The pivot begins...

[Empty_of_Clouds]

perseverating

Is that a real word?

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/perseverate

SEE #2 ("Always happy to teach.")

Definition of perseverate
intransitive verb

1a: to recur or repeat continually
We call such tunes 'catchy'—and they are sometimes referred to as 'earworms,' for they may burrow into us, entrench themselves and then perseverate internally hundreds of times a day, only to evaporate, fade away, in a day or two …
— Oliver Sacks

1b: to intently focus one's attention on a thought or thoughts : FIXATE
Lest she be misinterpreted, Hard is not an old-timer perseverating on the good old days and bitter about not getting some of that big money.
— Bill Dwyre
According to a variety of medical Web sites and publications, people who never smoke, … who exercise and don't perseverate about past wrongs and future ills are happier and healthier and live longer.
— Brian McKenzie

2 Psychology : to have or display an involuntary repetitive behavior or thought : to exhibit perseveration
Any person … whose social skills have been severely deficient since very early childhood, who started to talk late or whose communicative use of language is inadequate, and who perseverates and lacks cognitive and behavioral flexibility meets the diagnostic criteria for an autistic-spectrum disorder.
— Isabelle Rapin

Well, I learned a new word today, thanks!

However, you used it as an insult, which is not unexpected. So add that to your deplorable conduct toward me. Do I hear an apology?

I answered your inquiry about the word "perseverate" and provided you with the definition from the world's most highly respected dictionary of the English language.
If the definition insulted you, that's too bad. Your beef is with merriam-Webster, not me.

As the old saying goes, "If the shoe fits, wear it."

Based on your current and past engagement I conclude you chose the word because you know it is insulting.

Still waiting on an honest answer to my question.

[dneal]

And another page of not-responding. Holy crap that was fast!

That's enough for me for tonight though. Thanks for the laughs.

[dneal]

One last one though, before they get deleted

Sustained good faith effort is the key. If you respond with insult, rudeness and so on, then you are helping to create the poor quality of the environment. Rise above it, be an example!

That may be true, but the pile-on people will get no response from me; they'll be creating an echo chamber of their own devising. I only delete posts that are no longer needed or whose message has expired.

To be better, to at least have civil conversations, and to refrain from simply insulting other members should be the least standard that we can aspire to. Others, like myself, may want to go further. Good. Some will no doubt find such suggestions are challenging and perhaps a bit scary. Good. Nothing will change without people being proactive. Don't wait for the other guy to start. As I've quoted before:

“We but mirror the world. All the tendencies present in the outer world are to be found in the world of our body. If we could change ourselves, the tendencies in the world would also change. As a man changes his own nature, so does the attitude of the world change towards him. This is the divine mystery supreme. A wonderful thing it is and the source of our happiness. We need not wait to see what others do.” – Mahatma Gandhi

Hypocrite.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

2 Psychology : to have or display an involuntary repetitive behavior or thought : to exhibit perseveration
Any person … whose social skills have been severely deficient since very early childhood, who started to talk late or whose communicative use of language is inadequate, and who perseverates and lacks cognitive and behavioral flexibility meets the diagnostic criteria for an autistic-spectrum disorder.

To be brutal about it, this part of the definition, especially the first phrase could apply to many participants here, including ALL those in the current kerfuffle.

As for the rest, true I am more solitary than social in real life. Though when I am social, I am told by others that I shine, and that my use of language is both broad, deep in places and creative. Started talking, reading and writing well before the expected age most children do. Never been diagnosed as autistic despite once being a member of MENSA (scored 148) and known among my colleagues for having an astonishing degree of cognitive flexibility. Behaviourally... well, I am getting old so there is a natural reduction in flexibility there which we all will exhibit sooner or later.

Of course dneal and Seney will dispute the above, even in the absence of pesky things like facts. At least they are consistent in this.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

One last one though, before they get deleted

That may be true, but the pile-on people will get no response from me; they'll be creating an echo chamber of their own devising. I only delete posts that are no longer needed or whose message has expired.

