In the thread Proof of God, Saquist responded to one of my posts using the following language:

" In my estimation your actions on this forum closely resemble the psychotic rationale of a Hitler, Kim Jong II, the Ku Klux clan, Black Panthers, etc. "

I found this objectionable and reported it but, as far as I can ascertain, no action has been taken.

Am I being unduly sensitive or is the moderator not doing his/her job. Surely ,what was said to me constitutes an infraction.

Yeah...those are some harsh things to say about someone...I think he owes you an apology.

The mods live is different countries and the one in charge of that section might be sleeping or at work.
How long ago did you report it?

I'm sorry you feel that way Miles.
Insults are so subjectional. Certainly the person receiving criticism will often feel slighted. Yet the comparative analysis was sincere.

I ponder just why you seek engagement as you know I have a very low opinion of your social skills. I will continue to give you stark critiques of your behavior as long as you continue to force these encounters. I have suggested to you to cease and desist but I can not ignore you forever nor can I force you to withdraw.

Sure you can Saquist. It's called the ignore button.

The mods live is different countries and the one in charge of that section might be sleeping or at work.
How long ago did you report it?

Ah yes, I overlooked that, Thanks, I'm probably too angry and impatient

I'm sorry you feel that way Miles.
Insults are so subjectional. Certainly the person receiving criticism will often feel slighted. Yet the comparative analysis was sincere.

I ponder just why you seek engagement as you know I have a very low opinion of your social skills. I will continue to give you stark critiques of your behavior as long as you continue to force these encounters. I have suggested to you to cease and desist but I can not ignore you forever nor can I force you to withdraw.

It' not a question of criticism; it's a matter of your expressimg yourself using the language of the gutter, the last resort of someone who has nothing better to offer.

It can be a fine line between trying to insult someone, and trying to characterize another's arguments. Although most people would be insulted by the comparison, it does not seem overly obscene.

Sure you can Saquist. It's called the ignore button.

True...but I don't use ignore buttons as a matter of practice. I don't think ignorance is bliss. I prefer to be fully informed of others opinions. The only time I've used the ignore buttom was against a fellow named TWSCOTT. He dispenses a regular stream of useless information and I found scrolling through the thread to ignore him bothersome. In that case the Ignore buttom saved me time.

It' not a question of criticism; it's a matter of your expressimg yourself using the language of the gutter, the last resort of someone who has nothing better to offer.

Excellent! since you didn't have a problem with the criticism and there no use of vulgarity in the post I'm happy to see you've resolved your issues. Unless you have a different meaning by "gutter"....I don't use profanity, never have. If find a vocabulary to be DELIGHTFULLY more creative and expressive.

True...but I don't use ignore buttons as a matter of practice. I don't think ignorance is bliss. I prefer to be fully informed of others opinions. The only time I've used the ignore buttom was against a fellow named TWSCOTT. He dispenses a regular stream of useless information and I found scrolling through the thread to ignore him bothersome. In that case the Ignore buttom saved me time.



Excellent! since you didn't have a problem with the criticism and there no use of vulgarity in the post I'm happy to see you've resolved your issues. Unless you have a different meaning by "gutter"....I don't use profanity, never have. If find a vocabulary to be DELIGHTFULLY more creative and expressive.


Now you are trying to evade the issue, as is your wont. Only someone in the gutter would wantonly accuse another of being like historical psychotics. Ity's not a question of profanity; rather one of the level to which you have sunk.

Spidey has a point. The guy didn't call you Hitler, he was clever about his attack. I know, I get them all the time. :rolleyes:

Spidey has a point. The guy didn't call you Hitler, he was clever about his attack. I know, I get them all the time. :rolleyes:

He likened my behaviour to that of "psychotics". What am I supposed to infer from that ?

I take your point about his cleverness but I fear you are mistaken

Yet the comparative analysis was sincere.
ahh sincerity.
when you call someone a cuntlickingcocksuckingmotherfucker, say it with gumption, say it like you mean it.
bravo

He likened my behaviour to that of "psychotics". What am I supposed to infer from that ? I take your point about his cleverness but I fear you are mistaken

I know exactly what you're saying. I've been on the receiving end for months. He was clever in his attack. If he called you psychotic, that would be a personal attack. By his thinly veiled attack on your behavior, he has not officially broken the rules. The personal attackers on the board have become very clever/deceitful. You can keep reporting them and hope someone does something about it or you can ignore it. The problem is that the personal attackers make it no fun to come here and read anymore. They drop turds in the punchbowl at every opportunity. :(

Now you are trying to evade the issue, as is your wont. Only someone in the gutter would wantonly accuse another of being like historical psychotics. Ity's not a question of profanity; rather one of the level to which you have sunk.

Yes, Yes I'm dodging your "seering" insults and "witty repartee"
Since your own behavior has been less than diplomatic can you really be blameless?

