Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="talien" data-source="post: 5651973" data-attributes="member: 3285">It's hard to refute &quot;you disagree with the other guy so that must make you guilty.&quot;&nbsp; So I won't try. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I find it ironic that I should &quot;go over Dannager's past posts and see for myself&quot; about his bias but asking anyone to use the ICv2 links as evidence of how ICv2 works is unreasonable.&nbsp; Or to put it another way, when someone with a bias on a thread attacks me I should do my research on them, but it's unreasonable to assume someone reading my article should do their own research.&nbsp; This doesn't seem to match up to me.&nbsp; &nbsp;I agree, the title could have been worded better.&nbsp; I wrote it fast from a hotel room with a cold. &nbsp;I'm astonished by claims of me being angry about this topic.&nbsp; Seriously, I just posted links, people (apparently with their own known biases) attacked me for it. I refused to be bullied.&nbsp; That makes me angry?&nbsp; I shudder to think the reaction if I actually WAS angry.&nbsp;Where this assumption that I am some newspaper-style journalist comes from is beyond me. Here's what Examiner promises: &quot;Examiners come from all walks of life and contribute original content to entertain, inform, and inspire their readers. They are credible, passionate and influential because of their knowledge of a particular topic.&quot; That's it. At best -- and seriously, this is giving me way too much credit -- I write opinionated editorials. There's no way we could be journalistically neutral and &quot;entertain&quot; and &quot;inspire&quot; our readers as well. I believe that at this point the thread has violated several ENworld posting rules, so I'm out of this thread before it gets locked down.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="talien, post: 5651973, member: 3285"] It's hard to refute "you disagree with the other guy so that must make you guilty." So I won't try. :) I find it ironic that I should "go over Dannager's past posts and see for myself" about his bias but asking anyone to use the ICv2 links as evidence of how ICv2 works is unreasonable. Or to put it another way, when someone with a bias on a thread attacks me I should do my research on them, but it's unreasonable to assume someone reading my article should do their own research. This doesn't seem to match up to me. I agree, the title could have been worded better. I wrote it fast from a hotel room with a cold. I'm astonished by claims of me being angry about this topic. Seriously, I just posted links, people (apparently with their own known biases) attacked me for it. I refused to be bullied. That makes me angry? I shudder to think the reaction if I actually WAS angry. Where this assumption that I am some newspaper-style journalist comes from is beyond me. Here's what Examiner promises: "Examiners come from all walks of life and contribute original content to entertain, inform, and inspire their readers. They are credible, passionate and influential because of their knowledge of a particular topic." That's it. At best -- and seriously, this is giving me way too much credit -- I write opinionated editorials. There's no way we could be journalistically neutral and "entertain" and "inspire" our readers as well. I believe that at this point the thread has violated several ENworld posting rules, so I'm out of this thread before it gets locked down. [/QUOTE]

Verification