2 edits
Originally posted by ivanhoeYou must be listening to too much Jesse Jackson, for in all your dreaming about having better debate threads, your memory has failed you on this point you raised just days ago:
You're a difficult person to work with. I tell ya .....
"Negative debates about RHP members do not belong on the RHP forums."
Surely your personal attack on Nemesio was not essential to the survival of this thread. I dream of the day when all men, black and white, Dutch and American, Catholic and CoD, can come together in a thread, each moderating himself to the end of creating a safe forum for people of all kinds. Unfortunately, my dark memories still cloud over my sunny dreams.
Dr. S
Originally posted by ivanhoeIt requires two people to have a dialogue, Ivanhoe. You
You're a difficult person to work with. I tell ya .....
aren't a willing participant, so I can't help you. You asked
what sort of threads people liked; I responded with a relevant
thread-type that I didn't. You never asked for a thread-
list, I never intended to provide one. If you have specific
criteria in mind for an answer, you should provide them rather
than the insipid 'one-liners' you've been providing as of late.
Otherwise, you should be content with the answers you get.
In any event, all you need to do to make my answer 'workable,'
is print it out, paste it on the wall next to your computer and,
every time you open a thread, skim my message and see if the
criteria listed apply to that thread. You're an intelligent guy, you
can do it without my holding your hand.
Nemesio
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesI'm pink with brown spots! Why did you exclude me you scumbag!
You must be listening to too much Jesse Jackson, for in all your dreaming about having better debate threads, your memory has failed you on this point you raised just days ago:
"Negative debates about RHP members do not belong on the RHP forums."
Surely your personal attack on Nemesio was not essential to the survival of this thread. I dream ...[text shortened]... people of all kinds. Unfortunately, my dark memories still cloud over my sunny dreams.
Dr. S
1 edit
Originally posted by AThousandYoungWhy feed a man a meal when you can teach him to fish?
Nemesio, DoctorScribbles, that is garbage. It's pretty clear he wants a list of names. You're being obnoxious I guess simply because you want to be funny or you don't like Ivanhoe. Am I right?
If I give him a list now, what good does it do him? He would have
to ask the very same question again in a week, and I would have
to produce another list of names. But Nemesio and I have
gone the extra step, saving him the work of having to ask
the question periodically. For any thread that he encounters,
he can immediately determine, without relying on us further,
whether we would be inclined to like it or not.
He should be thankful, not resentful, of our generosity.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungNeither. If he genuinely wanted a litany of threads that every
Nemesio, DoctorScribbles, that is garbage. It's pretty clear he wants a list of names. You're being obnoxious I guess simply because you want to be funny or you don't like Ivanhoe. Am I right?
poster liked, then I think what he is asking is unrealistic; I've
liked a great many threads and I can't do hours of research to
recall which ones and to provide a review of the reasons why.
Instead, wouldn't you agree that it is far more helpful for him to
know the kinds of threads that a person likes or dislikes?
This allows him to deduce on his own whether or not a thread meets
with the satisfaction of the particular poster who took the time to
provide this information.
It would seem that my answer would be of greater intrigue to him,
rather than a long or perhaps endless list, for my answer also gives
him insight into future posts and threads, rather than just the
ones that already exist. It enables him to, if he is inclined, create
threads which would be satisfying to me as well.
Given that he provided no information about the reason he is
asking this question, I have to assume one: I am guessing he wants
to find out what interests certain RHP Forum readers. I have provided
an answer to this essential question.
I don't see how my post about the type of thread I don't like is obnoxious
at all; it's not directed at anyone (and especially not Ivanhoe, who rarely
backs down from a debate). Perhaps you can explain what you meant by
this, because you are obviously bringing baggage to this thread that was
neither intended nor expressed.
Nemesio
1 edit
Originally posted by Nemesio
It requires two people to have a dialogue, Ivanhoe. You
aren't a willing participant, so I can't help you. You asked
what sort of threads people liked; I responded with a relevant
thread-type that I didn't. You never asked f ...[text shortened]... igent guy, you
can do it without my holding your hand.
Nemesio
Dr. Scribbles accused me of making a personal attack on you ...... did I really ? I recall I once called you grumpy, but I didn't open a thread on that subject. Having negative debates about RHP members is something else than criticising someone ... and please tell Dr. Scribbles you can speak for yourself, Nemmie.
Nemesio: "You're an intelligent guy, ..... " 😏
Thanks Nemmie.
Originally posted by ivanhoeWell, a post stating soley that I am a difficult person is hardly
Dr. Scribbles accused me of making a personal attack on you ...... did I really ? I recall I once called you grumpy, but I didn't open a thread on that subject. Having negative debates about RHP members is something else than criticising someone ... and please tell Dr. Scribbles you can speak for yourself, Nemmie.
