|
|
|
Mycroft
Skeptic Friend
USA
427 Posts |
 Posted - 05/22/2007 : 19:59:49
|
Beskeptigal apparently wants to hash out some personal issues she has with me, and while I certainly want to give her the opportunity to air her grievances, the JREF has stricter rules involving personal arguments, so this is the more appropriate forum.Originally posted by skeptigirl on JREF:
You called the Fool a liar here just as you have called me one. |
You seem to want to fixate on my having called you a liar while simultaneously avoiding the issue of why I did so. That's not very logical.
You repeatedly made statements about me that were incorrect. By itself this could be a simple mistake, but then you persisted in making those same statement after having been corrected. That's why I called you a liar. If you don't like it, I suggest you address the substantive issue of why you repeatedly made untrue statements even after having been corrected, rather than simply complaining.| You don't seem to mind insulting people but you whine about reporting posts when someone calls you dishonest about pretending to be a Democrat for whatever reason you pretend to be one. |
The Fool has a history of shifting arguments away from the issues being discussed to making personal attacks on the people discussing them instead, much like you're doing here. Further, the Fool and *I* have a history at the JREF of getting into personal arguments to the point where we both received warnings and even suspensions, so that specific post was an admonition to him not to go that route again. In general, I would not otherwise report a post for that reson.| Free Republic, Malkin, and now a Guliani fan. You sir are no Democrat. Why do you insist on being dishonest? |
<sigh!> This is where you display a troubling narrow mindedness. Once again:
Defending a conservative from a specific allegation does not imply endorsement of everything anything that person believes. It only means you defend them against a specific allegation, nothing more.
Many people vote across party lines. As I said, I am considering supporting Giuliani, but if I do vote for him it would be my first time voting Republican in a national election.
You display narrow mindedness (dare I say extremism?) in apparently finding it inconceivable that a registered Democrat could vote across party lines. Look at the polls sometime, it happens all the time.
[Edited to fix quoting - Dave W.]
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 05/22/2007 : 20:04:25 [Permalink]
|
| Unfortunately, Mycroft, your tags didn't work out properly, so it's difficult to see who's saying what. |
| Edited by - Cuneiformist on 05/22/2007 20:07:24 |
 |
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 05/22/2007 : 20:57:29 [Permalink]
|
Mycroft:
Beskeptigal apparently wants to hash out some personal issues she has with me, and while I certainly want to give her the opportunity to air her grievances, the JREF has stricter rules involving personal arguments, so this is the more appropriate forum. |
Is there any reason you can't resolve this in PM's? We do have that feature you know. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 05/22/2007 : 21:08:29 [Permalink]
|
Kil---There is a big entertainment factor at play here.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
JohnOAS
SFN Regular
Australia
800 Posts |
 Posted - 05/22/2007 : 21:37:09 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Cuneiformist
Unfortunately, Mycroft, your tags didn't work out properly, so it's difficult to see who's saying what.
|
Yeah, assuming you really want any of us to see/comment in the first place (what Kil said) it'd be nice to have the quoting sorted out, and maybe a link or two if required.
|
John's just this guy, you know. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 05/22/2007 : 21:59:30 [Permalink]
|
Well, the really bad part is that beskeptigal has already suggested that Mycroft is on her "ignore list" here (for calling her names like "liar"), so the thread should have little of the desired effect. The question of why he's apparently not on her ignore list over on JREF is a wee bit interesting.
If Mycroft doesn't get around to it, I'll fix the quoting tomorrow afternoon. It's clear to me who's saying what. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 05/22/2007 : 23:01:07 [Permalink]
|
Mycroft said:
| You (beskeptigal) display narrow mindedness (dare I say extremism?) in apparently finding it inconceivable that a registered Democrat could vote across party lines. Look at the polls sometime, it happens all the time. |
beskeptigal, when it comes to politics, is a left-wing ideolog. Sadly she isn't the only one here who is.
It is one thing to challenge a position taken by a political party or an individual, as long as you can articulate the reasons you are in opposition.
It is a whole different thing when you trash people and parties just because they don't agree with you, and resort to logical fallacy (the whole time denying that you could possibly be using the tactics of the enemy) instead of reasoned argument.
Beskeptigal, and others here, feel that it is acceptable to make rash statements about the makeup of entire political parties and then try to hide behind claims of "opinion", when what they are doing is the exact opposite of stating an opinion.
Just click on the link in my sig for a fine example (the whole thread) of what I am talking about.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 05/23/2007 : 12:53:04 [Permalink]
|
Ricky said:
| Are you saying here that generalizations of a political party are not appropriate? For example, such a generalization may be that Republicans are not conservative to control spending, but rather, they only wish to keep themselves rich. Obviously, that isn't true of all Republicans. But I believe it may be true of enough to make a generalization. Would you say this an opinion, or a stated fact? |
We've had this argument in another thread. I fully explained the difference between an opinion and what besketigal was doing, in that thread. Many of you jumped to her defense, mindlessly refusing to look at what she was actually doing. If you are still, at this point, unable to determine what is and is not an opinion... then the chances of me being able to help you understand are pretty close to zero.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 05/23/2007 : 15:09:29 [Permalink]
|
Since there was little doubt what this thread was about, I have read it. I don't have Mycroft on ignore at JREF however I am not replying to any of his posts there. The reason I didn't put him on ignore there is the offensive posts were here.