To be better, to at least have civil conversations, and to refrain from simply insulting other members should be the least standard that we can aspire to. Others, like myself, may want to go further. Good. Some will no doubt find such suggestions are challenging and perhaps a bit scary. Good. Nothing will change without people being proactive. Don't wait for the other guy to start. As I've quoted before:

“We but mirror the world. All the tendencies present in the outer world are to be found in the world of our body. If we could change ourselves, the tendencies in the world would also change. As a man changes his own nature, so does the attitude of the world change towards him. This is the divine mystery supreme. A wonderful thing it is and the source of our happiness. We need not wait to see what others do.” – Mahatma Gandhi

Hypocrite.

Unlike you I don't label people as hypocrites if they have good reason to alter their positions, or merely drift a bit due to the inexactness of being human. I don't expect people to be static. For some reason you appear to do so though.


Edited because the following quote didn't get quoted (not sure why, perhaps it was a multiple quote?)

Sustained good faith effort is the key. If you respond with insult, rudeness and so on, then you are helping to create the poor quality of the environment. Rise above it, be an example!

I don't see you doing any of the first part, any of the time, but almost always the second part. Nor Seney, even excluding his/her deplorable conduct toward me.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

kerfuffle
/kəˈfʌf(ə)l/

nounINFORMAL•BRITISH

a commotion or fuss, especially one caused by conflicting views.



Just for Seney, as a kind of trade for 'perseverating', though without the pointless appeal to authority on source.

[724Seney]

2 Psychology : to have or display an involuntary repetitive behavior or thought : to exhibit perseveration
Any person … whose social skills have been severely deficient since very early childhood, who started to talk late or whose communicative use of language is inadequate, and who perseverates and lacks cognitive and behavioral flexibility meets the diagnostic criteria for an autistic-spectrum disorder.

To be brutal about it, this part of the definition, especially the first phrase could apply to many participants here, including ALL those in the current kerfuffle.

As for the rest, true I am more solitary than social in real life. Though when I am social, I am told by others that I shine, and that my use of language is both broad, deep in places and creative. Started talking, reading and writing well before the expected age most children do. Never been diagnosed as autistic despite once being a member of MENSA (scored 148) and known among my colleagues for having an astonishing degree of cognitive flexibility. Behaviourally... well, I am getting old so there is a natural reduction in flexibility there which we all will exhibit sooner or later.

Of course dneal and Seney will dispute the above, even in the absence of pesky things like facts. At least they are consistent in this.

face-vomiting.png

[Empty_of_Clouds]

As expected, predictable (see the last statement of the quote).

If you, Seney, would like to give me an honest answer to my question, my response to it may surprise you even so.


As an aside, while I find crude language and personal insults to be in poor taste, they actually don't advance your points, or upset me in any way.

Perhaps you should have a go at a more adult level of discourse. You never know how that may turn out. Your use of language and imagery is at the level of an adolescent, but I don't know if that is reflective of you as a person.

[724Seney]

As expected, predictable (see the last statement of the quote).

If you, Seney, would like to give me an honest answer to my question, my response to it may surprise you even so.


As an aside, while I find crude language and personal insults to be in poor taste, they actually don't advance your points, or upset me in any way.

Perhaps you should have a go at a more adult level of discourse. You never know how that may turn out. Your use of language and imagery is at the level of an adolescent, but I don't know if that is reflective of you as a person.

I find it to respond to your posts because by the time I am done replying, with even a short reply such as this one, you have edited it several times.

So, I will leave it at this.......

Your nonsense is duly noted.
I hope you believe the crap you write because no one else does.......... Needless to say, you have not got even one iota of self awareness because, if you did, you would see the ridiculousness of your posts and delusional thinking.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

As expected, predictable (see the last statement of the quote).

