept that sometimes you're not going to have a perfect understanding of what someone's trying to say online due to the limitations of the medium.
    Which limitations are you referring to? I ask because I don't generally have a hard time expressing my opinions simply because I'm typing rather than speaking. In both cases I'm relying on the same words and the same linguistic conventions. And if I'm going to call someone a name or make an accusation, I'm ready to back it up if I'm called to.

    That said, I'm not asking for a perfect understanding; I'm asking for something more than, "You are [x name]." Someone calls me a name, I ask them to clarify, they say they don't want to, I say that's dodgy and weaksauce. I see nothing wrong with that exchange (it's less than ideal, obviously, but if you're not going to meet me halfway, then there's really no other option than for me to make my assessment and move on). I may not get the answer I want, but you don't always get what you want.

    You state that the other person isn't obligated to respond to you at all; meanwhile, you state that the reasons you feel compelled to respond based on the Three-Pronged Internet Argument Fallacy. You're not the only person for whom this applies. I'd also offer that only responding to you partially is a form of exercising their non-obligation to respond to you at all.
    So, what, they're free to respond as they see fit, but I'm not, because they don't approve of my response?
    "I'm sorry
    For all the things that I never did
    For all the places I never was
    For all the people I never stopped
    But there was nothing I could do...
    "

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    4,122


    Default

    You said my post was pointless because I don't want to explain one word in a post. My post had a point that honestly has absolutely nothing to do with what you believe. The point was in the rest of my comment, talking about hoooow you go about sharing your beliefs with others.
    Quote Originally Posted by Little_Miss_1565 View Post
    Or what? Or you'll leave as soon as someone returns your rudeness and delete all your posts? I'm so scared.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Fuckin' Bible belt....
    Posts
    1,356


    Default

    You said my post was pointless because I don't want to explain one word in a post.
    Actually, I phrased it as a question precisely because I was asking you if that's basically what you meant --- you used a word (extremist), then you backed off and said you didn't mean that word. It's not a big deal to me, except that you've invested so much energy in trying to convince me that I'm being unreasonable for asking you to clarify what you meant. I thought that was odd.

    My post had a point that honestly has absolutely nothing to do with what you believe. The point was in the rest of my comment, talking about hoooow you go about sharing your beliefs with others.
    If the brunt of your argument is not that I am "just as extreme as the people I argue with," then perhaps you shouldn't head off your paragraph with that exact statement. As far as I can tell, the blunt of your accusation is that I am "extreme" (or whatever word you meant to use) because I am fairly established in my ideas, I defend them strongly, and I don't change my mind regularly. "Poking holes and searching for weaknesses" is how you test an idea to make sure it holds up in light of criticism. If your ideas are that easy to poke holes in, maybe you shouldn't hold them in the first place, or at least not take offense when someone criticizes them.

    The second part of what you said was probably the most condescending and maybe a little insulting, but since it's based on an assumption/prejudgment you've made about me and my psychology, I ignored it. And as for hearing new viewpoints, that's arguably the entire point of forums that feature politics. It's not my responsibility to make sure nobody gets butthurt if I don't back down and change my mind just because they feel like they've made a good point --- you make a critical mistake when you assume that I'm not listening to other ideas, just because I don't end up conceding them as equally valid. If you really believe in what you say, you should have more confidence in your ideas, and not get so upset when someone refuses to yield to them.
    "I'm sorry
    For all the things that I never did
    For all the places I never was
    For all the people I never stopped
    But there was nothing I could do...
    "

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Fuckin' Bible belt....
    Posts
    1,356


    Default

    Anyway, sorry to bump this topic after it had basically died, but a really good example of what I was originally talking about came up (I screencapped it for examination's sake, but I don't have a way to share it here without also posting it where the person who originally posted it might see it, and I don't want him to think I'm being a dick or trying to "raise an army" against him).

    I referred to "nuts," but also to people who are just factually wrong about things; I wasn't referring to matters of political philosophy (contrary to what the ensuing arguments might've lead one to believe), but rather to people whose points in an argument are founded on fundamentally false statements, things we can prove to be untrue.

    I recently had this discussion on facebook with one of my friends, who was still going on about the "Obamaphone" thing, and he insisted that "Obama's a socialist" and all that fun stuff; I pressed him to provide specifics and, while he acknowledged that the "Obamaphone" program was actually started under Bush Jr. and was actually called the SafeLink program, he claimed that Obama had changed the program to use our tax dollars to fund the service. I've only had this argument about 50 times since election season last year, and so I pointed out to him that the SafeLink program was funded by a non-profit corporation set up by the FCC to collect contributions from private companies, and that the FCC doesn't even mandate that the cost of those contributions be passed on to consumers. He eventually acknowledged that this was the case and backed off of his original argument, which demonstrates that he is actually an intelligent person --- it's just that he, like so many others, didn't really seem to care all that much if his argument was based on facts, at least not enough to research it before snarking off about it. I respect this person, he's not an asshole or anything (unless you think spouting off with incorrect beliefs qualifies you as an asshole, which I don't necessarily believe), and as shown by the act that he readily corrected his position when confronted with evidence to the contrary, he's an intelligent person. And yet.

    It just irritates me when people act like they're sure of what they are saying, but then it's so easy to prove them wrong (it literally took me 15 seconds on google to find the evidence). There's no shame in being wrong about something, as long as your position isn't predicated on the assumption that you can never be wrong about something. And yet, so often in political conversations it seems that that's the case.
    "I'm sorry
    For all the things that I never did
    For all the places I never was
    For all the people I never stopped
    But there was nothing I could do...
    "

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    427


    Default


  10. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Czech Republic
    Posts
    18,174


    Default

    I think people back off your debates simply because they get tired of debating with you. You really do have a tendency to WANT to argue about almost anything. Here it seems that you wanted to actually help a friend realize they had some information wrong, but I am sure you did it in an aggressive way. I doubt his arguments were a third of yours, and I am sure yours were of the length of something that would put anyone off discussing it with you. Unless you can show us otherwise.
    Quote Originally Posted by jsmak84 View Post
    I do not drink alcohol and coffee

    I do not smoke and do not do drugs

    I just do bumpin in my trunk

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •