Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jasamcarl" data-source="post: 1358120" data-attributes="member: 1251">Ah, thanks for clarifying. I don't believe this holds here though. In most of my post I used 'seems to me' and 'i think' to qualify all of my remarks. And given that this is primarily a discussion of perception (i.e. 'flavor'), I think the mindset of the poster is a perfectly reasonable subject of inquiry. He chose to be offended, threw some complelty irrelevant comments my way, to which I responded by noting how irrelevant his insults were to the topic at hand. In all those cases I was making an argument, either about the actual topic or what relevant to that topic. He was simply venting. Again, the truth (as I percieve it) can hurt, and often hurts because it is true. Not speaking it would be to censore myself or, worse, be condescending to the current posters. I just assumed enworld posters were smart enough to look past their immediate emotional response and to the substance as it stands. 'Insulting' to the person to identifies to closely with his campaign perhaps.Which brings us back to the question of rhetoric. I find that those who are too touchy automatically loose credibility because they are unable to or unwilling to face inconvenient arguments. If I post something that is equal parts irrelevant and substantive (which I do not concede i did), the mature individual would ignore the former and address the later. The person to ducks out completly just looks weak. Of course this depends on the larger audience, but I have no reason to believe that those who posted sympathy for the original, weak poster are representative of the larger messageboard community. If he is a lost cause, others might have easily taken something from my bluntness.Oh, and 'baby' and 'hypocrite' only came into the equation after i was referred to as something else. So while technically correct, the more defensible statement on your part would be 'there were interesting posts before the original poster started calling people prick'; but I don't blame you for not being consistent given your love of rhetoric. Are you now denying that there are hypocrites on this board? Curious position...</blockquote>

Verification