@ghost-of-a-duke saidI beg to differ. Everything he writes and everything I write is here for all to see. People can make up their own minds whether my contributions are pertinent and whether KellyJay's ministry benefits from his silence.
Not if he ignores everything you write.
@fmf saidA high percentage of the posts you make in this forum are directed at Kelly, which is decidedly odd considering he never replies to any of your posts.
I beg to differ. Everything he writes and everything I write is here for all to see. People can make up their own minds whether my contributions are pertinent and whether KellyJay's ministry benefits from his silence.
If you continually direct posts at somebody who clearly doesn't want to engage with you, how is that not trolling?
@ghost-of-a-duke saidThey are, nevertheless, worthy contributions in a public arena.
A high percentage of the posts you make in this forum are directed at Kelly, which is decidedly odd considering he never replies to any of your posts.
@fmf saidIf you continually direct posts at somebody who clearly doesn't want to engage with you, how is that not trolling?
They are, nevertheless, worthy contributions in a public arena.
@ghost-of-a-duke saidIt's not "trolling" because what is added to the public discourse is relevant. His inability or unwillingness to deal with the scrutiny, and the implications for the credibility of the claims he makes, is a matter for him.
If you continually direct posts at somebody who clearly doesn't want to engage with you, how is that not trolling?
@ghost-of-a-duke saidWhy are you repeating the same question?
If you continually direct posts at somebody who clearly doesn't want to engage with you, how is that not trolling?
@fmf saidWhy not just leave it to people he does engage with?
It's not "trolling" because what is added to the public discourse is relevant. His inability or unwillingness to deal with the scrutiny, and the implications for the credibility of the claims he makes, is a matter for him.
@fmf saidBecause you edited it out of your first reply and it was pertinent.
Why are you repeating the same question?
@fmf saidIf you continually direct posts at somebody who clearly doesn't want to engage with you, it 'IS' trolling.
It's not "trolling" because what is added to the public discourse is relevant. His inability or unwillingness to deal with the scrutiny, and the implications for the credibility of the claims he makes, is a matter for him.
@ghost-of-a-duke saidBecause I don't want want to. My views on KellyJay's claims about the universe and the human condition are just as valid as those of others here. They are also often different.
Why not just leave it to people he does engage with?
@ghost-of-a-duke saidI don't think it is. If I were to send him unsolicited PMs then maybe yes. But I am not. I am airing my perspectives in public on the perspectives he has aired in public. If he chooses to blank them out, that's for him. People can make of it what they will.
If you continually direct posts at somebody who clearly doesn't want to engage with you, it 'IS' trolling.
@fmf saidThis is the last post I'll make about you trolling Kelly. (Before you play your cliché card and accuse me of the thing I am accusing you of).
Because I don't want want to. My views on KellyJay's claims about the universe and the human condition are just as valid as those of others here. They are also often different.
@ghost-of-a-duke saidBut I answered each part as I always do.
Because you edited it out of your first reply and it was pertinent.
@fmf saidReply to his points then in open posts. Don't direct questions at him that you know he won't respond to.
I don't think it is. If I were to send him unsolicited PMs then maybe yes. But I am not. I am airing my perspectives in public on the perspectives he has aired in public. If he chooses to blank them out, that's for him. People can make of it what they will.