I believe you have behavorial problems Myles.
You still haven't answered why you continue to engage in conversation that you're insulted by.


losing one’s temper [Check]

actively defying requests

refusing to follow rules

deliberately annoying other people [Check]

blaming others for one's own mistakes or misbehavior [Check]

being touchy, easily annoyed or angered, resentful, spiteful, or vindictive and [Check], [Check], [Check], [Check], [Check] and [Check]

Now the initial comparison may have been extreme but your behavior is still highly aberrant. Consider the first comment an extropolation of extended inattention to your problem.

Yes, Yes I'm dodging your "seering" insults and "witty repartee"
Since your own behavior has been less than diplomatic can you really be blameless?

I believe you have behavorial problems Myles.
You still haven't answered why you continue to engage in conversation that you're insulted by.


losing one’s temper [Check]

actively defying requests

refusing to follow rules

deliberately annoying other people [Check]

blaming others for one's own mistakes or misbehavior [Check]

being touchy, easily annoyed or angered, resentful, spiteful, or vindictive and [Check], [Check], [Check], [Check], [Check] and [Check]

Now the initial comparison may have been extreme but your behavior is still highly aberrant. Consider the first comment an extropolation of extended inattention to your problem.

How about backing up your remarks with some facts ?

In the thread Proof of God, Saquist responded to one of my posts using the following language:

" In my estimation your actions on this forum closely resemble the psychotic rationale of a Hitler, Kim Jong II, the Ku Klux clan, Black Panthers, etc. "

I found this objectionable and reported it but, as far as I can ascertain, no action has been taken.

Am I being unduly sensitive or is the moderator not doing his/her job. Surely ,what was said to me constitutes an infraction.

Well admittedly one can only hope you are just an anomaly. You are very opinionated about things which you are almost entirely ignorant on. It is no crime to state ones opinion but your ignorance and insistence on certain positions can be frustrating. I think that just had to be said and let the chips fall where they may.:shrug:

I def. do not enjoy being insulted.

losing one’s temper [Check]

actively defying requests

refusing to follow rules

deliberately annoying other people [Check]

blaming others for one's own mistakes or misbehavior [Check]

being touchy, easily annoyed or angered, resentful, spiteful, or vindictive and [Check], [Check], [Check], [Check], [Check] and [Check]



This list describes most members here, why pick on Myles.

I like being touchy, someone touch me

Well admittedly one can only hope you are just an anomaly. You are very opinionated about things which you are almost entirely ignorant on. It is no crime to state ones opinion but your ignorance and insistence on certain positions can be frustrating. I think that just had to be said and let the chips fall where they may.:shrug:

Some examples please of where I have expressed opinons on matters of which I was ignoramt as opposed to simply disagreeing with you.


I have looked at some of the threads you started and found the following:

As a civilizatioon are we thinking too much ? Some of your statements and the responses you got make interesting.

In another thread you insist that a poll on Christianity was fixed. You were convinced that the moderators were changing the figures. Despite having been told that this does not happen , you continued to insist the poll was rigged

Now that I se where you are coming from, I do not think you make a reliable character witness. Someone referred to you as a Bible-thumper so your reason for criticizing me has more to do with my disagreeing with your religious views than anything I may have said to you. As a Christian you feel it behoves you to side with Saquist.

Don't forget to refer to any of your posts to which I responded with immoderate language !

Some examples please of where I have expressed opinons on matters of which I was ignoramt as opposed to simply disagreeing with you.

That's the problem. Sometimes when you simply just totally disagree with someone, it turns all personal and nasty. Then you get accused of personally attacking them.

I like being touchy, someone touch me
I'll leave that to Robo-Putin™...

...BEEP... ...BOOP... ...BEEP...
I'll put the touch on you all right kiddo...
Next stop for you is GULAG...!
http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/546/svputinnarrowweb300x354mm5.jpg

geees Killjoy what is it with your political insinuations on my part?

there about 20 replies of yours with theme of "oprechniks" "robo-putin" and "gulags"

like what dimension are you in?

In the thread Proof of God, Saquist responded to one of my posts using the following language:

" In my estimation your actions on this forum closely resemble the psychotic rationale of a Hitler, Kim Jong II, the Ku Klux clan, Black Panthers, etc. "

I found this objectionable and reported it but, as far as I can ascertain, no action has been taken.

Am I being unduly sensitive or is the moderator not doing his/her job. Surely ,what was said to me constitutes an infraction.

I received your reported post and found nothing to edit, delete or otherwise moderate. The key words were "in my estimation" and "that's how I see you."

Just because the mods are atheist doesn't mean you get to act like a bully in the forum and we'll take your side when the theists call you on it. Either take it like a man or add Saquist you your ignore list. But until he violates one of the rules, I see nothing to moderate. I didn't even find the post flaming.

This list describes most members here, why pick on Myles.