If you, Seney, would like to give me an honest answer to my question, my response to it may surprise you even so.


As an aside, while I find crude language and personal insults to be in poor taste, they actually don't advance your points, or upset me in any way.

Perhaps you should have a go at a more adult level of discourse. You never know how that may turn out. Your use of language and imagery is at the level of an adolescent, but I don't know if that is reflective of you as a person.

I find it to respond to your posts because by the time I am done replying, with even a short reply such as this one, you have edited it several times.

So, I will leave it at this.......

Your nonsense is duly noted.
I hope you believe the crap you write because no one else does.......... Needless to say, you have not got even one iota of self awareness because, if you did, you would see the ridiculousness of your posts and delusional thinking.

Note the hyperbole in the bolded part? Have you canvassed everyone? Really you are just talking about three people. The best of generosity suggests this is hyperbole, but as it's you I can see this as an attempt at a gaslighting lie.

"crap", "nonsense", " not got even one iota of self-awareness", "ridiculousness", "delusional thinking" - look at all those insulting words and projections. Deplorable.


You still haven't answered the question. I suspect you probably never will because it appears you are an inherently dishonest person. [and while you may find that insulting, it is a statement of my opinion of you based on your deplorable conduct and aversion to being truthful]


Edit: I love editing.

[724Seney]

Have you canvassed everyone? Really you are just talking about three people. The best of generosity suggests this is hyperbole, but as it's you I can see this as an attempt at a gaslighting lie.

Is that so????????
Let me refresh your memory.......

Check out post #31 of this thread:
https://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread...710#post364710

Look familiar?? Still want to maintain that it is only three people???

PS: For anyone who does not have the time to follow the link, the referenced post says this about our pal EoC and his well practiced victim mentality:

"Be aware that well-practiced manipulation techniques were just applied...again. I suggest not being taken in or feeling sorry.

This very same pattern has been exhibited over the years that have sought to shift responsibility, blame and even guilt for misbehavior onto other members as part of some kind of emotional neediness. Then there are these publicly declared departures to elicit sympathy - only to drift back into the forum again for a honeymoon period until the misbehavior begins anew. A search on member ID and the word "goodbye" will show just a sliver of the history and the grudges.

Like a close call with a con artist, learn the lesson what to watch out for and ignore, then move on to enjoy this community with the majority of its members and our pens!"

[Empty_of_Clouds]

I see you are still avoiding, deflecting, and now adopting the point scoring approach.

Still didn't answer the important question though.

[724Seney]

I see you are still avoiding, deflecting, and now adopting the point scoring approach.

Still didn't answer the important question though.

Nor did you.
Hypocrisy personified.

[kazoolaw]

I re-entered this Topic November 4, after a 10 month absence. This lengthy series of quotes is to preserve and respond to some of them. The quotes chosen are not all of them, and may be edited.

That may be true, but the pile-on people will get no response from me... I only delete posts that are no longer needed or whose message has expired.

To be better, to at least have civil conversations, and to refrain from simply insulting other members should be the least standard that we can aspire to. Others, like myself, may want to go further. Good. Some will no doubt find such suggestions are challenging and perhaps a bit scary. Good. Nothing will change without people being proactive. Don't wait for the other guy to start....(emphasis added)

The reason EoC's deleted posts are no longer needed is because they document past behavior which is no longer expedient for him. Likewise, those which have "expired." Remember the pens for sale dispute with bunnspecial? Go back now and only bunnspecial's posts remain. Remember the computer persona? How many remain? So, some will be copied, as a record of EoC in his own words, to let future readers draw their own conclusions about his latest re-invention from posts he has not disappeared.

@ EoC

That's all about as believable as your claim to have written an AI bot, or any of your claims to leave. Now you've added the 'depth of [your] resolve and breadth of [your] resources'?

We all know how this plays out - including you.

--edit--

and this is why we quote your posts (which I didn't this time). You've edited twice as I typed the first response.

