I think all the new posts are mine. Sorry about that. I haven’t been so reasonable or calm lately either. Sorry about that too. Have I been a bigger stupid evil bastard?

We aim to please. And thank you for providing this soapbox.

Brock, you’re going the right way for a smacked bottom.  STOP APOLOGIZING for exercising your freedom of speech, dude!

And hey, if you get to be an honorary Guest Bastard before I do, I’m gonna pout.

Les, success is a bitch, isn’t it?  :-D

I saw a beaver once

Question is, would randall, David, and Brett move to the forums too, or just move their arguments to another thread?

haha, true, I do much prefer the threads.

Brock, don’t worry about it too much. You’re not exactly the only one who’s guilty of that. These are highly emotional issues we’re dealing with. It’s not surprising to me at all.

GeekMom, it’s not too bad. Overwhelming at times, but not too bad.

Ragman, once MT 3.0 comes out they’d have to register either way so I suppose it’ll eventually be a moot point.

Well, Les, as much as you may not like me, at least I’m good for “business”.

Kind of a “at least I can serve as a bad example” thing.

You’re going to claim all the credit now, eh? Or did you forget about Brett, Paddington and Randall? But of course, it’s all about David.

On a more serious note, it’s not that I dislike you in general as much as I dislike some of your thinking and attitudes. Such as the aforementioned tendency to self-centeredness. For all I know in most other aspects you could be a very reasonable person and if I were to meet you in real life I’d give you the benefit of the doubt, at least initially. You haven’t really done anything to me as of yet to inspire the authentic sort of dislike that gets you on my shit list.

I think you read too much into what I wrote. I don’t mean to take all the credit. But I think I can claim some. Maybe you assume I’m more arrogant than I really am.

Speaking for myself, I know next to nothing about the person or persons penning the ‘David’ posts, but they consistently come across as arrogant and condescendingly rude.

With Randall I can agree to disagree. Brett views the world through a narrow window, but seems otherwise sincere. As far as David is concerned, Geekmom seems to yank his chain well enough

You had it right in the first part of the sentence. You know next to nothing. You should have given up there.

Oddly, most folks that I know me peripherally irl, think all kinds of odd things about me (humble, kind, generous, and wise to name a few. I’m often thought of as a peacemaker). I don’t agree with all that, but it’s amazing how much someone’s presumptions foretell their conclusions. Most of those folks know of me from areas where they see me working or participating on boards (school/church). I think all you see when you look at me is that I’m a Christian that can properly defend his point of view without having to bend. You don’t like that very much, so you give criticisms like: “you are arrogant” that cannot be refuted or proven. If it makes you feel better, fine. It doesn’t really bother me.

So that you don’t feel I was trying to insult you, I will admit: I know next to nothing also. And as far as geekmom goes: I think you need to scroll up and read those posts again. I believe you have it much in the reverse of reality. But why would I expect you to see that?

David, maybe “arrogant” is the wrong word.  Help me out here.  Which word would YOU use to describe someone who has an entertaining but pathological need to keep bragging about himself, his family and his religion (for example, talking about how wonderful other people think he is)? 

It’s not the defense of Christianity per se that is flawed; it’s the irrational thinking, the outlandish claims and the transparent, irrelevant attempts at image polishing that get in the way.  Those actually have nothing to do with your choice of religion; it’s just that the combination is an irresistible bubble that just screams “POP ME.“

You had it right in the first part of the sentence. You know next to nothing. You should have given up there.

Is this the best you can come up with? How sad. I can say without fear of contradiction that I consider your posts as arrogant and condescendingly rude. You can repeat as often as you wish what a great, misunderstood, upright and persecuted guy you are, it doesn’t change my perception of your posts.

And my scoring stands. You utterly lack Geekmom’s flair for well-placed barbs; all your repartee is lamely condescending. In my opinion, you also lose on subject matter, but it’s okay if you disagree with my assessment.

However, you serve well as a subject lesson.

How many ways can you prove you’re prejudice? Keep trying, I’m sure you can come up with a few more.

I’m was not trying to brag, I was pointing out that when people don’t know you they assume all sorts of things: some positive, some negative. I don’t spend a great deal of time concerned over either. Somewhere in there is the hope that one of you might learn something from that and live a happier life and be a little less thin-skinned. I admit that I’m blessed in many ways, I can’t help it if it seems like boasting when I state the facts. I don’t think that I’m particularly special for the things that I have. By and large, I’ve had precious little to do with things being that way (Jehovah-Jireh!). Pardon me for being happy.

“Outlandish claims” and “irrational thinking”? From where I sit, it looks like you’re projecting. Could it be that you don’t know everything? Oh, there I go being arrogant again. Like I said in a previous post, liberalism and an outrageous sense of superiority seem to fit hand in glove. Geekmom, you win my vote for the epitome of that quality. Elwedriddsche just runs somewhere in the pack on this site.

Sometimes I just have to shake my head in amazement…

I think you read too much into what I wrote. I don’t mean to take all the credit. But I think I can claim some. Maybe you assume I’m more arrogant than I really am.

Perhaps I did read too much into it and perhaps I am assuming you’re more arrogant than you really are, but then you turn around and make statements like: “You had it right in the first part of the sentence. You know next to nothing. You should have given up there.“ to Elwedriddsche which just reinforces my opinions about you.

It’s clear to me that Elwedriddsche was expressing his opinion on the

tone of your posts

and not necessarily you as a person. Frankly, it’s an opinion I share and it seems clear that several other people here also agree with it. Being a subjective opinion on our part it’s not a matter of whether it’s right or wrong, but a matter of how you are being perceived.

You keep insisting that we’re the ones who are thin-skinned and yet you launched into quite the vehement rebuttal of Elwedriddsche’s opinion of your posts. First you try to invalidate his opinion by telling him he was half right and should have stopped there. Then you attempt to defend yourself by listing off some of the good qualities people who know you personally might consider you to possess such as being humble, kind, generous, wise and a peacemaker. All of that may or may not be true about you, but none of it invalidates the fact that in

Elwedriddsche’s opinion

your posts here are arrogant and condescending.

You then go on to provide your assumption on why Elwedriddsche would hold this opinion, chiefly being that you’re a Christian who can defend his position without bending and Elwedriddsche “doesn’t like that very much” so he resorts to “criticisms” that can’t be proven one way or the other. In essence you attempt to dismiss his opinion on the grounds that A) he realizes deep down that he can’t refute your argument and B) he’s petty enough to resort to characterizing you in a negative light if he feels he can’t win the argument. You then top it all off with the laughable statement: “If it makes you feel better, fine. It doesn’t really bother me.“ Which contradicts all the bluster of the previous paragraph. If it doesn’t really bother you then why’d you waste all that time trying to dismiss Elwedriddsche’s opinion while listing off what some people consider to be your good points?

Your last reply left my sides hurting from trying not to laugh too loudly while at work. You even bring up the idea that GeekMom may be “projecting” because she considers your claims to be outlandish and your thinking irrational. I think it goes without saying that I’ve thought you’ve done your fair share of “projecting” on your own part. You accuse others of showing their prejudices, being thin-skinned, of thinking they know everything, and so on. All qualities that, in my opinion, you’ve shown as being true of yourself. I was especially amused by the excuse of “I can’t help it if it seems like boasting when I state the facts.“

Lastly, you repeat the statement “Like I said in a previous post, liberalism and an outrageous sense of superiority seem to fit hand in glove.“ So I will repeat what I said in reply to that post: You seem hell bent to prove that it doesn’t take a liberal attitude to have an outrageous sense of superiority. Doin’ a damn good job at it too.

Les, no bluster was meant at all, and I explained that in the following post as well. I’m not really all that interested in your collective opinions of me (I think that makes 3 times I’ve said THAT). But I am trying to point out that you are not thinking anywhere near as balanced about the subjects we’ve discussed as you’d like to think you do. 

thanks for perfectly illustrating that by both of you noting that I said elwedriddsche knew next to nothing. Yet neither of you managed another 4 or 5 sentences to get that

So that you don’t feel I was trying to insult you, I will admit: I know next to nothing also.

Yet clearly, I think I’m superior? No,no, my perception that you are seeing this from only one side MUST be in error. egads…

In the Definition of “marriage” thread, David wrote:

Ragman, I don’t know you at all, but I was probably using arcnet and uunet before you were born.

In this thread…

You had it right in the first part of the sentence. You know next to nothing. You should have given up there.
......
So that you don’t feel I was trying to insult you, I will admit: I know next to nothing also.

