A perfect way to cleanse USPOL

[Zedrow]

gem,

I learned early on (thanks to some help form Gort and Tim) that you can't assume anything about the other people on this board without following their posts for a while; and even then, I keep the discussion open in case my assumption is wrong.

I have been on the receiving end and just hate it when my response is assumed. It makes me feel like the person I am discussing things with is not bothering to read my full posts, and I tend not to bother with them if they are not willing to read everything before responding.

[drgoodtrips]

Originally Posted by Zedrow

I have been on the receiving end and just hate it when my response is assumed. It makes me feel like the person I am discussing things with is not bothering to read my full posts, and I tend not to bother with them if they are not willing to read everything before responding.

Yes, and something tells me that what chassis was referring to is people who do a lot of this. Personally, I consider the discussion experience degraded by partisans and idealogues of any stripe who are here to preach, annoy, and rant, rather than to discuss.

BTW - good to see you around again.

[gem]

Originally Posted by drgoodtrips

You were so pleased with your post that you posted it again in a thread in which it was irrelevant.

Are you 'assuming" my motives, DrGoodtrips?

Gem

[gem]

Quoting Thane:

Nothing I posted had ANYTHING TO do with any comments you made about our latest dead president.

Rest your case on bullshit all you want. I see where this is very quickly going to go.

Nowhere. Have fun now.

The very fact that you state that I was making comments about our latest dead President is a clear indicator of how some of the posters here seek to twist the words of another. I wasn't saying anything about Gerald Ford- I was merely using Ford's own words to rebut another posters position. If anything is "bullshit" it is just those kinds of manipulative techniques and statements... and you're right, trying to discuss anything with another poster who resorts to such tactics will indeed "go nowhere".

Gem

[drgoodtrips]

Originally Posted by gem

Are you 'assuming" my motives, DrGoodtrips?

{Shrug} If you want. I see that you didn't bother to supply a different motivation, so I guess my 'assumption' is on par with your actions. I suppose that you could have done that because some government agent broke into your house and forced you to from the business end of an uzi, but I tend to go with Ockham's Razor most of the time. If someone talks glowingly about his own cleverness in a post (and even tells us how much a friend liked it) and then SPAM's it into a thread where it has no relevance, I don't think the 'assumption' is much of a leap. I also 'assume' that the sun is going to rise tomorrow morning, and I'm not too worried about "making an 'ass' out of 'u' and 'me'" on that count either (I believe it was you that offered this trite aphorism here once, I apologize if I'm misremembering.)

[gem]

Originally Posted by Zedrow

gem,

I learned early on (thanks to some help form Gort and Tim) that you can't assume anything about the other people on this board without following their posts for a while; and even then, I keep the discussion open in case my assumption is wrong.

I have been on the receiving end and just hate it when my response is assumed. It makes me feel like the person I am discussing things with is not bothering to read my full posts, and I tend not to bother with them if they are not willing to read everything before responding.

What makes you think I don't read the entire posts, Zedrow? I will admit I generally choose to address particular aspects of other posts, especially if they are long ones. But that doesn't necessarily mean that I'm not reading the entire post.

Gem

[gem]

Originally Posted by drgoodtrips

{Shrug} If you want. I see that you didn't bother to supply a different motivation, so I guess my 'assumption' is on par with your actions. I suppose that you could have done that because some government agent broke into your house and forced you to from the business end of an uzi, but I tend to go with Ockham's Razor most of the time. If someone talks glowingly about his own cleverness in a post (and even tells us how much a friend liked it) and then SPAM's it into a thread where it has no relevance, I don't think the 'assumption' is much of a leap. I also 'assume' that the sun is going to rise tomorrow morning, and I'm not too worried about "making an 'ass' out of 'u' and 'me'" on that count either (I believe it was you that offered this trite aphorism here once, I apologize if I'm misremembering.)

I see you missed the second sentence of my first post here, Dr. Goodtrips.
Here it is again:

What I'm wondering is if this post is the type of post Chassisman is talking about:

Now what was that you were saying "I see that you didn't bother to supply a different motivation,..."?

Someone- I think it was Zedrow- indicated that it might be nice to read an entire post before responding. I agree, doing that is a very good idea!

And, yes, it was me that offered that "trite aphorism"! And the fact that you apparently missed the second sentence of my first post in this thread is a perfect example of the "trite aphorism"!

Gem

[drgoodtrips]

Originally Posted by gem

I see you missed the second sentence of my first post here, Good Dr.
Here it is again:



Now what was that you were saying "I see that you didn't bother to supply a different motivation,...?

Someone- I think it was Zedrow- indicated that it might be nice to read an entire post before responding. I agree, doing that is a very good idea!

Gem

Yes, I caught that. What I was trying to say delicately and I will now say more bluntly is that I don't buy that 'motivation'. Few people say "I want to take this opportunity to brag and I'm hoping everyone will shower praise on me." It kind of defeats the point, I would imagine. So, instead you "fish for compliments" and then say "well, thank you for reading and enjoying my work - I wasn't expecting this."

Besides, I have noticed a trend with you before in which you seem to say strange or unsubstantiated things, and then cop-out with some sort of nonsense about assumptions. For example, I could see you saying "I turned my stove on to cook some breakfast and then I put my hand down right on top of it and had to go to the hospital." Then, when someone asked how your burn was doing, you would say "Why are you assuming I got my hand burned - I could have had appendicitis!" To borrow from the cliche playbook, you like to have your cake and eat it too (never really understood that one - what's the point of having cake if you're not going to eat it) by copping out if your original story doesn't hold water with who you're talking to .