Edited for clarity and to remove superfluous material. Apparently that's not allowed now, who knew.

The removal of posts elsewhere was part of a requirement for me to try and reduce dukkha (suffering). If you have some unstated need not to believe this, that is your choice....




(5 months so far without a single deliberately or intentionally insulting post....

EoC makes two statements he wants us to believe: that he removes posts to reduce suffering, and has gone 5 months without a deliberately or intentionally insulting post.

Edited for clarity and to remove superfluous material. Apparently that's not allowed now, who knew.
The removal of posts elsewhere was part of a requirement for me to try and reduce dukkha (suffering). If you have some unstated need not to believe this, that is your choice, but it doesn't change the truth of my statement or of my message.

I appreciate that much of modern Western society, particularly in the US but by no means limited to it, is dominated by a desperate need to keep score. It stands in the way of contentment, and it poisons interpersonal relationships.

For the pilers-on: I read what you write for me and I feel compassion because you are unable to let go of your hate and desire for conflict. Beyond that I can only point to the path, I cannot (and would not try) to compel you to step onto it. Encourage only, and lead by example. (5 months so far without a single deliberately or intentionally insulting post. As you like to keep score, how does your own record stack up?)

"Superfluous" meaning inconsistent with the current narrative.
"Without a single...insulting post" Accurate but misleading. See the Decluttering topic, post 28, "Are you stupid or something?" And Decluttering, post 32, "Why not follow your own insanity (sic) advice?" Not a single but a double. In October, which is within the last 5 months.
You can weigh whether the cited posts were written "deliberately or intentionally."

Edited for clarity and to remove superfluous material. Apparently that's not allowed now, who knew.
The removal of posts elsewhere was part of a requirement for me to try and reduce dukkha (suffering). If you have some unstated need not to believe this, that is your choice, but it doesn't change the truth of my statement or of my message.

I appreciate that much of modern Western society, particularly in the US but by no means limited to it, is dominated by a desperate need to keep score. It stands in the way of contentment, and it poisons interpersonal relationships.

For the pilers-on: I read what you write for me and I feel compassion because you are unable to let go of your hate and desire for conflict. Beyond that I can only point to the path, I cannot (and would not try) to compel you to step onto it. Encourage only, and lead by example. (5 months so far without a single deliberately or intentionally insulting post. As you like to keep score, how does your own record stack up?)

"Superfluous" meaning inconsistent with the current narrative.
"Without a single...insulting post" Accurate but misleading. See the Decluttering topic, post 28, "Are you stupid or something?" And Decluttering, post 32, "Why not follow your own insanity (sic) advice?" Not a single but a double. In October, which is within the last 5 months.
You can weigh whether the cited posts were written "deliberately or intentionally."

The word 'intentionally' was used, as it were, intentionally, to make the distinction between intent on my part and interpretation on the part of the reader. None of what I've written since 27th June 2022 has been intentionally insulting.

How is directing a member to follow their own advice an insult? (the insanity thing) Perhaps you hadn't seen that the member had repeatedly put up a quote about insanity and outcomes, and complained that people didn't follow this advice?

Superfluous - unnecessary, especially through being more than enough.


Edit

You can weigh whether the cited posts were written "deliberately or intentionally."

Only the writer can weigh or determine this. For another to assume they know the writer's intent better than the writer themselves would be an act of sheer arrogance in absence of the fact.

Edited for clarity and to remove superfluous material. Apparently that's not allowed now, who knew.
The removal of posts elsewhere was part of a requirement for me to try and reduce dukkha (suffering). If you have some unstated need not to believe this, that is your choice, but it doesn't change the truth of my statement or of my message.

I appreciate that much of modern Western society, particularly in the US but by no means limited to it, is dominated by a desperate need to keep score. It stands in the way of contentment, and it poisons interpersonal relationships.

