jriggenbach Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 I guess the living room is as good a place as any to take my leave of you all, right?Probably not. Probably Phil will identify my true motive in doing so as the desire to "humiliate" somebody or other. Probably "Xray" will identify my true motive as the desire to "attack" somebody or other - or perhaps she'll identify it as my desire to flee from her "arguments," lest they make me check my premises. Always remember, boys and girls, if Phil or "Xray" speculates on my motives, that's fine and dandy. If I speculate on theirs, it's because I'm mean and evil.So long!JR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 Jeff,Come and go as you well please.But I do empathize with your frustration...Try being the traffic cop for this stuff.(For some reason that idiot commercial about floor mops with the "Baby come back" song is going through my mind. )If you really do stay away for a while, do take care. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
9thdoctor Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 (edited) JR usually dishes out, but Im surprised his skin is so thin. Hes the one who ticked off Ted, and there was the bigger loss. I was thinking earlier that when a mild poke in the ribs is called for, JR uses a cattle prod on full charge. It has to stay fun for everyone, otherwise what are you doing here?See ya around Jeff, ciao...Now how do we get Ted back? Edited November 1, 2009 by Ninth Doctor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Gagne Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 JeffWe are all always poorer when someone chooses to take his leave. Unfortunately, you are neither the first nor the last.I recall a young woman from a couple years ago, Virginia Murr (head of the Business Ethics department at my alma mater, Rockford College), who was ridiculed, pointlessly and mercilessly, until she just gave up visiting here. That was sad.I'm sorry you feel you received the same treatment, and apologize if I had anything to do with it.vtysteve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 Steve,I don't remember anyone ridiculing Virginia. I do remember some playful banter, but nothing bordering on mockery.There was a contentious part I recall. Some people did not agree with her assessment of power in martial arts—especially one poster who specializes in bullying talk, but who fortunately does not post much any longer. I regret that flare up and I do try to keep a lid on these things. But that's as far as I go. She never got in touch with me and I don't recall her expressing any grievances, so I never really knew what she thought. If she did get offended at the banter, she also didn't give anyone a chance to explain or come to some kind of agreement with her.As far as I know, she did what she thought best for her. On my end, the door here is open for her to come and go as she pleases. My posture is what is good for her is good for me. This last applies to all posters.Dennis,Apropos, Ted did not leave as far as I know. I doubt he will post very much in the near future, though. His problem is me far more than Jeff. As I said about Virginia, I can regret specific things and try to keep a lid on the acrimony between posters (within a certain limit), but I refuse to go further. I especially will not go to where Ted wished, which was to allow him to control things backstage. Maybe he got offended by my reaction, but I was also offended by his attempts (and a few uncalled-for petty pot shots at me buried in minor threads on other forums, although this part is not too serious in my priorities). I run my forum. He doesn't. In my opinion (based on his behavior), he has problems with that. So he does what he thinks is best for him. As he should.Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 (edited) JeffWe are all always poorer when someone chooses to take his leave. Unfortunately, you are neither the first nor the last.I recall a young woman from a couple years ago, Virginia Murr (head of the Business Ethics department at my alma mater, Rockford College), who was ridiculed, pointlessly and mercilessly, until she just gave up visiting here. That was sad.I'm sorry you feel you received the same treatment, and apologize if I had anything to do with it.Steve, Virginia made some improbable claims about her karate abilities and was called out on them. That's why she left. The blunt fact about karate is it is weight classed, ability is somewhat secondary. Even Bruce Lee with his amalgamation of styles and incredible speed could never have beaten Joe Lewis, the heavyweight karate champion. JR is always leaving Internet forums. Sometimes he comes back.--Brant Edited November 1, 2009 by Brant Gaede Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfonso Jones Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 I guess the living room is as good a place as any to take my leave of you all, right?Probably not. Probably Phil will identify my true motive in doing so as the desire to "humiliate" somebody or other. Probably "Xray" will identify my true motive as the desire to "attack" somebody or other - or perhaps she'll identify it as my desire to flee from her "arguments," lest they make me check my premises. Always remember, boys and girls, if Phil or "Xray" speculates on my motives, that's fine and dandy. If I speculate on theirs, it's because I'm mean and evil.So long!JRJeff - Sorry to see that you are leaving. Ultimately, survival on any forum requires thickening of the skin. I find this forum better than most in this regard, CERTAINLY better than other Objectivist-oriented forums with which I'm familiar.I urge you to consider standing up to those you see as picking on you.Not siding with you, not against you - - - but preferring that people don't leave under such circumstances as you are hinting at above.Regards,Bill P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Grieb Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 Jeff; I'd wish you stay too. You're a intelligent guy and we need intelligent people Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 I urge you to consider standing up to those you see as picking on you.Bill,LOL...That's not Jeff. That's er... kinda contrary to what... uhm... goes on...I usually see Jeff get angry and impatient at what he perceives to be incurable boneheaded dumbassedness. Also, when mocking it gets boring, he tends to move on.Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
9thdoctor Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 (edited) Apropos, Ted did not leave as far as I know. I doubt he will post very much in the near future, though. His problem is me far more than Jeff. JR’s post #75 on the Peron thread seemed to be what set Ted off, though his fury was directed at you. I stand by my prod vs. poke comment above, but I’ll be missing JR too, my post above wasn’t too clear on that. Edited November 1, 2009 by Ninth Doctor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 Dennis,That was the last one, but certainly not the only one. In this round, this guy wanted me to alter Jeff's post because he didn't want Jeff writing his name in it. He wrote to me offline demanding this. I told him (offline) that I'm not going to prohibit posters from using his name. Somehow the idea of "Ted" and "fury" doesn't mix in my mind. That's way too adult. The words that come to my mind are more childish in nature: things like tantrum and hissy."Fury" implies danger or actual effect in reality. Nothing like that exists here.Nyah!Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip Coates Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 (edited) > playful banter [MSK]Often the person dishing it out classifies it as "playful banter". "Aw, I'm just having some fun with someone who so richly deserves it."But when he is on the receiving end of the exact same words, they are mean-spiritedness, intolerable insult, character assassination, dishonesty, or a willful failure to grasp the point. Edited November 1, 2009 by Philip Coates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 Phil,That's why you are supposed to ask before shooting off at the mouth or going off and pouting. Asking for clarification is something Objectivists are terrible at, too. I think there is something in the philosophy that attracts some of the most insecure people I have ever met.I have no wish to hold anyone's hand if they won't even register their displeasure to verify that their impression is correct before acting. I'm not a person who gets off on hurting other people's feelings over nothing. Not many on this site are, either. If someone new takes offense at something I or someone else says in jest, I'll cut some slack. I'm pretty good at trying to set a good tone through clarifying misunderstandings. I've noticed that others do this, too.But frankly, when someone who knows me treats me like I'm making an outright attack on them in order to humiliate them over a silly comment, it's irritating. They know me and they choose to ignore that knowledge when acting. So I simply move on...Life's way too short to try to become a mind-reader or succumb to emotional blackmail...Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 I guess the living room is as good a place as any to take my leave of you all, right?Probably not. Probably Phil will identify my true motive in doing so as the desire to "humiliate" somebody or other. Way to go, Phil. Good job driving yet another person away from Objectivism with your psychologizing, hectoring and your schoolmarm pompousness.J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 Steve, Virginia made some improbable claims about her karate abilities and was called out on them. That's why she left.I thought that the problem with Virginia was that she was a mix of clashing interests. The old-school black belts I've known would be disturbed by her boasting about her abilities and about whose ass she could kick. They'd call it a "McDojo" attitude, but I'd suspect that it's probably more of an issue of Objectivism not melding well with karate.I recall people doubting Virginia's claims about her abilities. I was among them. I don't recall anyone ridiculing her, let alone "pointlessly and mercilessly" as Steve Gagne claims. Then again, maybe I didn't read all of what others had posted.J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 > playful banter [MSK]Often the person dishing it out classifies it as "playful banter". "Aw, I'm just having some fun with someone who so richly deserves it."But when he is on the receiving end of the exact same words, they are mean-spiritedness, intolerable insult, character assassination, dishonesty, or a willful failure to grasp the point.And particularly who and what are you complaining about? I do playful banter all the time, for instance--without the quotation marks. I could now say something mean but true but I won't. --Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip Coates Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 (edited) Notice how the three people who complained instantly about what I said are exactly three of the most shameless at making personal attacks in post after post -- MSK, Jonathan, and Brant.Then they try to shift the blame on -me-, the one who persistently calls them on it. Or repeat the rationalization that "aw, it's just playful banter." Edited November 1, 2009 by Philip Coates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xray Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 (edited) Ninth Doctor: JR usually dishes out, but I’m surprised his skin is so thin. I'm quite surprised too. Edited November 2, 2009 by Xray Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xray Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 (edited) deleted by me Edited November 2, 2009 by Xray Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 I guess the living room is as good a place as any to take my leave of you all, right?Probably not. Probably Phil will identify my true motive in doing so as the desire to "humiliate" somebody or other. Way to go, Phil. Good job driving yet another person away from Objectivism with your psychologizing, hectoring and your schoolmarm pompousness.If you knew Jeff better you'd know nobody drives him into or away from Objectivism. He's thin-skinned but a rock too. He'll leave an Internet forum, not his ideas.--Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 Notice how the three people who complained instantly about what I said are exactly three of the most shameless at making personal attacks in post after post -- MSK, Jonathan, and Brant.Then they try to shift the blame on -me-, the one who persistently calls them on it. Or repeat the rationalization that "aw, it's just playful banter."This is horsefeathers. If you get it in the chops it's because you keep trying to control people.--Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip Coates Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 (edited) Subject: Emotion vs. Reason"You keep trying to control people."Brant, it's a thinking error to use slanted, emotional language to 'load' or substiture for an argument. Or to allow one to not have to consider the case presented.To say you try to -control- people allows you to say that is a bad thing, and I don't have to listen. If you say you try to -criticize- people, then you have to at least allow that one might have a point and one has to at least examine the validity of the criticism.As another example, suppose I say something that is harshly critical of someone and that stings and makes them angry. But I may have a point, unpleasant as it is. If they respond by saying Phil is "being a schoolmarm" or "trying to control me" or trying to be "patronizing" or "condescending", they will -immediately- dismiss the ACTUAL CONTENT of what Phil is saying.Am I being clear?-- Controlling, condescending, buttinnsky, badmouthing, control freak, over-critical, bigshot-imitating, powerlusting, contemptuous, grandstanding and attention-seeking Phil Edited November 2, 2009 by Philip Coates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 Well, Phil, it's obvious your pedalogical methods aren't working. (Maybe with Xray.)-- Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip Coates Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 (edited) How do you know? Do you speak for every reader, even the ones you don't know? Edited November 2, 2009 by Philip Coates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip Coates Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 > Good job driving yet another person away from Objectivism [Jonathan]hostile troll ignored Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now