Yes I have been posting my opinions on here for months, years in fact and will continue to do so.
I certainly hope so.
I will start a polling you like on whether we should be censored for opinions that aren't popular or perhaps whether holding opinions based somewhat on assumptions is intellectually dishonest.
Are you mentioning censorship because it's me, the site owner, posting? If so, why? And "somewhat"? Seriously? Aare you deliberately avoiding my point?
How do you think they would do?
I don't know. But here's a question for you: why do you even mention it? Do you feel there is a risk of you being censored?
At what point did I deny I had assumed anything? No? Okay, at what point did I claim to know more than I could? No? Okay. So at what point did I get ANYTHING I said wrong? Where is your "Aha" moment?
You're *acting* as if your *assumption* was the truth. No, you don't read his posts, but yet you keep right on following him around the board and acting on your assumption.
You don't have one do you, Odeon?
Well, I think I do or I wouldn't have reacted and this callout either wouldn't have happened or you would have been able to show me the errors of my ways. But I haven't bought your arguments.
Is Zegh full of shit? Yes. I contend he is. I have 6 years of posts, PM's and recent commentary from others to make this claim. Which more than makes a case for claims I make against him. So whether I read him in the last few months or so is neither here nor there - even when measured against your standards of intellectual dishonesty.
But it is, and that's where we differ. I do think it matters because I expected more from you. Don't you see that? Your actions scream that you don't care, that you've made up your mind and it's all there is and can ever be. I expected more than that from you of all people, and so I'm bloody disappointed. If I attack somebody, at least I have the honesty to read his or her posts while attacking. Hell, even Benji gets that treatment.
But what else have you got? That can't be the sum of your argument because it is weak and you are not one to make weak arguments. So I am suspicious.
That's it. I don't think it's a weak argument. It's a simple argument, though, one that is easy to make, and I think it's enough.
But I have a question for you. If I read Zegh's posts, what would I have gleaned that would have or could have made a difference to how I see him? If I see him as a liar (being full of lies and inconsequentialities) then what would he have possibly said to dissuade me?
I've no idea. It's irrelevant. The difference would have been that I hadn't reacted. I happen to like Zegh, but I know you don't, and that's fine.
In other words if your claim is that it is dishonest to claim he is full of shit because I am assuming UNLESS I read him (right, tell me this is part of your belief around this) then what if I still would only have assumptions AFTER reading his posts.
You would have made an effort, and that does make a difference. A big one.
Where does this place this point about intellectual dishonesty. (ie If nothing was either lost or gained in reading his posts) AND as in this case maintaining the line of reasoning that he talks shit seems to have been pretty on the money given his PM's of 6 months ago and recent broken pledge/promise? Yes without reading his posts, I proclaimed he was full of shit and the evidence seemed to indicate that for me and backs it now.
How many times do I need to repeat this? His actions are irrelevant. You are the one to make claims, you are the one who should make an effort. Or at least accept that I did hold you to higher standards than that.
Therefore where is your point.
Right here, in this post and in most of the others I've posted in this thread.
I tell you one thing Odeon, this callout has done precisely two things. Firstly it has gobsmacked me as to your disappointing efforts to make poor claims against me and not defend them. Secondly it motivates me to dig in my heels over this Zegh thing.
I have defended my claims. I have done my best to rephrase them to explain my views. I have even handled your deflections (the Butterflies thing and the archaeologist that would rather assume than ask his subjects come to mind; in addition to your characterisations of Zegh, of course). I know you wanted a more complex argument, but hey, you can't always get what you want.
This callout is disappointing
We have a point of agreement here at least.
Can we finally leave it to the peanut gallery?
This is actually interesting to me. So your accusations of me being dishonest, intellectually dishonest, pretending, and taking the easy way out were all underpinned on this simple argument. That's outrageous, Odeon.
The problem is not that I was thinking it was a more serious argument but that the argument's simplicity is so very easily countered and could only ever have the chance of having any more weight if it were part of a larger more complex argument.
I will show you what I mean but first, I was not deflecting anything. I was addressing things that either were bought up in this callout or I believed had bearing. At no point was I deflecting anything nor do I have any particular desire to. I do not think your argument is a good one for all its simplicity. I think you wanted to try to mischaracterise me and for reasons I don't care to know.