Indeed, but no my dear. I do not "pick" on anybody. Miles asks for it and I happily oblige him. I'm Christian, not a push over and I have the right to defend myself.

I received your reported post and found nothing to edit, delete or otherwise moderate. The key words were "in my estimation" and "that's how I see you."

Just because the mods are atheist doesn't mean you get to act like a bully in the forum and we'll take your side when the theists call you on it. Either take it like a man or add Saquist you your ignore list. But until he violates one of the rules, I see nothing to moderate. I didn't even find the post flaming.

I would not expect any favours because you are an atheist. I just expected you to be evenhanded which it seems to me you are not. In my estimation you moderate like a demented Nero. What did you think of your rating as a moderator in a recent opinion poll ? It seems to me that you may be trying to redress the balance by telling everyone, here am I ,an atheist, taking the side of a Christian, so I cannot ever be accused of being biased.

So, as you have now explained so clearly that veiled insults are in order, if I read you correctly, I shall not resort to such tactics because I'll back intelligence against low cunning any day. I regard Saquist's veiled insults as a substitute for an intelligent response because in my opinion it is a mark of desperation. In my estimation he has all the attributes of the half-educated who bluster and torture language in a vain attempt to impress, in the absence of anything worthwhile to offer. I have yet to see an argument of his that I regard as remotely logical. In my opinion, and I doubt I am alone in this, he behaves like a frustrated evangelist who cannot get his audience to see "sense"

Indeed, but no my dear. I do not "pick" on anybody. Miles asks for it and I happily oblige him. I'm Christian, not a push over and I have the right to defend myself.

You say that you are a Christian which is something I find difficult to understand.You claim to have a more reliable copy of the NT, particularly with regard to Mathew 1.1 , than the King James' Bible, the Vulgate and the Greek NT, all of which are in agreement. Why are you so reluctant to share the good news with those who lack what, in my opinion, is a unique insight.

I love a good insult.
I'm quite an afficianado of the ancient Australian art of self offense.
I get up in the morning and start with a quick harangue in the mirror.
" You ugly old cunt, you look like the shrivelled scrotum of a three day old dingo in a north wind" etc.
Truly guys, being able to accept a decent insult and to give out a half baked creative one is a massive part of being Australian. if you can't cop a tongue lashing here ( a few English members of this forum will verify this), you may as well shrivel up and die.
Most British folk actually catch on to this very quickly and soon learn to love the exchanges ( up to a point).
Most Americans appear to be so baffled by the language and accent they don't even realise they are being pilloried.

I don't use profanity, never have. If find a vocabulary to be DELIGHTFULLY more creative and expressive.

You pathetic weasel dicked prick!

Skinwalker, please bear with me, this is an insult based thread.

At least let me get a few more in before being all namby-pamby and deleting the posts before they reach their target.

I'll be evenhanded.

I love a good insult.
I'm quite an afficianado of the ancient Australian art of self offense.
I get up in the morning and start with a quick harangue in the mirror.
" You ugly old cunt, you look like the shrivelled scrotum of a three day old dingo in a north wind" etc.
Truly guys, being able to accept a decent insult and to give out a half baked creative one is a massive part of being Australian. if you can't cop a tongue lashing here ( a few English members of this forum will verify this), you may as well shrivel up and die.
Most British folk actually catch on to this very quickly and soon learn to love the exchanges ( up to a point).
Most Americans appear to be so baffled by the language and accent they don't even realise they are being pilloried.

I have come to the conclusion that the only humour Americans, at least on this site.understand is in your face stuff. Subtlety is beyond them ,so it seems necessary to signal one's intentions to avoid being misunderstood. This , of course, makes the whole thing pointless

I have noticed how some people precede or follow a sarcastic remark with lol to ensure that they will not be taken seriously.So what is the point. It's a bit like a stand-up comic coming on stage and telling the audience that he's about to tell them some jokes.

Indeed, but no my dear. I do not "pick" on anybody. Miles asks for it and I happily oblige him. I'm Christian, not a push over and I have the right to defend myself.

When I ask for a source to support your utterances you are never happy to oblige. I wonder why that is. In my opinion your attitude is like that of a preacher who believes the Spirit is speaking through him, and who will consequently expect whatever he says to be believed. Why ? Because he says so. There is nothing to debate.

In my estimation you moderate like a demented Nero.


" In my estimation your actions on this forum closely resemble the psychotic rationale of a Hitler, Kim Jong II, the Ku Klux clan, Black Panthers, etc. "

You are getting up in his league now.

Skinwalker's moderates like.............
Myles' actions resemble the rationale of.......

and then the bad people follow.

I have come to the conclusion that the only humour Americans, at least on this site.understand is in your face stuff. Subtlety is beyond them ,so it seems necessary to signal one's intentions to avoid being misunderstood. This , of course, makes the whole thing pointless


Is it ethically better to condescend and insinuate the exact same judgements of another person? This seems to me where British culture and some parts of American culture split ways. The former has refined forms of nastiness and the latter is blunt and over the top.