For the pilers-on: I read what you write for me and I feel compassion because you are unable to let go of your hate and desire for conflict. Beyond that I can only point to the path, I cannot (and would not try) to compel you to step onto it. Encourage only, and lead by example. (5 months so far without a single deliberately or intentionally insulting post. As you like to keep score, how does your own record stack up?)

"Superfluous" meaning inconsistent with the current narrative.
"Without a single...insulting post" Accurate but misleading. See the Decluttering topic, post 28, "Are you stupid or something?" And Decluttering, post 32, "Why not follow your own insanity (sic) advice?" Not a single but a double. In October, which is within the last 5 months.
You can weigh whether the cited posts were written "deliberately or intentionally."

The word 'intentionally' was used, as it were, intentionally, to make the distinction between intent on my part and interpretation on the part of the reader. None of what I've written since 27th June 2022 has been intentionally insulting. However, I concede two things, one, that a reader may feel insulted no matter the actual intent, and two, that you will accord yourself with the virtue of telling the truth but will never extend it to me. Whether you intend to insult me by taking such a stance or not, I could and do feel insulted by this, and so it perfectly encapsulates the first point.

How is directing a member to follow their own advice an insult? (the insanity thing) Perhaps you hadn't seen that the member had repeatedly put up a quote about insanity and outcomes, and complained that people didn't follow this advice?

Superfluous - unnecessary, especially through being more than enough. I cannot help you in your desire to choose an interpretation that fits your own narrative, but that is the definition under which I use this word.


Edit

You can weigh whether the cited posts were written "deliberately or intentionally."

Only the writer can weigh or determine this. For another to assume they know the writer's intent better than the writer themselves would be an act of sheer arrogance in absence of the fact.

EoC argues that calling someone "stupid" is not an insult. Or that calling someone "stupid" is Unintentionally insulting? See a problem there?
EoC goes on to argue about "insanity," that it wasn't insulting, relying on what he allegedly said in a post he deleted. See a problem there?
We weigh credibility based upon a number of factors every day: advertising, the child with his hand in the cookie jar, a witness in a trial, politicians campaigning, etc. We rely on past history, observed demeanor, language, inconsistency, common experience, concealing/destroying evidence, etc.
That's what we ask the reader of each of our posts to do.
That's what you've asked us to do.

I asked whether the other guy was stupid, I didn't call him that. It's very mildly insulting at best, but hey nobody is perfect. I never claimed to be perfect, but all of a sudden you are trying to hold me to that impossible standard. Is this the length you need to go to justify your argument or try to 'win' the discussion? I had higher hopes to be honest.


Credibility is not the same as intention. You are now using a different term to try and reconcile your point. Nobody knows my intentions better than myself. Just as I don't know your intentions better than you. We can make assumptions, but they are based on only the information we choose to share, which may or may not be truthful in and of itself.

So, in this portion of the thread I have not asked you to weigh my credibility when I was talking about my intention. I have stated that my intention was not to be deliberately insulting. If you choose not to accept this then you can use your argument to not accept anything for any reason.

Here EoC says he was "mildly insulting" but "hey nobody is perfect." Compare/contrast this with the highlighted language about no deliberate or intentional insults. EoC concedes that asking someone if they're stupid may be mildly insulting, but asserts it was not deliberate or intentional. What wasn't intentional, saying it out loud? (added 11/6)
Credibility is not the same as intention. What EoC has done, and will continue to do, is make assertions that he wants us to take as credible. EoC says that his assertion of intent cannot be contradicted or disbelieved because he says so. Readers are entitled to review his body of posts here and arrive at their own conclusions.

What I notice in most of the posts from you three is statements on a subject either prefaced by disparaging remarks about the audience or interlaced with assumptions about the audiences' abilities or even just about the audience. @dneal practices all this regularly, @kazoolaw goes for the more furtive interlacing.. @724Seney just posts vitriol, only rarely addressing the topic of the thread.