You can keep selling that 'motivation' for as long as you please, and I won't buy it. Incidentally, I was referring to the post in which you used the 'assumption' crutch - not the original one.

[Captain Trips]

Originally Posted by drgoodtrips

{Shrug} If you want. I see that you didn't bother to supply a different motivation, so I guess my 'assumption' is on par with your actions. I suppose that you could have done that because some government agent broke into your house and forced you to from the business end of an uzi, but I tend to go with Ockham's Razor most of the time. If someone talks glowingly about his own cleverness in a post (and even tells us how much a friend liked it) and then SPAM's it into a thread where it has no relevance, I don't think the 'assumption' is much of a leap. I also 'assume' that the sun is going to rise tomorrow morning, and I'm not too worried about "making an 'ass' out of 'u' and 'me'" on that count either (I believe it was you that offered this trite aphorism here once, I apologize if I'm misremembering.)

I think it would be nice if we didn't have to go through this routine don't you ?

I mean it CAN be funny, this routine, but it just has gotten really old hasn't it ?

[gem]

Originally Posted by drgoodtrips

Yes, I caught that. What I was trying to say delicately and I will now say more bluntly is that I don't buy that 'motivation'. Few people say "I want to take this opportunity to brag and I'm hoping everyone will shower praise on me." It kind of defeats the point, I would imagine. So, instead you "fish for compliments" and then say "well, thank you for reading and enjoying my work - I wasn't expecting this."

Besides, I have noticed a trend with you before in which you seem to say strange or unsubstantiated things, and then cop-out with some sort of nonsense about assumptions. For example, I could see you saying "I turned my stove on to cook some breakfast and then I put my hand down right on top of it and had to go to the hospital." Then, when someone asked how your burn was doing, you would say "Why are you assuming I got my hand burned - I could have had appendicitis!" To borrow from the cliche playbook, you like to have your cake and eat it too (never really understood that one - what's the point of having cake if you're not going to eat it) by copping out if your original story doesn't hold water with who you're talking to .

You can keep selling that 'motivation' for as long as you please, and I won't buy it.

The fact that you choose "not to buy it" doesn't mean that I am wrong in what I say, Dr. All it says is that you refuse to buy it, which is your perogative. Unfortunately you also have the 'right' to be wrong. My apologies for another one of my "trite (and apt) aphorisms".

Gem


Gem

[Zedrow]

Originally Posted by gem

What makes you think I don't read the entire posts, Zedrow? I will admit I generally choose to address particular aspects of other posts, especially if they are long ones. But that doesn't necessarily mean that I'm not reading the entire post.

Gem

Sorry if it came out wrong, I was not implying that you don't read the posts but that, when it happens to me that is how I feel.

What I was referring to is your comment:

What hasn't escaped me is noticing the location of Chassisman- his location is described as the Bible Belt. I also noticed the general flavor of the siglines of those that have posted in this thread thus far that ostensibly support Chassisman's suggestions, and they could not be described as something that favors a "liberal" point of view.

To me this is assuming too much. AFIK (and I could be wrong), Chassis is a Libertarian, so his views overall may not be Liberal or Conservative.

[drgoodtrips]

Originally Posted by gem

The fact that you choose "not to buy it" doesn't mean that I am wrong in what I say, Dr. All it says is that you refuse to buy it, which is your perogative. Unfortunately you also have the 'right' to be wrong. My apologies for another one of my "trite (and apt) aphorisms".

Gem


Gem

{shrug} Okie-dokie.

[gem]

Originally Posted by Zedrow

Sorry if it came out wrong, I was not implying that you don't read the posts but that, when it happens to me that is how I feel.

What I was referring to is your comment:



To me this is assuming too much. AFIK (and I could be wrong), Chassis is a Libertarian, so his views overall may not be Liberal or Conservative.

I will agree that there is some merit to what you're saying, Zedrow. You will notice that in my location I state that I live in "northern Ixtlan". The reason I chose to use that as my location is because I love the book "Journey to Ixtlan", one of several in the Carlos Castanenda series and actually do adhere to many of the principles Castaneda espoused in his works. I do know this- I wouldn't use the term "Bible Belt", even if I lived in that part of the country, if I didn't adhere to the concepts and beliefs implied therein. After all, I live in Los Alamos, NM, but I don't use any words that would imply or give the impression that I support what this town is generally known for in stating my "location"- mostly because I don't adhere to or accept what this town is often regarded as being all about.

Gem

[Zedrow]

Originally Posted by gem

I will agree that there is some merit to what you're saying, Zedrow. You will notice that in my location I state that I live in "northern Ixtlan". The reason I chose to use that as my location is because I love the book "Journey to Ixtlan", one of several in the Carlos Castanenda series and actually do adhere to many of the principles Castaneda espoused in his works. I do know this- I wouldn't use the term "Bible Belt", even if I lived in that part of the country, if I didn't adhere to the concepts and beliefs implied therein. After all, I live in Los Alamos, NM, but I don't use any words that would imply or give the impression that I support what this town is generally known for in stating my "location"- mostly because I don't adhere to or accept what this town is often regarded as being all about.

Gem

Honestly, he's had the same location for a while and all I've assumed (and I shouldn't even do that because it could be a backhanded that he wanted to make) is that he is Christian.

[gem]

Originally Posted by Zedrow

Honestly, he's had the same location for a while and all I've assumed (and I shouldn't even do that because it could be a backhanded that he wanted to make) is that he is Christian.

After seeing his "location" it gave me the same impression as well, for the same reasons that I stated in my last post. Now, why do we frequently choose the siglines that we do? Do we not frequently choose them based on our personal beliefs?
I know I did when I chose mine!

Gem