windsofchange

Yes, I guess anything over one syllable looks pretty impressive, depending on what you're used to.

[ July 01, 2002: Message edited by: A Theist Gal ]</p>

MadKally

[ July 01, 2002: Message edited by: sockpuppet ]</p>

Mad Kally

You're one of those sweet, kind xians, just like my mom!

windsofchange

Well, if you call your mom the same name you called me earlier in this thread, can't say as I blame her.

HelenM

Me too!

No wait - I take that back...

Mad Kally

What did I call you?

Marduk

grrrrmeowwww!! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
cat fight cat fight!!!
(pant pant pant)

Arrowman

Sigh. Nothing good can come of this, except perhaps that Arrowman and Gurdur will achieve immortality in the II Hall Of Fame Archive Of Great Tiffs. Still, it is an interesting challenge, continuing my defence...

On My Withdrawal From the "Turkey Baster" Thread"

I have provided a detailed explanation of my reasons for withdrawing from that thread, including a mea culpa for not posting to that effect.

Instead of acknowledging that, you extend the accusation by claiming that I used your 'attitude' as an excuse for avoiding further discussion.
The basis for this? A smart crack in my latest post:
in which it should be clear that my point was that with the benefit of hindsight, I wonder whether it would have made any difference to the current discussion, even if I had got around to making the "apology and graceful withdrawal" post.

Lesson for young debaters: Always resist the temptation to introduce such smart asides, lest you give your opponent the opportunity to misrepresent you..

On "Condoning Certain Behaviours"

I asked for "chapter and verse" based on the last part of Gurdur's words here (my emphasis):
- and I have since disputed the "chapter and verse" that Gurdur provided, on the grounds that it did not support an allegation that I "condoned" certain behaviour.

Gurdur now points out that he was providing evidence of the fact that I had raised the subject.

- OK; I agree that I raised the subject when I made my observation about the "tendency to tolerate inappropriate behaviour from people with whom you agree". I misunderstood your intent, based on the latter part of your words as quoted above. No problem; of course I raised the subject. That is not controversial.

I thought we were talking about an assertion that I was guilty of, as Gurdur expressed it later:
This is a very specific assertion you have made on several occasions; you have yet to substantiate it except for (my emphasis):
Sigh. Having clarified that your quotation of me was evidence that I had raised the subject and was not intended to be evidence of my condoning the behaviours (which I accept), you now (in the bolded part above) use my words again to support the assertion that I "condone rudeness when it comes from someone I agree with".

The only other basis for this assertion might be that I have not "equally condemned" others (with whom I agree on a given subject) and you (with whom who I have disagreed).

On the Turkey Baster thread, I made one comment in which I suggested that both you and Cipher44 should calm it down. No inequality of treatment there. On this thread I have, among other things, disputed your assertion that certain behaviour was inappropriate and then gone on to criticise the way you have expressed yourself in this thread. The former position was not based on the fact that I agreed with the people in question, but on more objective arguments (nature of internet, heat-kitchen etc). The latter position was, I think, quite legitimate (and well intentioned, on my part) given the direction your posts have taken.

Whatever small chinks you might be able to find in that argument (I am sure you'll be able to find some words, somewhere, where I have slipped up) it hardly justifies the blanket and serious accusation that I have been selectively critical of certain behaviours, based on whether I agree with the person in question.

And finally

You know what? I didn't "demand that you fully justify your stance while not taking the trouble to justify mine". I expressed my opinion (including some assertions about the way you had responded to others) and you responded with two posts which took up 5 A4 pages when I printed them out. You volunteered a detailed justification of your stance; I didn't "demand" it.

In fact, I complimented you (admittedly in a saracastic/backhanded way) in my final post on that thread, when I said
- before withdrawing from the debate because I realised I would not have the time (or inclination) to do it justice.

Yes, I did enter this thread, and have continued in it, with some criticisms of both your opinions and the manner in which you have expressed them. I have been careful to disclaim those criticisms as not being personal attacks.

Apparently, whatever slipups or mistakes of expression, wisecracks or other acts of omission or comission I have made in these two threads are some sort of justification for you making some quite serious accusations that:
1. I am hypocritical.
2. I am a liar.
3. I am evasive and contradictory.
4. I use cheap rhetoric as a substitute for reasoned argument.
5. I am selective in my condemnation of abusive behaviour, depending on whether I agree with the person in question.

And despite my best efforts to explain and rebut these accusations, you brush those aside (in particular, I am apparently lying about my reasons for dropping the Turkey Baster thread) and simply repeat the accusation - in one case, using as support exactly the same quote which moments before you had "clarified" as not being intended as evidence to support that very accusation.

Arrowman
Whose funeral will undoubtedly feature the song "Oh Lord, Please Don't Let Me Be Misunderstood"

Gurdur

Tsk.
Naw, you're simply trying to ride in on my coat-tails, since I'm already one of the Immortals; if you want fame, go out and get it yourself, stop trying to gain it from using me. Oooooo, yes, we know, it was just too much.
Oh you poor thing, you moot the fact that any reasonable argument from you might not be any use in view of my 'attitude', then I actually have the cheek to pick up on that !
Then you shouldn't have wasted everyone's time with amateur moralist theatrics, no ?
Hey, don't worry, let me know when you're serious; given your track-record here on your antipathy towards me, it might not be too surprising if I discount your disclaimer, no ?
(2) I never said; it is your own interpretation. You can't rebut them, since admittedly my POV fits the facts of the situation; you can simply insist my view of your intent is wrong, something which we can never satisfactorily prove here one way or the other.

Weird.
I explained that fully; you seem to be having problems with it. I cited that quote in answer to your apparent questioning of my statement that you yourself had brought up the issue of politeness to those we disagree with --- not as proof of anything else.
You do seem confused, but I don't see it as being my fault, since I was quite explicit.

Oh dearie dearie me.

Gurdur

Tiddley om, tiddley om, pom pom pom.
Failed to deal with these points:

Crap.
Compare with:
All of that after you consistantly failed to grasp my points of fact throughout the Turkey Baster thread, instead repeating assertions already shown to be untrue.
Oh rubbish; you repeatedly confuse your subjective opinions for objective facts.
A very bad failure of philosophy there.
well, hey, I'm sure I could go quote for quote through both threads, but any lurker who wants to go the whole hog can read both threads for themselves.
Actually (and unsurprisingly) I think it does.
Quite correct of you to state that, and incorrect of me to say you had "demanded" it; you simply reasserted all the tired old amateur moralist theatrics at me in that old thread, then when I produced a longer version showing just where you had gone wrong in your subjective opinions which you took for objective facts there, you simply didn't deal with it.
Tsk.

So like I said way way before, Arrowman; you seem to have a problem when I express moral judgments not in accordance with your own opinions, and I seem to attract your attentions in some personal way.

Care to get around this yet again ?