The intent is the same: to hurt, shame, make the other seem silly to others...

I think it is ridiculous that Saquist said your actions are like the rationale of Hitler...

I can certainly understand that pissing you off.

But I can't see where it is somehow better to be adept with a fine pen when the intent and the results are the same.

geees Killjoy what is it with your political insinuations on my part?

there about 20 replies of yours with theme of "oprechniks" "robo-putin" and "gulags"

like what dimension are you in?

That of the Great Sodding Bumbershoots of The Mendeleyevium Coast !!!

Al-Bukhaari narrated in al-Saheeh (6116) from Abu Hurayrah (may Allaah be pleased with him) that a man said to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), ?Advise me.? He said: ?Do not get angry.? The man repeated his request several times, and he said, ?Do not get angry.? The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)
It was reported in Saheeh al-Bukhaari (6031) that Anas ibn Maalik (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was not a person who insulted people or used obscene language, and he did not curse people. If he wanted to rebuke anyone, he would say, ?What is wrong with him? ? may his forehead be rubbed with dust.?
pls go to thereligion thread and read who is mohamed and the manners he teaches.

PLS DO NOT SAY AGAIN I AM OFFTOPIC

I would not expect any favours because you are an atheist. I just expected you to be evenhanded which it seems to me you are not. In my estimation you moderate like a demented Nero. What did you think of your rating as a moderator in a recent opinion poll ? It seems to me that you may be trying to redress the balance by telling everyone, here am I ,an atheist, taking the side of a Christian, so I cannot ever be accused of being biased.

So, as you have now explained so clearly that veiled insults are in order, if I read you correctly, I shall not resort to such tactics because I'll back intelligence against low cunning any day. I regard Saquist's veiled insults as a substitute for an intelligent response because in my opinion it is a mark of desperation. In my estimation he has all the attributes of the half-educated who bluster and torture language in a vain attempt to impress, in the absence of anything worthwhile to offer. I have yet to see an argument of his that I regard as remotely logical. In my opinion, and I doubt I am alone in this, he behaves like a frustrated evangelist who cannot get his audience to see "sense"

The bolded statements, in light of the statement in red, make you out to be a liar.

You're like others that are fine with the moderation as long as it favors you. When it doesn't, you find fault with it.

Is it ethically better to condescend and insinuate the exact same judgements of another person? This seems to me where British culture and some parts of American culture split ways. The former has refined forms of nastiness and the latter is blunt and over the top.

The intent is the same: to hurt, shame, make the other seem silly to others...

I think it is ridiculous that Saquist said your actions are like the rationale of Hitler...

I can certainly understand that pissing you off.

But I can't see where it is somehow better to be adept with a fine pen when the intent and the results are the same.


I hear what you say and have no quarrel with you because it is clear that we have different forms of humour. This had begun to dawn on me after reading some posts which were accompanied by lol as a way of signalling that a remark was not to be taken seriously.

As an Irishman, I tell Irish jokes which make us look stupid, This is not done to hurt anyone; it's a way of killing off stupid stereotypes. In other words one exaggerates the stereotype till it becomes absurd. No explanation is necessary, as my intention is understood.

Here in the UK the British spend a lot of time laughing at certain aspects of their society. Again, no one is hurt, because no malice is intended. Jews have a very finely honed sense of humour and tell jokes about jews. Let me give you an example of a joke which a jewish acquaintance told me recently/


Three jews were walking past a Catholic church which had a large sign which said " Convert Today and Be Rewarded with a Gift of £1,000 ." One of the three decides to give it a go. He enters the church and emerges half an hour later with a wide grin on his face. What was it like his mates ask.
"Well, says he, I had to say a couple of prayers after a priest had poured wate of my head and then he gave me this booklet to take home and study,

One of his mates asks " did you get the £ 1.000 to which he replied:

Don't you jews ever think of anything but money"

Now either you find that funny or not; humour cannot be explained but I assure you there's no malice involved.

I accept what you say about my encounter with Saquist and Skin but I was not going to take my being likened to a psychotic, lying down. The insult was intended but dressed up in such a way that it was supposed not to be meant as an insult. If I say to you that in my estimation you are behaving like a psychotic what inference can you make other than I am calling you one. To behave like a psychotic is tantamount to being one.

I hope what I have said goes some way to explaining what we regard as humour. There are of course, some idiotic jokes which overstep the mark, especially those made by racist rednecks.But they are generally stamped on.

Maybe Oscar Wilde put his finger on it when he spoke of " two nations divided by a common language"

The bolded statements, in light of the statement in red, make you out to be a liar.

You're like others that are fine with the moderation as long as it favors you. When it doesn't, you find fault with it.



Oh dear, in my estimation you are whining like an old applewoman. Be a man and take it on the chin, or don't you follow your own advice.