I do wonder whether you ever saw the following:
Stop being a child Al, and take some responsability.
Is this a "reaction"?
If so, does that compell you to keep going, indefinitely? Then you are a child.
All you do is revert to this "I'm just a troublemaker, I can't help it!"-crap. You can help it. We all can help how we behave. And you're not a "troublemaker" or a "badass" or a "bear" or a damn "genie" (stup using these angrandizing analogies. And see? You read my messages, all of them, which... I knew... 
)
I'm going to go a little further, and givne Hyke 1 of my months to try "silent treatment" again. I will respond to normal communication, but not to "cat memes" or any other "provocative" bullshit.
One month, starting now.
[zeghing intensifies]
I don't recall you taking responsibility for your own childish behaviors. Yet you talk to others like your an adult and they're a child. You are delusional. Must be the weed giving you unwarranted self importance.
I decided to give him the benefit of the doubt. Given every opportunity to see what he did wrong and what had not worked, I may as well read his reply.
Bloody Hell.
Did I not tell him that the tactics he had used were bad tactics? Did I not make that abundantly clear? Did I not say that ignoring was only sighting better than the shaming, daring and insulting tactics and doesn't resolve anything but rather would only work if others move on? Didn't I say that doing rinse repeat of the same tactics he had used (ignoring was a previous tactics) will not work?
So what does he do? 
But that was not all. Was else did the smug condescending man-child say? Yup, I need to take responsibility. Well clearly I have the whole way through. I have no issue with this. I happily own everything I said and my place in it.
Kittenburger, you noticed (and I am sure anyone else reading did too) He did not take any responsibility. None. Effectively he says:
"I didn't do anything. I was not involved. I have no responsibility or accountability for my actions. But to" prove" my commitment to stopping it, I will try to use a tactic I previously used that was just denounced by one of the people I am feuding with. It did not work last time and I have been told explicitly that it won't this time, but I will use it again....and with righteous indignance and in a month' s time I will say "See!!" like a school child and you will all see how committed I was and how bad the others were"
This is virtue signalling. He is doing two things giving the pretence of wanting resolution by do something that appears that he is doing something constructive. But it has a nastier element to it which everyone should see. A petulant element. Earlier Hyke suggested maybe ignoring Kittenburger and I. She set no timestamp for this ignoring tactic. So he will come in, ignore all other advice, set a timestamp, trial ignoring for a month and then when it doesn't work, will petulant say "See, Hyke! You were wrong. I knew better. That tactic was your tactic and it doesn't work because nothing works and it's not my fault"
He is a man-child. It's not about fixing things. He is shifting blame. Hyke's fault because she gave bad advice, Al's responsibility because he will not finish what I started and allow me to not be accountable for my actions. It's Kittenburger's fault because she won't stop pointing out my shitty behaviours. The only person who isn't at fault is Zegh.
Oh he mentioned the Bear and the Genie, and his pea brain thought that in either of those analogies I was contextualising myself as the bear or the Genie.
The Genie for instance is the things carelessly said or doing, that causes havoc and becomes a bigger and bigger issue if uncontrolled. Therefore too difficult to control or contain back in the confines of the bottle. In this situation it makes the Genie, everything unconstructive thing you've said and your shit attitude about things to this point....not me.
As for the bear? You are an idiot. No worth explaining, you are still likely at the Genie example, trying to find a way that I was trying to make a point to me about me whilst speaking to you.. Because you are a dumb bastard.
So no surprises. I didn't expect much, so I wasn't disappointed. I won't hold the door open for you again, nor read the crap you say
So when I see you say:
At what point did I deny I had assumed anything? No? Okay, at what point did I claim to know more than I could? No? Okay. So at what point did I get ANYTHING I said wrong? Where is your "Aha" moment?
You're *acting* as if your *assumption* was the truth. No, you don't read his posts, but yet you keep right on following him around the board and acting on your assumption.