Nemesio: "You're an intelligent guy, ..... " 😏
Thanks Nemmie.
material to the discussion. I tried to respond with 'material,'
although you haven't given me much with which to work. I was
prepared to move beyond it, however.
DoctorScribbles is, no doubt as a result of his reformation, is very
sensitive to attacks being made on serious debators such as myself
or yourself. His 'third-party' rebuking of your vapid post may have
been unnecessary, but that doesn't make it untrue.
If you are interested in a litany of threads, I am unwilling to take
the time to provide them. Had I known that, I would not have made
a post at all in this thread.
However, I stand by my claim that giving you information about the
kind of thread is very helpful to you in determining what sort
of threads I do and do not like, which is my understood aim of your
question. I do not deny that I might have misunderstood your aim,
but neither can you deny that you haven't provided a great deal of
information in the leading post of this thread.
Nemesio
Originally posted by NemesioThat's just so. That's the very reason I gave my full support
DoctorScribbles is, no doubt as a result of his reformation, is very
sensitive to attacks being made on serious debators such as myself
or yourself. His 'third-party' rebuking of your vapid post may have
been unnecessary, but that doesn't make it untrue.
to ivanhoe's anti-call-out movement, even though his third-party
rebuking was superfluous in light of the fact that every single
person I have ever seen called out here is fully capable of
defending himself.
Originally posted by Nemesio
Well, a post stating soley that I am a difficult person is hardly
material to the discussion. I tried to respond with 'material,'
although you haven't given me much with which to work. I was
prepared to move beyond it, however.
DoctorScribbles is, no doubt as a result of his reformation, is very
sensitive to attacks being made on serious debators ...[text shortened]... ou haven't provided a great deal of
information in the leading post of this thread.
Nemesio
Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.
What happened in this thread is what is happening in a lot of threads.
I wanted to know what kind of threads people like and before you know it people start accusations and other annoying things. Whether you like it or not you are being drawn into this sort of "discussion".
I don't like your tone Cribs, your lying attitude and I don't like your style. You are not looking for a debate, you are looking for a fight.
I like threads where there is a certain creative quality to them. The arguing is so much more insightful and interesting if one's true nature comes out. Today I attempted to make a parallel with the story of the pharisees in the temple and the widow's mite by wondering if RBHill's church would rather accept a contribution from an Enron executive or a tithe from a stripper. I find straight answers to these kinds of questions to be illuminating.
Originally posted by NemesioI did just that in "What Is Evil"
My least favorite threads include those in which the lead poster
presents a question or concept which is addressed or criticized
and the lead poster basically deflects and scampers, cries foul,
or ignores outright.
Nemesio
I was interested in what other people thought and I got what I wanted, deserted it after. Ooops.
Originally posted by NemesioHe asked for the threads you like at present. That suggests that the threads he's asking for are still being discussed and are probably on the first page, or maybe have slipped to the second. That takes a few minutes of skimming the list if you want to bother. This is not unrealistic.
Neither. If he genuinely wanted a litany of threads that every
poster liked, then I think what he is asking is unrealistic; I've
liked a great many threads and I can't do hours of research to
recall which ones and to provide a review of the reasons why.
Instead, wouldn't you agree that it is far more helpful for him to
know the kinds of thr ...[text shortened]... obviously bringing baggage to this thread that was
neither intended nor expressed.
Nemesio
Giving reasons why is a asking for a fair amount of effort from posters, but not all that much. Certainly not more than you put in with your post.
I think what would be helpful to him would be to answer his question. He asked which threads you liked. This means you pick specific choices from a list of possibilities; that's what "which" means. Giving a description of what you like requires him to spend a fair amount of time interpreting your post and making a guess as to what you would think - possibly being wrong. It would be much faster and much more accurate for you to simply tell him. This is exactly what he asked you to do.
You don't have to speculate as to his reasons in order to answer his question. In addition, he suggests what his reason is - that he's "missing something" and he wants to know why people like certain threads. You did do that, but you didn't give specific examples, which was his primary request.
The reason your post is obnoxious is that you went to a great deal of effort to tell Ivanhoe why you refuse to give specific examples, and your reason is lame. Your criterion for disliking a thread requires you to make a judgement call, and Ivanhoe cannot know how you will judge something. You could have easily said either you didn't want to take the time to give examples or you could have given examples. You were condescending in my view.
Am I bringing baggage to this thread Ivanhoe? Am I making stuff up there that you aren't also seeing?