I am glad to see I'm not alone, not that I was in any doubt, having read the results of the poll on moderators. Fancy, all those people against you. What on earth can they be up to. On, the other hand , all the other moderators were regarded as reasonable. So, in my humble opinion, you are in a class of your own and not to be taken too seriously.

Don't call me a liar. I am only a copycat following your example. I shall not address others as I have you

When I ask for a source to support your utterances you are never happy to oblige.

Correct. I sense no obligation to a person who slanders.

I wonder why that is.

"I tried to tell you but you would not listen"~ You've betrayed truth and honor at every chance.

There is nothing to debate.
Now perhaps you understand....but I doubt it.

Don't call me a liar. I am only a copycat following your example. I shall not address others as I have you

Cicumstantial hypocrisy.

Correct. I sense no obligation to a person who slanders.



"I tried to tell you but you would not listen"~ You've betrayed truth and honor at every chance.


Now perhaps you understand....but I doubt it.

I think you are taking a deliberately narrow view. You are creating the impression that I am the only one to whom you will not reveal your sources. But that is not so. There were others on that thread who pressed you to cite your source for the misquotation of Matthew 1.1 but you refused them also. So who is betraying the truth and what truth are you referring to ?

If you dispute what I am saying, I will gladly cite the posts where you made claims for which you were unwillinglg or unable to supply evidence. I can prove that you refused to answer a straightforward question time and again,

Now you are centre stage why not tell us which version of the Bible you use that conflicts with the King James' version, the Latin version and the Greek version. You now have the chance to call me out, so why not do so ? If you refuse yet again, others may draw the wrong conclusion about your regard for truth. Also, why not give some thought to all those Christians who lack your priveliged insight.

Your alternative is to indulge in some more personal abuse, but I believe that such tactics cast doubts on your credibility. Put up or shut up.

Oh dear, in my estimation you are whining like an old applewoman. Be a man and take it on the chin, or don't you follow your own advice.

I am glad to see I'm not alone, not that I was in any doubt, having read the results of the poll on moderators. Fancy, all those people against you. What on earth can they be up to. On, the other hand , all the other moderators were regarded as reasonable. So, in my humble opinion, you are in a class of your own and not to be taken too seriously.

Don't call me a liar. I am only a copycat following your example. I shall not address others as I have you

Personally, I don't mind the insults to me. I do, however, find that you're own poor behavior here at Sciforums is detrimental to the forum in general. I pointed out your own self-contradictory nature above (they call such behavior "lying" where I live -perhaps they call it something different where you are).

You can either participate in a functional and appropriate manner in the forum or not. Your choice. This is, however, a formal warning and if I should have to warn you again I'll give you a temp ban. Other members would like to go on participating in the forum without being harassed by trolling behavior like yours.

Personally, I don't mind the insults to me. I do, however, find that you're own poor behavior here at Sciforums is detrimental to the forum in general. I pointed out your own self-contradictory nature above (they call such behavior "lying" where I live -perhaps they call it something different where you are).

You can either participate in a functional and appropriate manner in the forum or not. Your choice. This is, however, a formal warning and if I should have to warn you again I'll give you a temp ban. Other members would like to go on participating in the forum without being harassed by trolling behavior like yours.

I honestly do not know what you mean by trolling in relation to what I said. I was making the point that I was not alone in finding Saquist intractable. He has behaved in the same way towards others, I offeredto support my contention by referring to the posts in question.In simple terms, I was defending myself from his attack.

Perhaps you could explain in what manner I could have defended myself that you would find acceptable.; or have I no right to defend myself. Read his ad hominen post and my response and explain why I was trolling and he wasn't.

I get the impression that you would like to ban me but doubtless you see yourself as a fair moderator.

While I don't always agree with the Moderator he has elminated perjorative comments that I have made in response to you aswell as your own. I've never disagreed with this cleaning processes.

One of the clues Miles, is that in every (yes, every) situation you instigated the confrontation. Yours was not defense, you were and still are the agressor. You come out of the blue and engage, engage, engage and engage. I've taken numerous opportunities to disengage from your attacks to turn and find you replying with slanderous intent in another thread.

You then began reporting my post as if you were the victim. Our post were deleted as a result.

I don't know how many times I've tried ignoring you but i've have lost count and the will to continue ignoring you. So I face you , because it takes less energy, and I give you nothing for your efforts. The positive return is that I gain practice in dealing with a aberrant character set in a more efficient manner in a public setting. There is also my continued study of your behvior that I find fascinating, intriguing...you may be the first person I've engaged with such a diminutive amount of self control.

saquist is like totally awesome in clarity and focus
that said, the tard will not withstand my scrutiny

ja
there can only be one

/puffed up peacockery

oh
myles is the pits

saquist is like totally awesome in clarity and focus
that said, the tard will not withstand my scrutiny

ja
there can only be one

/puffed up peacockery

oh
myles is the pits

Thank you
your rapier thrust
Both wounded
Just wait
Wheel turn
Oder nicht ?

