This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

I need a definition of faith that is precise.

#291AynRandySavagePosted 1/24/2013 1:03:35 PM(edited)
Gegengegengegen posted...
cyclonekruse posted...
But a real response would be to say that he shouldn't expect any different treatment than he doles out himself. Whether that's "big" of me or not. Not that I like to admit it but he has succeeded in getting under my skin (though not for the reasons that he's speculated in the past). Which was his goal as he has admitted in the past. So I guess kudos to him for dragging me down.


That's pretty depressing


While I said that if I were a troll, I would've been very successful, I'm certainly not trying to get under his skin here. I just observed that his own admitted lack of self-control would have helped his ability to argue against OW in this topic, and for some reason he took umbrage against it. I'm in the same boat as you, I don't understand why he brought up the fact that he has poor self-control and an unhappy childhood if he doesn't want others to talk about it.(for the record, I don't understand why he brought it up in the first place)

edit: I do find it funny that he's only been able to admit that I "got under his skin" after 200 some posts. His "I arbitrarily decide to respond to whatever I see fit" wasn't very convincing.
#292GegengegengegenPosted 1/25/2013 11:05:21 AM
But I still don't understand how that came up in the first place.
#293cyclonekrusePosted 1/25/2013 2:05:37 PM(edited)
Gegengegengegen posted...
But I still don't understand how that came up in the first place.

Originally it came up in a private exchange where he asked me specifically why I bothered responding to him. So don't listen to him when he falsely claims I made such statements publicly or that he has no idea where they came from. He's the one who brings such things up every time now.

Edit: I blame myself really for thinking at one time that he would have the tact to keep such things private and not throw them in my face every chance he got.

---
Locke: "Why do you find it so hard to believe?" || Jack "Why do you find it so easy?!" ||
Locke: "It's never been easy!"
#294GegengegengegenPosted 1/25/2013 4:35:29 PM
cyclonekruse posted...
Gegengegengegen posted...
But I still don't understand how that came up in the first place.

Originally it came up in a private exchange where he asked me specifically why I bothered responding to him. So don't listen to him when he falsely claims I made such statements publicly or that he has no idea where they came from. He's the one who brings such things up every time now.

Edit: I blame myself really for thinking at one time that he would have the tact to keep such things private and not throw them in my face every chance he got.


Well why would you tell him that to begin with?
#295cyclonekrusePosted 1/25/2013 5:21:42 PM
From: Gegengegengegen | #294
Well why would you tell him that to begin with?

That's just how the conversation played out. IIRC, after some fairly contentious back-and-forth I told him I didn't have any respect for him as a debater or person (my intention was to be open and forthright and not hide my negative bias toward him--though thinking back it was a clumsy attempt at best and probably came off as just mean-spirited). So he asked why I bothered responding to someone for whom I have so little respect. I couldn't think of a good answer, so I again responded honestly that it must be some sort of compulsion. It's not even an uncommon compulsion as it turns out, as humorously depicted here:

http://xkcd.com/386/

But it kind of went from there. So, yes, I was much too honest in answering his somewhat probing questions. But I didn't bring these things up for no reason as he suggests. Nor did I make them "public." That would be on him.
---
Locke: "Why do you find it so hard to believe?" || Jack "Why do you find it so easy?!" ||
Locke: "It's never been easy!"
#296GegengegengegenPosted 1/25/2013 7:45:02 PM
cyclonekruse posted...
From: Gegengegengegen | #294
Well why would you tell him that to begin with?

That's just how the conversation played out. IIRC, after some fairly contentious back-and-forth I told him I didn't have any respect for him as a debater or person (my intention was to be open and forthright and not hide my negative bias toward him--though thinking back it was a clumsy attempt at best and probably came off as just mean-spirited). So he asked why I bothered responding to someone for whom I have so little respect. I couldn't think of a good answer, so I again responded honestly that it must be some sort of compulsion. It's not even an uncommon compulsion as it turns out, as humorously depicted here:

http://xkcd.com/386/

But it kind of went from there. So, yes, I was much too honest in answering his somewhat probing questions. But I didn't bring these things up for no reason as he suggests. Nor did I make them "public." That would be on him.