How was it not the truth? The one time in this that I gave him the benefit of the doubt and I saw what I have seen months before. It confirmed my assumptions and suspicions. As for acting on assumptions, we all do. Some of you assumed that when he spoke of not engaging with me or DFG for a month, you assumed he was not lying again. It was certainly not something I assumed. Why? Because I do more than just assume. I am forming opinions that DO have more than just dislike or assumptions attached to it and it would be silly to believe otherwise.
You made a big point of quoting the definition of Intellectual Dishonesty as though you thought quoting this helped your position.
Intellectual dishonesty is a failure to apply standards of rational evaluation that one is aware of, usually in a self-serving fashion. If one judges others more critically than oneself, that is intellectually dishonest.....
When one avoids an honest, deliberate and comprehensive approach to a matter because it may introduce an adverse effect on personally and professionally held views and beliefs.
My approach IS Honest.
It is entirely my belief and I am transparent, open and will give my reasoning behind it.
My approach is deliberate and I back my opinion as much or more than I need to.
My approach is comprehensive and this callout ought to promote that. I am not someone with no exposure to Zegh who never read a word and based all of the nothing I knew of him to smear him. The reason why I track him as well as I do is because I have a comprehensive approach. It is exactly the same reason that you are struggling to find ANYTHING that I have said that is incorrect.
As for changing beliefs, he has his work cut out for him to change my beliefs, but then I struggle to do that with liars. I have an aversion to it. I am more wary. But naturally I will keep an eye on things and if I see reports that he is becoming a bit more than what he is now, I will treat it with suspicion but ultimately see if he is keeping to his word. I was very suspicious of Richard for example. But that turned out well enough. Could Zegh rise to the level of Richard? I don't know. I did not think Richard had it in him and I do not think Zegh does. Richard happily proved me wrong. What is Zegh up to now on IntensitySquared, is he attacking DFG whilst still on his 30 day silent treatment as quoted above? Is that silent treatment? Have I any need to change my belief? COME ON, ODEON!
I do not apply different standards to Zegh than I do myself. I am hardly a hypocrite
As for apply standards of rational evaluation that one is aware of, absolutely. I believe there is no inherent standard or quality in posting (as shown above in his "silent treatment"). I get as much information from examining what others say and applying it against his known behaviour and endearing personality. I am not exactly flying blind here.
But you can't know exactly what he is saying? Really? Okay. He and Butterflies are in a callout of SB and DFG:
Is he being nice to DFG?
Is he being supportive?
Is he giving her advice?
Is he encouraging her?
I mean why am not thinking any of these things? They would be assumptions if I was to think them. You are not about to tell me that he is. I would not be fool enough to believe you if he did.
Hey maybe he is ignoring her completely right? I mean he DID say he was doing one month of silent treatment and 1 month from March the first would mean he is still within this. Are you going to tell me he is or would my assumption be a little more grounded than that IF I told you WITHOUT READING HIM that he is being a condescending snide little shitbag and despite being on a self-imposed cone of silence in respect to DFG he is breaking protocol and joining in with Butterflies in giving DFG shit?
Hey YOU tell me.
See where this all falls down for you?
I can always back this position. It is NOT intellectually dishonest and with you saying you don't read his posts and you assume stuff.....and? It does not make your point. I do not know how you do not get this. I know you try to imply that if I assume anything then I cannot know or base this on anything but the assumption. Its not true. In fact in Zegh's case, I have yet to appreciate what more I would have at my disposal than an even greater sense of "I fucking knew it" as I did with that March the first post.
You do not even try to make that case those. It is simply you trying to equate not reading someone's posts as having NOTHING at your disposal to base solid assumptions on or being dishonest. But you won't show where the dishonesty is.
"What have I got wrong?"
"It doesn't matter".
"Well yes it does".
The reason it does goes entirely to the part of me being dishonest. Again, I was not flying blind and this is not mere chance or luck.
What you fail to appreciate is that none of this makes a case for you. Quite frankly I really hope that "the treatment" you give Benji stands up to examination a lot better than this effort.
So Odeon being that the claims against me and my character and actions are so very weak and easily euthanised, and that you are a smart man, ought I feel REALLY offended? (IF this is really the sum of your argument).