While I don't always agree with the Moderator he has elminated perjorative comments that I have made in response to you aswell as your own. I've never disagreed with this cleaning processes.

One of the clues Miles, is that in every (yes, every) situation you instigated the confrontation. Yours was not defense, you were and still are the agressor. You come out of the blue and engage, engage, engage and engage. I've taken numerous opportunities to disengage from your attacks to turn and find you replying with slanderous intent in another thread.

You then began reporting my post as if you were the victim. Our post were deleted as a result.

I don't know how many times I've tried ignoring you but i've have lost count and the will to continue ignoring you. So I face you , because it takes less energy, and I give you nothing for your efforts. The positive return is that I gain practice in dealing with a aberrant character set in a more efficient manner in a public setting. There is also my continued study of your behvior that I find fascinating, intriguing...you may be the first person I've engaged with such a diminutive amount of self control.


Ok , you have my permission to carry on in your own inimitable manner.Just don't' forget to ad hom anyone who disagrees with you. It's your most awesome weapon. Bye for now. I shall ignore you from now on but continue to read your posts with interest.

saquist is like totally awesome in clarity and focus
that said, the tard will not withstand my scrutiny

ja
there can only be one

/puffed up peacockery

oh
myles is the pits

Vielleicht haette es dir mehr Spass gemacht wenn ich gesagt haette " vielen Dank fuer Obst und Gemuese. Was meinste ?

perhaps
say it and find out

Myles...I say we should do something with this Gustav

Gustav? Who is this Gustav that you speak of?

Gustav? Who is this Gustav that you speak of?

oh come on...ignoring people ain't nice

perhaps
say it and find out

Vielen Dank fuer Obst and Gemuese. Was meinst du jetzt ?

Myles...I say we should do something with this Gustav

I hope you have nothing nasty in mind

Gustav? Who is this Gustav that you speak of?

Gustav
Is he who speaks in riddles
work out
meaning profound
remarks
not meant for all
Verstanden ?

Gustav
Is he who speaks in riddles
work out
meaning profound
remarks
not meant for all
Verstanden ?

See I like riddle myself, but when someone curses in every sentence, it take away the wish to solve the riddle.

See I like riddle myself, but when someone curses in every sentence, it take away the wish to solve the riddle.

Harden the fuck up draq.

In the thread Proof of God, Saquist responded to one of my posts using the following language:

" In my estimation your actions on this forum closely resemble the psychotic rationale of a Hitler, Kim Jong II, the Ku Klux clan, Black Panthers, etc. "

I found this objectionable and reported it but, as far as I can ascertain, no action has been taken.

Am I being unduly sensitive or is the moderator not doing his/her job. Surely ,what was said to me constitutes an infraction.

IMO, Being too sensitive chief.
At least he was clever about it, Here (I would) smile and say..well..Lets see shall we ?

If he went "Why you evil little jerkoff muslim loving unamerican/country dumbass(as weird as that sounds)" that would be an insult.

But that's easy to ignore. Guess he got your attention.

Harden the fuck up draq.

ok you curse, but you don't speak in riddles. It does not annoy me as much. :p You just say it right up.

Harden the fuck up draq.

LOL!

I need to say that more often..to others..

LOL!

I need to say that more often..to others..

please don't :(

Harden the fuq up?

Harden the fuq up?

just don't curse, no hinting either.

Say it nicely. Dear draqon my fellow member, please relax my friend. :rolleyes:

I hear what you say and have no quarrel with you because it is clear that we have different forms of humour. This had begun to dawn on me after reading some posts which were accompanied by lol as a way of signalling that a remark was not to be taken seriously.

As an Irishman, I tell Irish jokes which make us look stupid, This is not done to hurt anyone; it's a way of killing off stupid stereotypes. In other words one exaggerates the stereotype till it becomes absurd. No explanation is necessary, as my intention is understood.

Here in the UK the British spend a lot of time laughing at certain aspects of their society. Again, no one is hurt, because no malice is intended. Jews have a very finely honed sense of humour and tell jokes about jews. Let me give you an example of a joke which a jewish acquaintance told me recently/


Three jews were walking past a Catholic church which had a large sign which said " Convert Today and Be Rewarded with a Gift of £1,000 ." One of the three decides to give it a go. He enters the church and emerges half an hour later with a wide grin on his face. What was it like his mates ask.
"Well, says he, I had to say a couple of prayers after a priest had poured wate of my head and then he gave me this booklet to take home and study,

One of his mates asks " did you get the £ 1.000 to which he replied:

Don't you jews ever think of anything but money"

Now either you find that funny or not; humour cannot be explained but I assure you there's no malice involved.