Do you disagree with this assessment of what you write here? Or would you prefer to ignore what I've just said, cleave to the idea that your own lives should remain unexamined, and just go after me again? As before what do actually expect to realistically achieve here? And that's an honest and direct question.

EoC begins by saying I have disparaged readers, or made assumptions about audience ability, or about the audience. No examples supplied. "Furtive interlacing" sounds impressive. For a term without meaning.
Yes, EoC, I disagree with your assessment. I've not ignored your faulty characterization of my comments, I've shown you have cited no evidence, and created a meaningless vocabulary. Your first question is direct and may well be honest. Your second is not. My realistic expectation is to document your posts so that they don't disappear, and respond to your style of argument. Some of your posts require more than casual scanning to appreciate their sophistication.

Here's the question again, to save your mad scrambling through past posts:

What do you realistically expect to achieve by your caustic approach to engagement in this forum?


I love editing. It's going to be my new thing. Get ready to quote early ladies, you never know how things will change!

Sorry I didn't catch the first formulation of the question, but "caustic wasn't in it.
In an attempt at humor/sarcasm EoC states he loves to edit his posts, because we "never know how things will change." My hypothesis is that edits always work in EoC's favor.

Have you canvassed everyone? Really you are just talking about three people. The best of generosity suggests this is hyperbole, but as it's you I can see this as an attempt at a gaslighting lie.

Is that so????????
Let me refresh your memory.......

Check out post #31 of this thread:
http://<b>https://fpgeeks.com/forum/...post364710</b>

Look familiar?? Still want to maintain that it is only three people???

PS: For anyone who does not have the time to follow the link, the referenced post says this about our pal EoC and his well practiced victim mentality:

"Be aware that well-practiced manipulation techniques were just applied...again. I suggest not being taken in or feeling sorry.

This very same pattern has been exhibited over the years that have sought to shift responsibility, blame and even guilt for misbehavior onto other members as part of some kind of emotional neediness. Then there are these publicly declared departures to elicit sympathy - only to drift back into the forum again for a honeymoon period until the misbehavior begins anew. A search on member ID and the word "goodbye" will show just a sliver of the history and the grudges.

Like a close call with a con artist, learn the lesson what to watch out for and ignore, then move on to enjoy this community with the majority of its members and our pens!"

The highlighted link is to a series of posts referencing EoC and reactions to him. Not all are critical of him.
There is also a series of saved posts in the Topic Kabul and Responsibility

[Empty_of_Clouds]

That's hilarious that you feel some weird need to spend so much time trawling through threads to try and score points. Kind of a low-level ambition.

The standing question for you is: What do you realistically expect to achieve with your caustic approach to interacting on this forum?

from post #154 - I'll use this is as the definitive version of the question that Seney is so tellingly averse to answering. Other versions don't differ much in intent, except in the minds of the point scorers.

Kind of sadly amusing that you make such a big deal about variations in how I phrased a question but are completely oblivious to the fact that you substituted credibility for intention, two words with quite different meanings, just to further your own narrative.

EoC says that his assertion of intent cannot be contradicted or disbelieved because he says so. Readers are entitled to review his body of posts here and arrive at their own conclusions.

It's so funny that you think your remote conclusions have more weight than a statement of fact from the source. And then you state that my conclusions about you are wrong because you say so. Bit illogical, and frankly disingenuous.

You hold me to an absolute standard but don't demonstrate such adherence yourselves.

Here, in this particular part of the forum, I will treat you as you treat me. If you find that inconsistent, I don't give a shit.

Anyway, troll away. You will find it unprofitable.

[dneal]

EoC seems to believe that multiple pages of obfuscation are to his benefit, so let’s revisit where these many pages of nonsense began.

Post #108, EoC interjects himself into the disagreement between TSherbs and myself, quoting portions of my post #107:

I've offered contrition several times. I've started threads trying to reconcile.

