- From: Dev <spam-addy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 20:40:05 +0000 (GMT)
Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Dev <spam-addy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
zoara <me18@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
It's a greater fault displayed by those who, when faced with me
complaining about being insulted, point out that they weren't
being insulting, then refuse to explain what's wrong with my
interpretation, thus giving me no hope at all of avoiding
similar mistakes in the future.
In my experience it's often because I can't work out *why* you've
found it insulting, so have no idea where to begin with an
explanation of what you've misunderstood. The only explanation I
can give is "I can't see how it's insulting".
I suspect I'm not alone.
You're not. I'm amazed at the way he manages to fashion 'insults'
out of the most innocuous posts.
But Dev, you have complained about me insulting you - and you
pompously demanded an apology.
No, I politely asked for one.
I've never reacted like that to you. Can you not see the flaw in
your behaviour here?
"Flaw in your behaviour" seems to be a very common phrase in your
vocabulary. I presume it's one you've heard being used by professionals
in regard to yourself.
I am afraid that I unwittingly set off this latest session of
Rowland-being-insulted by my comment about him "out-trolling the
most energetic of trolls by asking question after question in our
discourse". I tried to explain that I meant only that his creating
very lengthy posts full of questions, repeatedly questioning what I
meant by every simple and basic point written in very clear
language, tended to confusion.
No you didn't. You told me it was complimenting me on my debating
No, in my second reply to you after the original quote, I wrote "I find
it rather interesting and curious that you purport to take a compliment
on the skill of your usenet rhetoric to be a derogatory remark."
In the first reply I wrote:
|> If I reinsert a little of how I continued, "You have been
|> out-trolling the most energetic of trolls by asking question after
|> question in our discourse...", it becomes clear that I only liken
|> your repetitive use of apparently supposedly innocent questioning to
|> the well-known ability of trolls to lead others on by repeated
|> questioning into quagmires of muddled explanations. As a (former?)
|> writer, you must recognise how language is often used metaphorically.
which is more or less what I wrote to zoara in the paragraph above
I can only say that in my experience, most people would have
laughed off the comment; the only sort of person to take such
umbrage would be trolls themselves or Rowland.
Again, you retain a misjudgement: I didn't take umbrage, I was merely
a bit irritated and wanted to clear it up.
Don't backtrack! You called it a "direct personal insult" and then went
on to say: "As you know very well: suggesting I'm trolling is an insult
on its own. Suggesting that I'm out-trolling the most energetic of
trolls deepens the insult."
I had already explained exactly what I meant when you went off the deep
end and wrote:
|> And never mind the rest of the bloody sentence-long paragraph, which
|> makes claims about what I've wrote and my attitudes which are
|> grossly inaccurate in a deeply insulting fashion.
|> I've no idea why you thought it'd be a good idea to write all that
|> crap about me, or how you could have come to those grotesquly
|> insulting and inaccurate judgements, but there you go.
|> I find that quite a lot of people here seem to make the same sort of
|> deeply insulting misjudgements on me, but like you are unwilling to
|> open their eyes to any correction in their misjudgements.
I don't think he's deliberately trolling when he responds in that
way, and then goes on to discover many further 'insults' in almost
everything that has and has not been said;
<sigh> Go on, what are you on about? Where is your evidence?
Have a look at your post:
where you analyse my attempts to explain what was just a simple figure
of speech and come up with "All you've done there is insult me an extra
three times without doing a damned thing to clear up what I'll accept
is some kind of communication failure."
You then go on to write in one paragraph "What I mean by that is that
it should be clear to anyone of normal intelligence...", following up
with "...you should also have left out the faintly derogatory `it
becomes clear that'...."
The only rational mind that could produce that post would be that of a
btw, you are insulting me with your mistaken psychological analysis -
if you think that you are not doing so, you've got your head up your
But that's not me looking for further insult, it's you choosing to
post further insults.
There's simply no need for you to carry on like this at all, not
really. Not unless you are wanting to wind me up and reinforce the
inaccurate ideas about me that a group of posters here like to think
of as true.
Which is pretty poor behaviour on your part, if you think about it.
Not that you'll admit fault - doing so is not in your nature, is it?
Nope, what's in your nature is criticising others.
Isn't criticising others what you seem intent on doing?
I think it is entirely due to his personality problems (but he
might say I'm entirely mistaken here). He has to find insults where
none exist because he expects there to be insults, possibly because
he feels that he deserves insults because he himself continually
feels that he is failing to meet the very high standard he sets and
expects of himself.
Don't be bloody silly.
When I read insults, it's because I read insults.
I don't take umbrage, I mostly just get irritated at the hypocrisy of
those who complain about me insulting them when I've meant no insult
and get complain about me more when I point out that they've insulted
me when they claim they didn't mean to insult me.
Er... run that by me again, will you? I think you said that others
shouldn't complain about any insults they see when you say you haven't
insulted them, but that you should complain about any insults you see
when others say they haven't insulted you.
I think one of the problems here is the inability of people to
understand what I mean in my posts, and a refusal to admit that their
judgements on me are consequently seriously flawed.
What? Do you mean like your inability understand other people and your
refusal to admit that your judgments are flawed?
I might be wrong because, as Rowland himself has said, I haven't
met him and know only the usenet persona; but I feel that Rowland's
own lack of acceptance of himself and his normal failings (failings
we all have in some measure or another), is at the root of all this.
Again, you continue to operate a misjudgement about me. I've no idea
why you think I can't accept my failings, since I make it clear here
that I do so.
It seems to me that the real problem is more that those such as
yourself who think that they are in a position to judge me in that
way are themselves rather more guilty of a lack of self-perception
than I am.
In short, it's your inability to accept yourself and your normal
failings that's rather more the problem.
I just think you're projecting.
It is a pity for he is a very vigorous contributor to the group
The great pity is that I'm subjected to being described in the sort
of bullshit terms you're using: posts like the nonsense you've
written above just go to reinforce the ludicrous misjudgements you
and others seem to think you can make on me.
I'm afraid that as long as you continue to make the sort of posts you
occasionally do, you'll risk getting that sort of feedback.
You need to learn that your judgements on me are seriously flawed.
Admit that it's simply not possible to form valid judgements on a
person in the way you've been doing, and try to find some means of
accepting that you're wrong about me.
I don't think I've got your personality characterised. But I can see
some behavioural mistakes derived from the fact that you continue to
post mistaken personal judgements on me.
I do wish you'd just shut up about me personally.
I intend to, provided your responses to me are reasonable.
Om Namah Shivaya | Om Girishaya namaha
- Prev by Date: Re: OT: End of winter
- Next by Date: Re: Upgrading processors in MacPro 1,1
- Previous by thread: Copyright.
- Next by thread: Re: Copyright.