posted
*jaw drops open* steven, that's just staggeringly insulting. Edit it, please -- so that your daughter doesn't have to see you say it, if for no other reason.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Totally not happening, tom. I stand 110% behind every word I leave up here, and I guarantee you that that post will stay as long as Papa Moose lets it. It needs to, because Dag needs the lesson, and if you people won't try to teach it, I sure will.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by steven: Rivka's posts to me are nearly always directly insulting and often uncalled for.
The first is probably true, at least for some value of "nearly always". As for uncalled for, please do keep trying to sell that one. I find it very entertaining to watch you defend the indefensible.
Also, I have no idea why you think I'm trying to teach you anything.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:This is a direct quote from Threads, before he edited. "That's just... plain ****ing inappropriate."
Which means he edited it for diction as opposed to meaning. I think he nailed it on the head with the first try.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by steven: ... It needs to, because Dag needs the lesson, and if you people won't try to teach it, I sure will.
I suggest that regardless of whether or not Dagonee needs a lesson, that this approach is rather doomed to failure. You may seek an alternative.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Which means he edited it for diction as opposed to meaning. I think he nailed it on the head with the first try."
Go through a divorce. Try it. I'd rather have years of verbal abuse if it could have taught me how to keep mine from happening the way it did.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"I find it very entertaining to watch you defend the indefensible."
Whatever.
"Also, I have no idea why you think I'm trying to teach you anything."
Then why on God's green Earth do you bother criticizing? I would love to know. I certainly don't criticize people for the fun of it. Or, I try not to. If you're trying to avoid doing that, you're really failing.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not for the fun of it. Definitely not -- I avoid you whenever possible.
But sometimes what you say must be responded to, lest some poor poster think your attacks are viewed as ok, or some poor lurker think that because your nonsense goes unchallenged, maybe it's true.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
So what if you've been divorced? You can't seriously claim that you made that comment in good faith. Given the context and phrasing of your comment, you clearly seem to be implying that Dagonee's divorce was a result of his personal skills. That's inappropriate because it basically amounts to kicking him while he is down. It's mean, unhelpful, and I don't even see how you could conclude that it is true. Judging from what you've said, it seems like you are extrapolating that conclusion based off of the manner in which he interacts on this forum. Even given the public nature of the personal friendships between some in the hatrackosphere, that's just absurd.
Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
"But sometimes what you say must be responded to, lest some poor poster think your attacks are viewed as ok, or some poor lurker think that because your nonsense goes unchallenged, maybe it's true."
I've thought the comment through for a while before I said it, like several months. Love it, hate it, it was there. I've said it, and it's going to stand.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Man, what kind of person spends months thinking, "Should I be a jerk" and then goes, "Yeah, sure?"
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Steven, there's a huge gap between steadfastness and sheer, mean-spirited orneriness. Saying "It's going to stand" about your (to put it charitably) unhelpful comments puts you on the wrong side of that divide.
Plus, who appointed you to be anybodies' teacher?
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Judging from what you've said, it seems like you are extrapolating that conclusion based off of the manner in which he interacts on this forum. Even given the public nature of the personal friendships between some in the hatrackosphere, that's just absurd. "
I don't know what his problem is, so I use the scattershot approach. The man needs to be looking under some stones, every old rock he can find, because he's getting divorced, and he certainly doesn't even like the idea of divorce, period. That's time for self-reflection. You don't know, you haven't been there, and...I don't wish it on you. There are deep habits ingrained in most of us, and that limit us, to varying degrees. I don't even begin to have the answers, but I know that when a divorce comes, and it's not either
1. somebody's an addict 2. somebody's crazy 3. the in-laws and/or close friends' fault 4. somebody's cheating and won't stop
It's time to take inventory and start discarding that which isn't helping you succeed. Maybe.
"That's inappropriate because it basically amounts to kicking him while he is down."
Hey, I got no answer on that.
"Man, what kind of person spends months thinking, "Should I be a jerk" and then goes, "Yeah, sure?""
Where's your better advice for him? One-liners are entertaining, but that's about it. And talk about mean-spirited...
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by steven: I don't see you ever defending me, and, for that matter, I myself have been divorced.
When was the last time you saw me participating in long-running feuds between hatrack veterans? It's not like I regularly pop into these things and take a side. I responded because of the completely offensive and mean nature of your comment.
Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Self-reflection generally comes from, like, within. Not from some jerk on teh intarweb telling someone they should find their inner mirror.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by steven: "That's inappropriate because it basically amounts to kicking him while he is down."
Hey, I got no answer on that. [/QB]
Ummm, YEAH, maybe you should work on that. You think?
edit: I'm out. This thread is bringing me down, time to get back to the lyrical mysticism of Twin Peaks, Season Two. Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
steven, how could you be unaware that the personal lives of people here are off limits to you? I, too, prefer not to interact with you at all, but Rivka is correct; some behaviour is so atrocious, it must be named.
Ick, now I need a bath.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"steven, how could you be unaware that the personal lives of people here are off limits to you?"
That kind of hurt.
Edit--I'm not sure what you meant. Are you saying that people should insult me based on what I've revealed about my life, but I shouldn't return the favor?
[ November 11, 2008, 01:17 AM: Message edited by: steven ]
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Not that I can't learn a thing or dozen about interacting, but Dag is going through a divorce. For that matter, I think almost anybody who has gone through a divorce either needs to re-examine their spouse-picking software, or their personal-interacting software, at least.
You are a child. Sorry your terrible pseudoscientific diets ate your brain, peace.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:First, the study which found more coverage of Obama than McCain is being interpreted as though it applied to all the media. It did not. This was a self study of the Washington Post. It only looked at articles published in the Washington Post. It is premature to conclude that this trend applied to anything but the Washington Post, a newspaper that ultimately endorsed Obama.
Incorrect. The percentage figures I quote come from here, "which examined 2,412 campaign stories from 48 news outlets, during six critical weeks of the general election phase from the end of the conventions through the final presidential debate."
quote:
Then you need to read this study more carefully since it concludes
[quote]Since the end of August, the two rivals have been in a virtual dead heat in the amount of attention paid, and when vice presidential candidates are added to the mix the Republican ticket has the edge. This is a striking contrast to the pre-convention period, when Obama enjoyed nearly 50% more coverage.
In other words, during the critical period of the campaign, there was no overall tendency of the media to print more stories about the Obama/Biden ticket than the McCain/Palin ticket.
The disproportionate coverage of Obama during the preconvention period is more easily explained since Obama was involved in a heavily contested primary and McCain was not. Even after the end of the primaries, Obama's campaign was far more active during the summer. I distinctly remember one headline that read something like " Obama visits Germany, McCain visits German restaurant".
quote:]The second logical error is the classic presumption that correlation implies cause. It is at a minimum implied that Obama won more votes because the media wrote more about him.
I specifically have not said anything about cause.
No you didn't say anything about cause, but the accusation of "unfairness" is likely to be interpreted in that way. If the media was following public opinion rather than leading it, it is more difficult to make an argument that this is unfair. One might argue that it was unprofessional or irresponsible for the press to simply print what they thought people wanted to hear but I can't see a good argument for unjust or unfair.
[ November 11, 2008, 10:48 AM: Message edited by: The Rabbit ]
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
In all the time I've been at Hatrack, I have never seen Dagonee make and ad hominem attack. I've never seen him be anything other than a gentleman here which is more than I can say for myself. Even when Jhai called him and ass and you got totally abusive, he did not respond in kind. Although I routinely disagree with him, he has always treated me with respect. I'm proud to call him a friend. One short sarcastic response from a man who is having major life troubles doesn't change that.
The idea that you could teach him a lesson is laughable.
[ November 11, 2008, 10:45 AM: Message edited by: The Rabbit ]
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
I didn't get into this discussion until late because I rather felt I knew what was going to be said early on. I might have been right about that, but this... Well, I definitely wouldn't have expected this.
Dagonee, if you're still reading- and I would hardly blame you if you weren't, at this point- I'm very sorry to hear about your personal troubles.
Even if Dagonee has made ad hominem attacks in the past- honestly, I can't remember; I've certainly been scathed, but I can't remember being attacked on a personal level- that certainly wouldn't make it okay to bring up something so personal as if it refutes their point. Firstly, it doesn't refute the point, which should stand alone on its own merit whether it came from Mother Theresa or Cruella Deville. Secondly, it's just below the belt. It stands a good chance of hurting someone personally, and for what?! Cheap points? Even if we were discussing personal relationships, it would be iffy; under this heading, it's like dismissing someone's literary preferences because of their taste in fishing gear.
I do have some (hopefully interesting) things to say on the actual subject, but... I don't know if things are capable of moving on from this.
Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
