Discussion in 'Site Feedback' started by Seattle, Jul 18, 2019.
See how this works...
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
I do you a favour, you do me a favour. All good, then. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
My apologies....I actually thought that "spitting the dummy"was a reasonably well used phrase....And while there's nothing wrong in being a pipe fitter, I was a Fitter/Machinist/Welder that has done pretty well in life and really want for nothing [other then a continued long and fruitful life] ...you? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
That's what I'm here for. They call me the good Samaritan in some parts.
I'm good as well. I've said nothing about your wealth in any of my posts.
Never heard of it.
But then again, you're so far away, it takes a while for stuff to get here from where you are. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Terrific!!! All the best then!! You just seem to get so confused about this pipe fitter business, or do you have something else troubling you?
Gee's what's up with you bloody Northern Hemisphere people!
How about phrases such as "fair dinkum"? or "taking your bat home"? or an "Ankle biter"? or a "Billabong?"
I know a boat named 'Fair Dinkum'.
Never heard of 'taking your bat home'.
'Ankle biter' is a toddler.
'Billabong' is a generic word that is put into any context at all to denote an Australian speaker - like 'Eh' denotes a Canadian speaker, or 'Fuck yeah!' denotes an American.
You're a rather dramatic dude aren't you? I'm not troubled, I'm glad you have a 2 story house and whatever else you've shared with us.
I'm not confused about Pipefitters. I think I'm talking to a confused Pipefitter much of the time but that's fair dinkum as well.
You think what you like,Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!your thinking has already been shown to be inappropriate and driven by other emotions that are best controlled.
Again take it easy, OK?
Are all pipefitters this repetitive? I'll take it easy, OK?
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Whatever floats your boat...I'll bow out now, as I have the footy to watch, plus of course this thread is about your whinging and whining and general dummy spitting, when called out with regards to your nonsense. Best of luck with that. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Cool. I'm sure you have other posts to report so I won't keep you.
Yep, that means it's totaly and absolutely true...
Similar to "dummy spitting" referring to your kids playing cricket and the person who is batting get's out and being the owner of the cricket bat, walks off in a huff and takes his bat home.
a Lake or pond and an Aboriginal word.
Please, James, no. Your "humorous ironic slant" is very often projection. Here, let me show you an example from not so long ago:
In this example, you simply skipped over what someone wrote in order to respond to a straw man.
This is what you responded to:
• Given your tendency to forget your own words and actions, I admit it wouldn't be surprising if you said you cannot recall what I'm reminding. But it's also true you used, in the spilled dispute, the word "hatred", and, yes, we get its colloquial meaning as well as the darker suggestion; maybe it's time you reconsidered your relationship to the hatred itself: "This in spite of my intense hatred of the lot of them (see what I did there?). Funny that." (#3581593/566↗)
Yes, let's highlight that: "yes, we get its colloquial meaning as well as the darker suggestion".
Let me try a joke for you, James: I know Australians don't do reading comprehension well, but there's another example. Now, as an Aussie joke, should I try the sample of two? Or the sample of you? Let's face it, this isn't really about Americans or Australians; it's about you.
Your sense of humor is what it is, James, but what you're overlooking is the degree to which it reflects your prejudice, priorities, and perspective. That is to say, yeah, we get your joke, but what it describes and exploits also echoes in your behvior. What you did in your response to me was skip over what I wrote, that, "we get its colloquial meaning as well as the darker suggestion"; more particularly, the part that, "we get its colloquial meaning". And a pretentious straw man performance for the audience is what we got in return.
Here's an interesting thing about knowing you, better, James: It's actually kind of hard. I've known you for seventeen years, and maybe offscreen you're someone entirely different, but James R, the Sciforums member and Adminsitrator, is not really someone I would want to know; he's often duplicitous and manipulative and petty, to the point clownish self-defeat. And he drags everyone else through it with him, apparently because he can. Last month, you said↗, "I am quite happy for my honesty to be judged by readers based on my record", but if we're honest, James, the analysis would hurt your feelings, and you know it.
(Honestly, at eight posts into it, I started wondering how I was going to ever come back 'round to what ought to be a simple point, but between the short form confusing you, the long form confusing you, the colloquial confusing you, and something more formal confusing you, as well as the growing realization, as more and more time passed, that you really were just out for sport, well, yeah, they're just sitting there.)
And part of it really is that you're way too delicate. I mean, sure, I'm fine with the end of dumbassed Buckwheat tropes, and all that, but there is an aspect of it that goes, "Really? Okay, then." The bit about not being an American, though—and, let me be clear, I'm fine with that point, too, in and of itself—cracked me up because a handful of significant policy disputes we've had over the years included you telling me about Americans, and being (ahem!) kind of wrong, but, hey, at least you found some sort of satisfaction in those moments. Maybe.
To a certain degree, a problem this community faces—or, perhaps not, if numbers really worked out such that people apparently want it this way—is that enough front with a "humorous ironic slant", and tend to "read everything as if it is all serious business", that anyone thinking themselves at all sincere is best advised to presume everyone else somehow insincere. It's actually kind of problematic for those who are sincere, and, meanwhile, we're all aware Seattle could easily retort by saying ... well, right, but, again, it's not really about Australians or Americans, something, something, sample of you.