But I did respond to Mycroft in defense of another person he was less than decent to there with this post.
Originally Posted by The Fool
so you reach into your bookmark list of nutball extremist right wing bloggers to find someone to help you with your apologia for a right wing nutball blogger....son, are you still claiming to be a democrat? Lol......
[Mycroft:] Please refrain from personalizing the issue in this way. Since you have no knowledge of the contents of my bookmark list, this statement from you claiming knowledge of it is a deliberate falsehood.
I am not apologizing for any blogger (another falsehood from you), I am pointing out the logical errors of Varwoche's smear-campaign.
Speculating on my status as a Democrat is another example of your personalizing this argument. I am reporting it and asking you to stop. |
And this was my reply.Really? Then report this too: You don't seem to mind calling me a left wing radical and a liar every chance you get.
You do pretend to be a Democrat. And you are dishonest and probably use that scam as a way to bolster your credibility. You have posted support for right wing extremists like the Free Republic and people like Malkin all the while claiming to be a moderate Democrat.
Pot meet Kettle. |
I see nothing wrong with characterizing a person's political stand as long as it is at least semi-accurate and relevant. If it isn't the political stand they claim to have, and there is evidence, then confronting the person with the evidence is most certainly appropriate.
Being against the war is not evidence I am a left wing radical and it is offensive to be called that as well as being called a liar. Agreeing with Michelle Malkin and defending the people who hang out on the Free Republic forum is not the likely position of a moderate Democrat.
Claiming everyone who offends you is making up "deliberate falsehoods" gets tiring. The Fool is not inclined to post falsehoods about anyone as far as I can tell. And to be reporting posts and acting all huffy for things Mycroft commonly writes about other posters needed pointing out. Especially after the undeserved crap he continues to spew about me.
I have no more to say to or about Mycroft in this matter.
|
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 05/23/2007 : 15:58:02 [Permalink]
|
Ricky said:
| Dude, I didn't ask you to tell me how I felt about my statement. I asked you how you feel about it. Do you think my statement about Republicans is an opinion or a statement of fact? Because I see no difference between what I said and what beskeptigal said. Personally, I think the only thing that is different is that you agree with one, and disagree with the other. |
Again, if you can't distinguish between opinion and assertion, I probably can't help you any further.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 05/23/2007 : 18:29:20 [Permalink]
|
OK,
I guess I'll say it.
I seriously question the utility of having a essentially private argument in public. Whether either or both of you have some sort of exhibitionist feeling about this is beyond me.
Why the hell do you two want to air your dirty laundry here?
Humans, being morbidly curious critters, will tend to watch you flagelate yourselves into bloody pulps. Because we care? No. Because we can't not look. Like when traffic slows down to gawk at a serious accident. Not to help, to gawk at someone else's misery.
Enough is enough.
Drop it and move along. If you two want to finish your beef with one another, do it in private.
|
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Mycroft
Skeptic Friend
USA
427 Posts |
Posted - 05/23/2007 : 18:43:25 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by beskeptigal
You do pretend to be a Democrat. And you are dishonest and probably use that scam as a way to bolster your credibility. You have posted support for right wing extremists like the Free Republic and people like Malkin all the while claiming to be a moderate Democrat. |
I have never posted “support” for Free Republic. What I have done is to point out that it's very unlikely that every poster there is guilty of making death threats so it's unfair to smear them all with that charge.
That's just common sense. It has nothing at all to do with ideology. That you continue to conflate that as somehow supporting a forum I've never been to is either amazingly ignorant or fundamentally dishonest.
Originally posted by beskeptigal
Pot meet Kettle.I see nothing wrong with characterizing a person's political stand as long as it is at least semi-accurate and relevant. If it isn't the political stand they claim to have, and there is evidence, then confronting the person with the evidence is most certainly appropriate. |
In general, neither do I. At the JREF, however, the rule is to keep the discussion to the ideas and not the people, so that comment was appropriate in that specific circumstance.
Originally posted by beskeptigal
Being against the war is not evidence I am a left wing radical… |
I have never cited you anti-war stance as evidence of your being a left wing radical. I have been very specific about why I made that statement, and you continue to substitute your own fabrications.
Originally posted by beskeptigal
…and it is offensive to be called that as well as being called a liar. |
And you still want to complain about being called a liar rather than examine why you were called a liar. Again; you made statements about me that were false, and continued even after being corrected.
Originally posted by beskeptigal
Agreeing with Michelle Malkin and defending the people who hang out on the Free Republic forum is not the likely position of a moderate Democrat. |
Again, defending MM on one specific charge does not imply endorsement of any of her opinions.
Originally posted by beskeptigal
I have no more to say to or about Mycroft in this matter. |
I predict you will. If not in this thread, you will find another opportunity to make a personal hit-n-run, bringing up these same issues but then refusing to discuss them to any resolution.
fixed quoting error.
Kil
|
|
|
|
McQ
Skeptic Friend
USA
258 Posts |
Posted - 05/23/2007 : 19:00:37 [Permalink]
|
I wonder if the "Rubber Room" area that was mentioned as being a possibility on the forum was just dropped or is it still being discussed among the admins/mods. I seem to remember it as a "maybe", but never heard any more about it.
|
Elvis didn't do no drugs!
--Penn Gillette |
| Edited by - McQ on 05/23/2007 19:02:52 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Bringing personal arguments home
Topic Locked
