Appropriate Communication for a Spirituality Forum

@fmf said
But you have known me for years. The thread was a car crash. petewxyz was making a pompous fool of himself over and over again on almost every page. If it had been KellyJay you'd have been 'congratulating' me in private like you used to.

Perhaps if I had Dive's inclination to dig up ancient threads I would find some of your posts singing my praises.

Like yourself, I remain the same person I always was. Bottom line, you struggle when I like posters you personally have no time for.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Forming allegiances is how the forums work, and yes, sometimes allegiances change.

That is clearly how they work for you Ghost of a Duke.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Perhaps if I had Dive's inclination to dig up ancient threads I would find some of your posts singing my praises.

Like yourself, I remain the same person I always was. Bottom line, you struggle when I like posters you personally have no time for.

You know very well that very little pertinent stuff needs to be “dug up”.

Besides the forum search engine is a POS.

@divegeester said
That is clearly how they work for you Ghost of a Duke.

I have often marveled sir how you personally traverse these forums without a solitary allegiance to anybody.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Perhaps if I had Dive's inclination to dig up ancient threads I would find some of your posts singing my praises.

Of course you could. There'd be loads and loads of them. And not because of some "allegiance" either.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Like yourself, I remain the same person I always was. Bottom line, you struggle when I like posters you personally have no time for.

But it wasn't me who suddenly flounced out of the friendship/allegiance thing and the radio programme and everything - simply because we disagreed over something in private - it was you! Good grief man.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
I have often marveled sir how you personally traverse these forums without a solitary allegiance to anybody.

Thank you 🙏

@petewxyz said
@FMF & @Divegeester

You seem to feel that repetition makes what you do here okay, it doesn't. You're certainty and lack of curiosity about the meaning of the other certainly does not sit well with words like 'intellectual honesty'. Your misuse of psychological terms like 'narcissistic' in an attempt to demean the other does you no favours. Your approach to people does not sit well in a Spirituality Forum.

Welcome to the Spirituality Forum as it exists here.

I don't anticipate changes, so take what you can use from this forum and don't feel bad about discarding the rest.

@fmf said
Yes. I stand by my side of our conversation on that thread. My curiosity was amply demonstrated by how long I endured your bizarre doubling-down and deflection.

I am communicating to you that I stand by what I said to you on that thread. I am communicating to you that I think you are still doubling down in a prideful and self-obsessed way. [Exhibit A, that thread; Exhibit B, this thread].

You should have taken Ghost of a Duke's advice.

That sounds like an implicit threat.

What are you gonna do? Beat him down incessantly, like you beat down GB incessantly until he finally left the forums?

@fmf said
You seem to be wanting to deter or inhibit others from expressing themselves and their ideas as they see fit. Meanwhile, nobody is trying to do that to you.

As a kid, did you always prefer to use the crayon colors no one else used?

@fmf said
I think BigDoggProblem has your card marked.

Argumentum ad populum.

@fmf said
I am sure petewxyz is happy to have your support for now as a fair weather friend. I thought he displayed less integrity than KellyJay on that thread, a similar seemingly willful lack of coherence, a similar pridefulness and resort to blaming others for his fumbling, and he seemed to have a similar dose of victimhood going on. And we all know what you thought of KellyJay and how you interacted with him. I am at least consistent.

"Fair-weather-friend".

Are you implying that GoaD has less integrity than you?

Laughable, at best.

@fmf said
But what does that mean, if anything?

You don't know what that means? Really?

Where's your vaunted integrity now?

@divegeester said
I didn’t scolded you, don’t be so sensitive.

I asked you why you, an atheist, were answering a personal faith based question which was directed at another Christian.

Suzianne predictably didn’t come back to answer, just as she didn’t when you last jumped in to (let’s call it what it is) defend her. I thought your behaviour, and her’s was interesting in this forum and where it happened before.

But I think you already know all this, don’t you.

I have things to do, apparently unlike you.

I'm sure I'll cycle back around to that thread and continue the conversation. Why must I do this on your schedule?

So... much... integrity...

@divegeester said
The quality of your response is not in question, and as you well know it was not and is not my point of interest. So why tell me about it.

I’ll say it again so it’s clear; my challenge to you then was that, as you had done before, you stepped into to defend Suzianne when no defence was needed. She is more than capable of looking after herself and doesn’t require your clumsy incongruent pseudo-gallantry. You just make her look inept.

Keep going. Dig the hole deeper.