(One of the interesting things about the idea of eight posts and counting, is even that much was written fully knowing you don't take what I say seriously. How seriously will you take this post, given that my long posts are often laced with darkly humorous irony that some tend to miss for reading everything as if it is all serious business, so it never surprises me when you're huffing after the wrong end of your scarecrow?)
—my problem isn't that you're giving Seattle shit, just like it isn't that you've given a couple others a little roughing up of late, either. It's just the way you're doing it. And I'm trying to be sympathetic about that point, James. Look: He's simply not sincere. One of the tragedies of how we fail to get along is that there are some jokes I just can't share with the guy who clearly doesn't understand my sense of humor, or some approximate such. But if there is a next-gen version of an old joke about particular superstition, Seattle's not actually it, but, rather, a fascinatingly self-demonstrative variation on the theme. But it really is hilarious, to me, and would be to the twelve psychologists, nine sociologists, and two historians who accidentally understood it.
Compared to everything else I might yell at you about over time, Seattle's insincerity, quite honestly, is best left to itself. Consider it this way: If he said that to someone in the pub, and the other guy smacked him squar', we would, as we hauled the two apart, be asking our friend Seattle why the hell he went and said that, because, well, ¡Duh!
Ask yourself: Do you really believe he can't figure that out? Okay, okay, okay; so, cut him some random, contrived, not even necessarily enumerated, benefit of the doubt. What is it? And, sure, I said not necessarily enumerated, so just think of it for yourself; it's probably pretty silly. I just went looking for another, more severe example of problematic cluelessness, and, yeah, it was two episodes; comparatively, that other member is even less believable in the sense of not understanding why people are looking at him askew and saying, "Uh, dude ...."
Still, I mean, have at Seattle, if you want, but—
—c'mon, James, don't just walk into it like that. In the first place, you left yourself for hoisting by your own petard; to the other, though, and perhaps a bit more subtly, the question of knowing you better is complicated by your efforts to conceal and protect yourself, and that behavior, while it has its own reasons, over time has not only stands out as at least a little strange, but also affects what goes on around you.
Here's a contrast that will help us bring it 'round: An old scrap of detail in memory has to do with the caution that comes with knowing what it's like to have a cyberstalker causing real-world results, and in that context, I think of our most recent run of dispute and wonder if you could please stop acting like the actual problem is something else. It's a weird sentiment that runs, "Could you please fail to ...?" When it spilled into public view in January, what stood out was not your move to that existing thread, but that you missed the point of reference to that thread, which in turn you cited as your reason for carrying over.
It's part of a pattern, like the other recent joke about Americans; you're skipping past what people say in order to answer a fallacy of your own construction, in order to fit a neat talking point that does not necessarily otherwise apply. And that's the thing; the sincerity of our neighbor's insincerity is what it is.
But it's also a neat ribbon to tie a package: Seattle operates so inside the confines of comfort you have insisted on, over the years, that he has no external incentive to do any better. So if I remind that you need it here even if it's full of shite, the point isn't to shred you for that, but, rather, to remind that it is futile to you individually, and generally unhelpful for the community, to take certain people seriously. The infraction? Well, right, duh. Your assessment, that he did the wrong thing and somebody called him out on it, is correct. Taking seriously his assessment of your sense of humor? Okay, if you want. But that sniffy, self-righteous shovel job just does not, on this, or, really, any occasion, help you. To wit, the important point: Do you really believe he does not understand the infraction? His assessment of your humor? How often is he right, or even sincere, about anything?
How often is he (Seattle) wrong about anything? How often are the most mundane things "punished" while the continual nonsense goes on?
We have one (often hysterical) staff member who seems to be on a different planet than the rest of the forum and even, it seems, moderating group.
We have Tiassa the continually aggrieved social commentator. Whose tortured style of writing would cause William Buckley to call it embarrassingly affected.
Tiassa, the one who knows who is insincere (everyone but him) and who is the most humorless of them all.
When we have a site nominally about science that is populated by those who have never read a science textbook of any kind and the biggest concern is Seattle and his sincerity, something is wrong.
I'm sure drama has its place and its place is with Tiassa (no argument there) but let's be clear that's all that it is.
"... we have a site nominally about science that is populated by those who have never read a science textbook of any kind and the biggest concern is Seattle and his sincerity..."
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Who really gives a fuck? I mean there are other forums, some better, some worse, some with less to no tolerance for the screwballs that sometimes infest science forums, some that welcome them with open arms as it adds quantity over quality. I chose to participate here [despite its shortcomings] because you blokes/sheilas really need me and my insightful contributions.[said with plenty of sincerity and thoughtfullness Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!]
In actual fact, the problem with this site, [along with the usual screwballs] is that we have too many self gratutuitous members, [and mod] with their heads up their arse, that see themselves as the be all and end all of discussions. This has been highlighted for me after some time on another forum where I still participate.
are the sane or insane managing the asylum. Sancho wants to know.
Separate names with a comma.