Re: argumentum ad hominem
- From: "<<<~A John 3:16 Whosoever~>>>" <kaseybeck61@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 14:02:05 -0700 (PDT)
On Apr 2, 1:33 pm, "Yowie" <yowie9644.DIESPAM...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
David, I have always been polite with you and have never 'abused' you.
Disagreement is not 'abuse'. I am saddened you have found my comments in any
way abusive, they were not meant to be.
To avoid any further hurt on your part, I am no longer going to engage with
you - if my replies to you are 'abuse' in your eyes to continue would be
cruel and hurtful, something I do not wish to be.
Naturally, you don't want to intentionally hurt David, Yowie - but
honestly, if David is the sociopath that I suspect him to be, he
doesn't feel hurt and cruelty as do those of us who are not
sociopathic. Knowing this is not an excuse to be cruel or hurtful to
any sociopath, but it does shed a different light on things.
I believe that David actually revels in what he is dishonestly terming
as "abuse", as it fulfills the need for his narcissistic supply. I do
find it interesting that he has even placed you on his list - as far
as I have seen, you have always been polite with David (and all other
posters). Personally, I view David's placement of me at the top of
his list as a sick way for him to let me know that he's enjoyed my
"abuse" of him and is desperate for me to start responding to him
again.
He's a sick man, Yowie, and really needs to be ignored by the Usenet
community by-in-large. In so doing, he will be forced to get his
unhealthy fulfillment elsewhere and hopefully the treatment he needs.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: argumentum ad hominem
- From: David
- Reclaiming SRQ for Quaker discussions; possible at last?
- From: Engineer
- Re: argumentum ad hominem
- References:
- Re: argumentum ad hominem
- From: Yowie
- Re: argumentum ad hominem
- Prev by Date: God created the soul for fertilized human embryos
- Next by Date: Reclaiming SRQ for Quaker discussions; possible at last?
- Previous by thread: Re: argumentum ad hominem
- Next by thread: Reclaiming SRQ for Quaker discussions; possible at last?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|