But never actually followed through with any sincerity. I think that would be a good start, but it requires sustained application. If I can do it, being a substandard human in some members eyes, I am sure you can.

I have absolutely zero problem pissing any of you off, and I haven't even put any effort into it yet.

One does not have to put effort into a default position.

As I said quite a while back, taking the attitude of 'I'll do it if someone else goes first' doesn't really cut it. Better to be a pioneer.

Note: I started my change in attitude on 27th June, so I am now into my 5th month. Give it a try!

I note to him how this will turn out - and an opportunity to avoid the inevitable, which he declines (posts #109 and #110).

Of note in EoC’s post #110:

- That I am insincere (is this another not-insult he has been refraining from since June?). I would point him to the Ukraine thread, or the Retirement thread as two quick examples of sincere attempts.

- That I have taken an attitude of “I’ll do it if someone else goes first”, which is clearly not my repeatedly stated position of responding in kind.

- That he will not respond to those who will pile on to his injecting of himself into the dispute:

That may be true, but the pile-on people will get no response from me; they'll be creating an echo chamber of their own devising.

This is demonstrably untrue, as we see multiple pages of EoC in fact responding.

Post #110 continues with:

To be better, to at least have civil conversations, and to refrain from simply insulting other members should be the least standard that we can aspire to. Others, like myself, may want to go further. Good. Some will no doubt find such suggestions are challenging and perhaps a bit scary. Good. Nothing will change without people being proactive. Don't wait for the other guy to start.

My response in post #111 is:

EoC - I think your view is skewed. Feel free to browse the threads I've started in the last 12 months or so, and see who put forth the good faith effort (or 'sincerity', to use your term) and who didn't. I frequently note where they go wrong, the post number, and the poster responsible.

I have had my fill of unsubstantiated accusations, and I view your assertion that I'll be nice if someone else goes first to be one of those. Show your work, so to speak, and do it fairly; and I'll consider it fairly.

My position remains zero tolerance for bullshit, which includes duplicity or disingenuousness; and I will respond to it as I like.

He responds, beginning his deflection/weaseling.

Sustained good faith effort is the key.

I have had my fill of unsubstantiated accusations, and I view your assertion that I'll be nice if someone else goes first to be one of those.

That wasn't aimed at you specifically although it does relate to a specific member, but was rather a suggestion simply for us all to effect this change rather than waiting on others. Lead rather than follow. Sorry if you thought that was a personal remark, wasn't intended to be, more just hasty writing on my part and failing to be as accurate as I should be.

My position remains zero tolerance for bullshit, which includes duplicity or disingenuousness; and I will respond to it as I like.

If you respond with insult, rudeness and so on, then you are helping to create the poor quality of the environment. Rise above it, be an example!

It is perfectly clear that EoC was offered an opportunity to substantiate his assertions, and that I would consider them fairly. It is also perfectly clear that I reiterated my position on unsubstantiated accusations - which his are.

It is also readily apparent that EoC begins his deflecting/weaseling, now claiming my posts he is quoting and responding directly to weren’t aimed specifically at me.

The example he advocates in the last two sentences of post #112 (and certainly fails to exemplify) prompts a question that I pose in post #113:

Bold has been a shining example of the approach you advocate. How has that worked out for him?

I do rhetorically tell him there’s no need to respond, and why; because (to paraphrase another poster) this is a well-practiced tactic, and I have no intention of entertaining it.

No need to respond. Not only have you not offered any substantiation, you're already backtracking on your assertions, which unambiguously referred to me.

Also note where EoC has demanded an answer to a question he posed in an attempt to turn the tables (typical of his well-practiced deflecting/weaseling), he never offered an answer to the question I posed (rhetorical “no need to respond” notwithstanding).

So here we are, half a dozen or so pages later, with EoC continuing his no-response policy with deflection, weaseling, and obfuscation; constituting hypocrisy on multiple levels.

—break—

I must say that I find this particular post especially delicious though, as he attempts to contradict my prediction of what his next weasel will be - by restating it!

