29 Apr 15
Originally posted by divegeesterpfffft... you're trying too hard to be tough and scary looking. It's not working.
What is it you find "fascinating" about the two people you are corresponding to on a forum, corresponding back with you? You seem edgy and paranoid as FMF says; perhaps you see demons on your bedposts at night.
29 Apr 15
2 edits
Originally posted by moonbusThis was the second time I've given FMF a thumbs up... but telling him why I would add a number to his score is less than useless.
I sometimes give thumbs-up to a post which I think is particularly apt or well-formulated, even when I disagree with its content.
I usually don't bother with looking at or using the thumbs... it's mostly useful for people who don't want to risk posting anything themselves, but still want to be involved in some way. That's why I don't necessarily believe it's used to manipulate public opinion, although it can appear to be a tactic used for intimidating an opponent... it all depends on who is thumbing and why they do it.
There are of course other reasons a number might show up (in either box), such as the reason you gave for thumbing up a message.
Originally posted by lemon limeYesterday, you interpreted two thumbs down by persons unknown as being a sign of them trying to "exercise control" over you. Today you're saying it's more likely they are persons unknown "who don't want to risk posting anything themselves" ~ presumably because they are afraid of doing so in some way - at least in your mind - although, you suggest, they might just be seeking to "manipulate public opinion" against you or even "intimidate" you.
I usually don't bother with looking at or using the thumbs... it's mostly useful for people who don't want to risk posting anything themselves, but still want to be involved in some way. That's why I don't necessarily believe it's used to manipulate public opinion, although it can appear to be a tactic used for intimidating an opponent... it all depends on who is thumbing and why they do it.
Sheer paranoid nonsense but interesting nevertheless. It certainly belongs here on a thread where some people are discussing 'Why are we Christians under attack?'
30 Apr 15
Originally posted by FMF... people are discussing 'Why are we Christians under attack?'
Yesterday, you interpreted two thumbs down by persons unknown as being a sign of them trying to "exercise control" over you. Today you're saying it's more likely they are persons unknown "who don't want to risk posting anything themselves" ~ presumably because they are afraid of doing so in some way - at least in your mind - although, you suggest, they might jus ...[text shortened]... belongs here on a thread where some people are discussing 'Why are we Christians under attack?'
So now you're a Christian? When did this happen? 😲 😕 😛
🙄
30 Apr 15
Originally posted by lemon limeNo. Several Christians on this thread have been discussing 'Why are we Christians under attack?' which is of course a key aspect of the thread title. And, as I have clearly argued (and it has been demonstrated by some Christians too, perhaps inadvertently), paranoia and insecurity seem to be what underpins their perception and characterization of these "attacks"
[b]... people are discussing 'Why are we Christians under attack?'
So now you're a Christian? When did this happen? 😲 😕 😛
🙄[/b]
Originally posted by FMFYou have a point... although the 'attacks' coming from you and divegeester seem to come across as more of a comedy routine. But maybe this is just how it appears to me, and there really are Christians here who are deeply offended by you and your co-horts.
No. Several Christians on this thread have been discussing 'Why are we Christians under attack?' which is of course a key aspect of the thread title. And, as I have clearly argued (and it has been demonstrated by some Christians too, perhaps inadvertently), paranoia and insecurity seem to be what underpins their perception and characterization of these "attacks"
But I think the word 'attack' is probably too strong a word to be using here, because it suggests you think your words have the force of an attack... an attack able to disable and disorient, and cause Christians to doubt what they believe. In other words, you're giving yourselves too much credit for what you call 'attacks' on Christians.
30 Apr 15
Originally posted by lemon limeSuzianne is a case in point, as can be seen from the first couple of pages of this thread.
You have a point... although the 'attacks' coming from you and divegeester seem to come across as more of a comedy routine. But maybe this is just how it appears to me, and there really are Christians here who are deeply offended by you and your co-horts.