annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
lain:You know, chrys, I wouldn't have said that about you.
I'll disagree with you and tell you so and tell you why, but I don't set out to attack you.
program
- Thread starter chrysostom
- Start date
lain:You know, chrys, I wouldn't have said that about you.
I'll disagree with you and tell you so and tell you why, but I don't set out to attack you.
You know, chrys, I wouldn't have said that about you.
I'll disagree with you and tell you so and tell you why, but I don't set out to attack you.
those words are so comforting
maybe you should have a disclaimer for all your posts
please note: this is not an attack
your posting the link does encourage others to click on it
and
that encourages the wackos to continue putting their stuff out there
don't you think it is wrong to encourage them?
Were you trying to attack her?
And it isn't even noon.
Now you know
the rest of the
story
good day
lain:
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
I think, and maybe I'm wrong but I don't think I am, that you see disagreement with you as a personal attack, or even a betrayal.
It shuts people down, chrys, when you don't allow them the autonomy to have a view that's different from yours.
In real life they might close down, stop communicating, talk only about superficial things. Or they might walk away, leave it all behind because they know nothing will ever change.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Sometimes it's best to expose lunacy instead of ignoring it...
you are wrong anna
I know the difference between disagreement and personal attacks
you know I have many friends here
and
you know how few actually agree with me
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Well if you do see the difference you'll realize that anna isn't personally attacking you.
It's because he's a weasel (that, chrys, was a personal attack).
I don't have a problem with it where you're (chrys) concerned given how much of it you dish out directly and indirectly and through surrogates. Your misogynistic end run about a women's club was an example on the weak end of it, as was the dot comment to me.
Your arguments are frequently worse, so I can see where you'd want to change it up.
lain:Now off to lunch with the family unit.
well it is something we can agree on
and
it is surely justified because I called you a what?
Gosh, take your pick...I think Baby Killer was probably you at your worst, but if you want a broader list I guess I could oblige. You've made a career out of suggesting things that aren't true about me, like the notion that I don't answer questions put to me, that I'm less than honest about the answers I do give. That sort of thing.
But it doesn't have to be about me. What you said to/inferred about anna was weaselly enough. See, that rates with me too. Just because you might see people as utility it doesn't follow that everyone else shares your disconnect. :nono:
So yeah, you're acting awfully weaselly and have been for a long while. I think there was a time when you weren't but you don't seem inclined to revisit it and I'm beginning to wonder if it was even true or if I just didn't know you well enough. :idunno: I'd rather believe the former. There's a modicum of hope in that.
that is really too bad because encouraging someone may be one of the more important things we do around here
when was the last time I called you a baby killer?
let's just say it was six months ago
does that give you the right to call me a name today?
It helps if you read the whole thing. I said I found the snide and not so vaguely misogynistic dismissal of anna weaselly. I thought the whole "expose" people crap you were pulling here was/is weaselly too, comes to that.
And if you think back to the bit about your family member who came to you for advice you'll realize that how I respond to your posts has everything to do with how you post, which seems fair. I didn't give you any grief until you went out of your way to slap at Protestants in a non responsive post to my inquiries/posts, which were actually meant to be helpful.
I meet people as they insist on being met. The moment you abandon the weaselly I'll be among the happiest people here and the first to extend a hand. Same for Sod. This isn't a grudge match. It's very much in the moment. I may remind you of a past activity in line with a present activity/problem, but I'm not holding any anger related to it or about you really.
so even though I did not call you a name
you were able to call me a name because of my posts to you and anna were that bad
and
you were unable to respond in kind
Your post to anna was that bad. Your background reason for this thread too, comes to that. It's not upfront. It's sneaky and a bit underhanded and that's most of what I mean by weaselly.
Respond in kind? No. I wasn't being underhanded or sneaky. I was being upfront. In kind sounds too much like boys being boys as opposed to someone walking up and hitting you and you aiming one for their ear hole.
so you think I had all this planned out?
All what? You wanted to classify everyone. You said that early on...the why you intimated with your choice of words much later. Exposiing?
lain: