Still not pretending.
That is the problem. You can say what you wish and that is fine. It is just disappointing that you seem at every point and turn to say I am pretending this or pretending that or being dishonest about this or that. When I take the time to give context to show that I am anything but what you ASSUMED, you try to tell me I am not addressing your point.
So what WAS I pretending? Nothing.
What was I being dishonest about? Nothing.
What did this callout directly relate to? My interactions with Zegh.
Now I do not believe you did belittle my ninja cats and I still maintain that you have yet to make ANY case for Intellectual dishonesty.
I KNOW you would have preferred I had read Zegh's posts and made no assumptions on what he said, intended or felt. I know that. You told me. WAS I intellectually dishonest in not doing so?
No.
Why not? Because IF we take the view that Zegh is liable to post bullshit and lies as he has done in the past then relying on such readings of his posts is likely to result on NOT being further informed nor having more reliable information. Listening to him would more likely result in lies and being lied to.
You COULD say "Well you are intellectually dishonest because you did not avail yourself of all the information the Zegh could have said and you made assumptions that were bereft of anything you would gain directly from reading."
And what was that? I missed out on more condescension , smarminess and lies. So how would this avail me of anything constructive and make me more intellectually honest. IN FACT by availing myself of such information I may have believed his lies about laying off me and DFG for 30 days.
I didn't and the result is that he broke his promise and lied.
Therefore my assumptions were proven grounded and correct. Furthermore it showed a justification for having not read him.
So what WAS pretended? Well apart from nothing at all. I know it is a claim you like throwing around, but it is as impotent as your claim that I was intellectually dishonest.
So I have been too literal in respect to "the easy way out". How literal? Did I not just show that what I did and how I reasoned was a lot more demanding and involved than the alternative and as a result I was not taken in by a lie. (Yes even whilst posting ninja cats and observing what others said about him).
As to not having to change my mind about something. I have that option now. I do not need to change my mind about anything I don't wish to.
However, let's look at an example of what I imagine you mean:
I believe Zegh has no wish to resolve a feud he started and of his own making.
About eight months ago he writes PM's top me stating that I only harass girls and he is not a girl and i should try and harass him off the board and try my hardest to do this (paraphrased - I have posted the PM's in question).
"But if you aren't reading him, then how do you know his position has not changed in the meantime Al, you are being intellectually dishonest and taking the easy way out and assuming what you can not hope to know" Right? I mean this IS the crux of what you are saying, right?
Except about a month ago in a callout someone mentioned that he had admitted to loving stirring things up with me and DFG, irrespective of previous proclamations about it being something he wanted to resolve.
Soon afterwards again it was brought to bear by someone other than Zegh that he has decided on a 30 day break from attacking DFG and myself.
He did not last a week and he was attacking DFG.
SO.....you can see that regardless of what I posted, I was well and truly across what was happening. Regardless of the fact, that I was not reading Zegh I could see what was happening. I could use this information to make reasonable assumptions and in fact reading him may have not been advantageous.
What exactly ought I have reassessed? HE showed exactly the same indifference to resolving things as he had 8 months ago and I still I was right then and right now. Why exactly do you imagine I would be inclined to change my mind? Any reason? Why do you think it may be reasonable?
Its a problem you say a lot of stuff but do not back it, and when I defend the claim you say "I'm not talking about that". It seems convenient.
Assumptions
Pretence
Pretending
Dishonest
Intellectual dishonesty
Easy way out
I call BULLSHIT on the lot of it. Line them up I will knock them down. The problem you have is that YOU made the above claims about me and they are incorrect. You can say I did not defend them correctly, or that what you said you did not mean literally, or that you mean something else but you need to make the point better if that is the case because I am still none the wiser as to what you mean.
You are either being really vague and hedging around what I put to you in order not to have your premise exposed or you have not made a case well enough for me to understand where in Hell you are coming from. (Of course there is the minute chance I simply have not understood and it is my failing
) )
Spell it out Odeon. I don't mind being treated like an idiot in this context. Surely no worse than being treated like a pretending dishonest dude who takes the easy way out. That is a lot further from my personality, intent, motive and posting than being an idiot.