Here's the question again, to save your mad scrambling through past posts:

What do you realistically expect to achieve by your caustic approach to engagement in this forum?

Note that I am not talking just about your deplorable conduct toward me, but also toward others.

That was the question, which I note you have refused to answer yet again.

Excuse me..... but the way I act / interact with others is, quite simply, none of your damn business.
There you go. Asked & answered.

Now, it's your turn Mr. "5 Months With No Insults." Please explain how your characterization of me as "deplorable" is not an insult?

Oooh, ooooh, He didn't say YOU were deplorable, he was just talking about your conduct. Not an intentional insult, don't ya know. That's completely up to the writer!

You will no doubt have seen that I used the terms 'deplorable conduct' in the quote above. Funny how you spin that to mean that I said he was a deplorable person. Whatever floats yer boat I guess, but that was just egregious.

If this doesn’t exemplify the complete absurdity of this “kerfuffle”, I don’t know what does.

Lastly, it would be interesting for EoC to pose his “what do you realistically expect to achieve…” question to himself; and give us an answer. But since he’s not responding to the pile on, I suppose we’ll never find out.

[dneal]

That's hilarious that you feel some weird need to spend so much time trawling through threads to try and score points. Kind of a low-level ambition.

I don't know about kaz, but it's certainly no trouble for me. I would think a highly competent / MENSA 148 / blah, blah, blah... wouldn't find substantiating his argument difficult either.

You hold me to an absolute standard but don't demonstrate such adherence yourselves.

Here, in this particular part of the forum, I will treat you as you treat me. If you find that inconsistent, I don't give a shit.

Anyway, troll away. You will find it unprofitable.

You introduced a standard when you injected yourself into this, in your lecture.

You've stolen my position, as you said you would; but we all know you do give a shit. That's why you repeatedly threaten to leave, and delete your posts in a futile attempt to hide the evidence (as kaz rightly points out).

There's certainly a troll here, and I've caught you in a simple trap devised for it. "Trump was right". Now run along and delete the post in there before someone quotes it!

There's only one person who I suspect will find all this unprofitable.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

There he is! The other dishonest member of the trio. Well done on another nasty post. You must be proud!

Here's the question again for Seney, although really it could apply to all three of you fairly equally:

The standing question is: What do you realistically expect to achieve with your caustic approach to interacting on this forum?



You have given me no reason to trust anything you say. All the effort you're going to does amuse me though. Keep it up!


Edit: the juvenile psych-type statements intended to try and elicit a response that would satisfy you don't really work on me. Have you learned nothing? I was right about you though. Not a man of his word, not someone to be trusted.

Edit a 2nd time to note that you don't appear to be able to parse my statements accurately. I don't give a shit if you find me inconsistent. It is also extremely funny that you believe you know my motives and intentions. You don't. Neither does the other guy, but those are the kinds of delusion harboured by arrogant people.

[dneal]

My question came first. Bold exemplifies the behavior you are advocating. How has that worked out for him?

[dneal]

There he is! The other dishonest member of the trio. Well done on another nasty post. You must be proud!

Here's the question again for Seney, although really it could apply to all three of you fairly equally:

The standing question is: What do you realistically expect to achieve with your caustic approach to interacting on this forum?



You have given me no reason to trust anything you say. All the effort you're going to does amuse me though. Keep it up!


Edit: the juvenile psych-type statements intended to try and elicit a response that would satisfy you don't really work on me. Have you learned nothing? I was right about you though. Not a man of his word, not someone to be trusted.

Edit a 2nd time to note that you don't appear to be able to parse my statements accurately. I don't give a shit if you find me inconsistent. It is also extremely funny that you believe you know my motives and intentions. You don't. Neither does the other guy, but those are the kinds of delusion harboured by arrogant people.

Quoting for posterity.

Well done exemplifying the behavior you advocate!