I accept what you say about my encounter with Saquist and Skin but I was not going to take my being likened to a psychotic, lying down. The insult was intended but dressed up in such a way that it was supposed not to be meant as an insult. If I say to you that in my estimation you are behaving like a psychotic what inference can you make other than I am calling you one. To behave like a psychotic is tantamount to being one.

I hope what I have said goes some way to explaining what we regard as humour. There are of course, some idiotic jokes which overstep the mark, especially those made by racist rednecks.But they are generally stamped on.

Maybe Oscar Wilde put his finger on it when he spoke of " two nations divided by a common language"
Sounds like we are on the same page.
Ah., Irish. I have to say Myles your humor seems much more English to me. I'm half Irish, half English - all American? - and your humor feels much more like the English side of the family. Though, I must admit, the Irish side of my family is on the shy side, much self-deprecating humor, and humor built up on a wry grasp of human suffering - I can't really know how typical the Irish side of my family is in their humor. .

And I should apolagize for having responded only to you. Let me turn my attentions to Saquist.

please don't :(

Ok, I'll check to see whether you're within earshot..

A lot of people in my school have the potential but are laid over by triviliaties.. .

I'm sorry you feel that way Miles.
Insults are so subjectional. Certainly the person receiving criticism will often feel slighted. Yet the comparative analysis was sincere.



" In my estimation your actions on this forum closely resemble the psychotic rationale of a Hitler, Kim Jong II, the Ku Klux clan, Black Panthers, etc. "

Could you explain to me how his actions here are like the psychotic rationale of Hitler?

Saquist, you're so fucking boring you couldn't entertain a doubt.
You're as ugly as a hatfull of arseholes with prickly heat.
Saquist take a long hard look at yourself sunshine, you deluded trumped up lily livered fuck-knuckle, you weeping dag on a festered ewes coight.
Sort yourself out, you know you want to.
Give yourself a smoked salmon enema.
Bugger off and leave your pathetic sense of urban trash sensibilities at the door.
Go-oorrn Bugger awf!

Myles you self deprecating defecating decaffineated decoy.

Myles you self deprecating defecating decaffineated decoy.

Damn your annoying alliteration!.
:p

Challenger...FUCK OFF!

Challenger...FUCK OFF!

Bin there, done that..too lonely.. sorry.

Myles you self deprecating defecating decaffineated decoy.

Bejaysus, sure isn't it yourself that has the gift of the gab or . to put it another way. I must concur that your mode of self-expression has all the characteristics associated with one who has displays an independent and unequivocal grasp of the totality of what is real in the realm of spirit as opposed to an existential level of mind rooted entirely in the materialistic zeitgeist one has come to associate with those who are no longer favoured by our Heavenly Father, His Son and His Spirit.

You are among the elect to whom the knowledge is vouchsafed that in celestial mathematics 1/3 = 1.

Damn your annoying alliteration!.
:p

Alliteration ? do you mean Illeteration ?

???

???

this thread is for people to express how they feel about insults and insulting each other...want to try? or maybe stop yourself from acting so

you know when people insult me i just say to myself:

i am such a nice person
if anyone has a
problem with me
its they're problem,

and when people insult me I remind myself why I am here alive in the first place and that as a buddhist I must halt hate within me and not act in evil way towards anyone. Problem is, I still get angry sometimes...like I did at Gustav...but I must halt this and not act so selfishly.

and when people insult me I remind myself why I am here alive in the first place and that as a buddhist I must halt hate within me and not act in evil way towards anyone. Problem is, I still get angry sometimes...like I did at Gustav...but I must halt this and not act so selfishly.


everyone gets angry from time to time, its just human nature,

"he who makes a beast of himself
get rid of the pain of being a man"

everyone gets angry from time to time, its just human nature,

"he who makes a beast of himself
get rid of the pain of being a man"

well I am trying to get away from that aspect of human nature

this thread is for people to express how they feel about insults and insulting each other...want to try? or maybe stop yourself from acting so

What are you saying ??? :)

What are you saying ??? :)

I am saying from here on, on this thread you have 2 choices:

1) Act and insult

2) Act and not insult

-----

If you choose choice #1 than...don't choose it

If you choose choice #2 than...make sure other people choose it as well

http://frecklescassie.files.wordpress.com/2007/06/bored-cat.jpg

I try not to insult, so long as others pay me the same respect :)

you know when people insult me i just say to myself:

i am such a nice person
if anyone has a
problem with me
its they're problem,

I say that as well but only when I am looking at myself in a shaving mirror. It sets me up for the day. I top myself up at lunchtime with an inspirational self-help book called " My Dog Taught Me to Pray"

???

Figure it out

Could you explain to me how his actions here are like the psychotic rationale of Hitler?

Oh yes...I'd actually would love to share what I've gathered so far through analysis. However I'm certain it would only insite negative reaction. The time is due for my participation and indulgence on this particular thread to come to an end.

