Originally posted by Proper KnobThank you I will deal with this internally
Of course people change, if someone brings something up from the which the person has changed their mind on, all that have to do is say - 'Actually I've changed my mind on that, and here are the reasons why'. It's not hard.
Here's some unsolicited advice for you, if you are concerned about retrotrolling I would advise you to follow these steps on this ...[text shortened]... nd admit your mistakes.
4. Refrain from goading, ridiculing, taunting and calling people names.
1 edit
Originally posted by Proper Knobretro trolling may be done for fun also but it can also be sinister, it depends entirely on context. For example FMF's willingness to bring something GB allegedly said in a thread about the death of someone was not done for fun it was done simply to put the boot in. If i say to divesjeeser next week, you remember you said Jesus was retro trollin Satan, that will be done just for fun.
Robert you seem to have missed this -
Name calling and taunting? You seem to have missed them.
What if goading and ridiculing are not done in the right spirit? What if retrotrollin is being done just for fun?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWould you describe yourself as opposed to people calling someone out for hypocrisy?
For example FMF's willingness to bring something GB allegedly said in a thread about the death of someone was not done for fun it was done simply to put the boot in.
If you are, do you think you demonstrate this opposition in the way you post on this forum?
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFI don't want to discuss my personal views of anything, i need to deal with them internally but i thank you for the kind offer to discuss them in public, its very thoughtful.
Would you describe yourself as opposed to people calling someone out for hypocrisy?
If you are, do you think you demonstrate this opposition in the way you post on this forum?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThere is ample evidence that you want declare the behaviour of others to be "morally repugnant" in public, whilst being unwilling to discuss what may be "morally repugnant" about your own behavior. If you bring others' behaviour up in public and deal with it in public, how is that allowing them to deal with it "internally" as opposed to publicly?
You have evidence that i have prohibited other posters from dealing with how they post internally?
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFThat i find your putting the boot in to Grandpa Bobby as morally repugnant is my affair, you need not acquiesce.
There is ample evidence that you want declare the behaviour of others to be "morally repugnant" in public, whilst being unwilling to discuss what may be "morally repugnant" about your own behavior. If you bring others' behaviour up in public and deal with it in public, how is that allowing them to deal with it "internally" as opposed to publicly?
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFYes but these are divulged at by behest as is my prerogative. I have asked you to desist from asking me personal questions and would be pleased if you would comply with those wishes. If i have anything of a personal nature to divulge i will divulge it at my own volition.
But aren't your pronouncements ~ on the what is "morally repugnant" and "morally reprehensible" in others ~ your "personal views"?