It sounds like you made it personal from the beginning though. I don't get why you'd want to tell him of your negative bias either, it's great that you can admit that you're not being objective(so long as you try to correct that fact) but telling him that only makes it easier for him to dismiss everything you say as being biased
#297cyclonekrusePosted 1/25/2013 9:59:04 PM
From: Gegengegengegen | #296
It sounds like you made it personal from the beginning though. I don't get why you'd want to tell him of your negative bias either, it's great that you can admit that you're not being objective(so long as you try to correct that fact) but telling him that only makes it easier for him to dismiss everything you say as being biased

I don't view getting "personal" as a huge deal. He's free to offer his personal opinion of me, so long as he admits that it's his personal opinion and not much else. What gets me is that in one breath, he'll admonish me for inserting my opinion into the discussion and the next he'll be giving me his personal opinion. And he also likes to indirectly offer his opinion through giving "others people's" opinions rather than owning up to them himself. Getting personal I can deal with. Being unfair ought not be tolerated.

As far as admitting my biases go, I'd rather be honest and give him a way to dismiss what I say than be dishonest and not give him that out.
---
Locke: "Why do you find it so hard to believe?" || Jack "Why do you find it so easy?!" ||
Locke: "It's never been easy!"
#298GegengegengegenPosted 1/26/2013 8:18:29 AM
cyclonekruse posted...
From: Gegengegengegen | #296
It sounds like you made it personal from the beginning though. I don't get why you'd want to tell him of your negative bias either, it's great that you can admit that you're not being objective(so long as you try to correct that fact) but telling him that only makes it easier for him to dismiss everything you say as being biased

I don't view getting "personal" as a huge deal. He's free to offer his personal opinion of me, so long as he admits that it's his personal opinion and not much else. What gets me is that in one breath, he'll admonish me for inserting my opinion into the discussion and the next he'll be giving me his personal opinion. And he also likes to indirectly offer his opinion through giving "others people's" opinions rather than owning up to them himself. Getting personal I can deal with. Being unfair ought not be tolerated.

As far as admitting my biases go, I'd rather be honest and give him a way to dismiss what I say than be dishonest and not give him that out.


Those are both really bad ideas. And you can see the outcome of that here. You have no ability to persuade him of anything and he's lambasting you(quite correctly) for digressing into personal opinions.
#299AynRandySavagePosted 1/26/2013 12:17:56 PM
Gegengegengegen posted...
cyclonekruse posted...
From: Gegengegengegen | #296
It sounds like you made it personal from the beginning though. I don't get why you'd want to tell him of your negative bias either, it's great that you can admit that you're not being objective(so long as you try to correct that fact) but telling him that only makes it easier for him to dismiss everything you say as being biased

I don't view getting "personal" as a huge deal. He's free to offer his personal opinion of me, so long as he admits that it's his personal opinion and not much else. What gets me is that in one breath, he'll admonish me for inserting my opinion into the discussion and the next he'll be giving me his personal opinion. And he also likes to indirectly offer his opinion through giving "others people's" opinions rather than owning up to them himself. Getting personal I can deal with. Being unfair ought not be tolerated.

As far as admitting my biases go, I'd rather be honest and give him a way to dismiss what I say than be dishonest and not give him that out.


Those are both really bad ideas. And you can see the outcome of that here. You have no ability to persuade him of anything and he's lambasting you(quite correctly) for digressing into personal opinions.


I don't want to seen as lambasting him. I just think that when your whole purpose for posting is to argue that people are treating you unfairly, you'd better take some time off the internet.
#300cyclonekrusePosted 1/26/2013 1:44:02 PM
Gegengegengegen posted...
Those are both really bad ideas. And you can see the outcome of that here. You have no ability to persuade him of anything and he's lambasting you(quite correctly) for digressing into personal opinions.

If I don't persuade him of something it should be because my argument was lacking, not any sidebar I gave. If he uses that as a reason to dismiss my points that is not my fault. He himself has expressed a similar sentiment saying that whether or not he is being hypocritical doesn't affect his points.

And it wouldn't bother me if he just told me off for offering my opinion. That's fine. If he thinks it doesn't and cannot have a place in reasonable discussion that's a valid position. But telling me that and then brazenly doing the exact same thing himself is not acceptable. If he expresses something like that he ought to live up to his own expectations. I see no reason why he ought to expect me to live up to a higher standard than he does. That's what gets under my skin, not the actual opinions themselves.
---
Locke: "Why do you find it so hard to believe?" || Jack "Why do you find it so easy?!" ||
Locke: "It's never been easy!"