Saquist, you're so fucking boring you couldn't entertain a doubt.
You're as ugly as a hatfull of arseholes with prickly heat.
Saquist take a long hard look at yourself sunshine, you deluded trumped up lily livered fuck-knuckle, you weeping dag on a festered ewes coight.
Sort yourself out, you know you want to.
Give yourself a smoked salmon enema.
Bugger off and leave your pathetic sense of urban trash sensibilities at the door.
Go-oorrn Bugger awf!

The use of the term..."coight" was well placed and smoked salmon enema was adroit and unexpected... but the over all insult lacked impact and resonance...Frankly it was a bit jujune, likely due to length. I'd rate it 8.2 for good word usage.

Oh yes...I'd actually would love to share what I've gathered so far through analysis. However I'm certain it would only insite negative reaction.

you get a free pass
it's only.... who?
please indulge with analysis

/waiting

you type funny
/really do

In the thread Proof of God,...
...
...
Am I being unduly sensitive...

Yep.

Myles, this is an example of ad-hom:

Saquist, ...
You're as ugly as a hatfull of arseholes... you deluded trumped up lily livered fuck-knuckle. Give yourself a smoked salmon enema.

Myles, this is an example of ad-hom:

Not quite.An ad hominen argument is one in which someone avoids the issue by attacking the character of another. It does not need to be an insult veiled or otherwise, although that is what it normall amounts to. If. during the course of a debate, you ask me to offer evidence to support a point with which you dont agree and I might reply

That you are too stupid to undertand what I have just told you, or

That in my estimation you would not understand my response.

Both are ad hominen arguments because I have avoided my obligation to provide evidence by drawing attention to a putative flaw in your character. By using such tactics I lose the argument, You don't have to respond.

You are talking about the difference between one type of insult and another, i.e., A direct attack or a veiled insult.

An ad hominen argumet not based on an insult would be if you made an adverse comment on some aspect of the UK and I responded by suggesting that you have only lived here for a couple of years and you will know better when you have lived here a bit longer, I would not be addressing the issue. If I could refute your argument by providing evidence to show you were mistaken, I would not need to use an as hom.

Ad hom isn't necessarily about avoidance. It can just as easily be about derailment, devalument, and / or polarization. The example I provided is specifically ad hominem abusive... an outright attack to derail, devalue, polarize opinion, or (as you stated) avoid. The one thing to note about ad hom of any form is that it demonstrates aggression. While asserting occasional agression in a debate might be unavoidable, a persistent version of it tends to be problematic and perceived as intentional.

From reading the thread referenced in the OP, you were pretty consistently aggressive and Saquist pointed that out. That his statement caused you so much pain as to create this thread coupled with the constant aggression in the other thread is very suggestive of a one-way biased oversensitivity.

Ad hom isn't necessarily about avoidance. It can just as easily be about derailment, devalument, and / or polarization. The example I provided is specifically ad hominem abusive... an outright attack to derail, devalue, polarize opinion, or (as you stated) avoid. The one thing to note about ad hom of any form is that it demonstrates aggression. While asserting occasional agression in a debate might be unavoidable, a persistent version of it tends to be problematic and perceived as intentional.

From reading the thread referenced in the OP, you were pretty consistently aggressive and Saquist pointed that out. That his statement caused you so much pain as to create this thread coupled with the constant aggression in the other thread is very suggestive of a one-way biased oversensitivity.

I'm not sure where we differ on this. An ad hominen ,as you know, means "to the man". Whatever form it takes it is an attempt to avoid answering a question. It doesn't matter what other names you may give it. The intent is always the same.

Tempers can flare during a debate such that insults may be traded. That is down to human nature but the debate gets back on track therafter. But if one of the interrlocutors continues to use ad homs, he will lose the day because it becomes clear that he has nothing worthwhile to offer. I think we are saying essentially the same thing.

As to my attitude, it would better be described as irascibility born of frustration for reasons I have already given and which I have no inclintion to repeat because it would serve no useful purpose.

Oh yes...I'd actually would love to share what I've gathered so far through analysis. However I'm certain it would only insite negative reaction. The time is due for my participation and indulgence on this particular thread to come to an end.

Bad timing I would say.
I think it is a fairly simple, fair question. The statement of yours I quoted earlier was awkward since you equate Myles' actions as being like the rationale of Hitler, as one example. Since Myle' actions here are all verbal acts, one would think his rationale would be like Hitler's rationale. But whatever it is you actually meant here you drew a strong connection between Myle's and Hitler - and Hitler's rationale led to the deaths of millions, and much as Myles can be very irritating at times, I haven't seen him write anything that will lead to the deaths of millions.

It certainly seems like the kind of statements that should be backed up in any case. If you just meant piss him off, well that's one kind of action on your part. But if you really see a connection between Myles and Hitler it seems like some incited negative reactions would be a small price to pay for nipping the next Holocaust in the bud.

I also think the Black Panthers is a rather silly inclusion on that list, but that is another issue.