I’m was not trying to brag, I was pointing out that when people don’t know you they assume all sorts of things: some positive, some negative.

Just an observation.

David, your comment

You had it right in the first part of the sentence. You know next to nothing. You should have given up there.

was what I decided against writing to you when I responded to the uunet comment.  I figured that I would just keep it simple and try to avoid being insulting, hence the “No, you don’t” and “No, you aren’t” responses, which you appeared to take in a more emotional tone than was offered.  Like you said,

I think you read too much into what I wrote.

Fair enough, Ragman. I still don’t feel I was insulting you, I certainly didn’t mean to (and I’ve said as much), where Elwedriddsche certainly was trying to insult me, and has made no excuse for it (rather, I’m sure He’ll take credit for insulting me). But your point is well taken. That is to say if you are indicating that both Elwedriddsche and I are wrong, and not that I’m just a jerk and He’s fine. Which is precisely what I’ve been trying to get across here.

What Les said…

So you were a customer of Rick’s company? My, my

Les, no bluster was meant at all, and I explained that in the following post as well. I’m not really all that interested in your collective opinions of me (I think that makes 3 times I’ve said THAT). But I am trying to point out that you are not thinking anywhere near as balanced about the subjects we’ve discussed as you’d like to think you do.

For someone who’s not interested in our collective opinions about you, you spend a lot of time trying to refute them. Your actions belie your claims, David.

In your opinion our thinking isn’t as balanced as we’d like to believe it is. OK, that’s your opinion. Considering that I disagree with many of the opinions you hold why should it be any surprise to you that I’m not in agreement with that one either? For that matter, why should I accept as true your opinion that my thinking isn’t as balanced as I’d like to believe it is?

thanks for perfectly illustrating that by both of you noting that I said elwedriddsche knew next to nothing. Yet neither of you managed another 4 or 5 sentences to get that “So that you don’t feel I was trying to insult you, I will admit: I know next to nothing also.“  Yet clearly, I think I’m superior? No,no, my perception that you are seeing this from only one side MUST be in error. egads…

I got it, I just didn’t read too much into it. From my perception it was a disingenuous statement to make after spending the better part of the response trying to dismiss Elwedriddsche’s opinion in such a condescending manner. He was expressing his opinion on your posts and you tried to tell him he was wrong for holding that opinion. Or do you not remember the statement “You had it right in the first part of the sentence.“ I don’t know where you come from, but where I come from the implication is clear: First part of the sentence is “right” second part, his opinion, is “wrong.“

Your attempt to excuse yourself by admitting that you “know next to nothing also” is a transparent (and some might say cynical) attempt at deflection of criticism that is made clear by the preceding “so that you don’t feel I was trying to insult you” comment. When Elwedriddsche said he knew next to nothing he made it clear it was in regards to what “the person or persons penning the ‘David’ posts” is like in real life, whereas your comment doesn’t indicate just what you’re specifically talking about other than its intent is so he won’t feel insulted.

Your whole response is not unlike someone who takes the time to tell someone else why their sense of fashion is so fucked up only to turn around at the end and say “But who am I to talk? I don’t have any fashion sense myself.“

David, PLEASE see if you can try to stop bragging with such unimpressive credentials; it just makes you look silly.  Those of us who had access to the Arpanet and Usenet in the early ‘80s just aren’t impressed by the fact that you were a customer of UUNet later on.  This is another example of your trying to intimidate someone with laughably inadequate results.  Clearly YOU are impressed by yourself, but that’s where it stops.

Why don’t you just get back to arguing the issues?  I notice Randall, Brett and Paddington don’t feel the need to tell us how wonderful people think they are or how successful they are or how long they’ve been around or anything like that as part of their arguments.  If you looked up from your medal collection, you might notice that they don’t get HALF the shit from us that you do. 

You must not trust the strength of your arguments very much if you feel they need non sequitur reinforcements.

Proverbs 16:18
Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.

ragman,,

Question is, would randall, David, and Brett move to the forums too, or just move their arguments to another thread?

i tried to register for the forum, did not know it existed (i’m still learning).  i just figured out how to to do the quote thing!!

anyone i have not recieved a return email to hook me up. but i will try and use it when i get aquainted…