Odeon you implied I was dishonest at best and a liar at worst

[ZEGH8578]

I don't actually care if you've given Zegh a break or not. He is a big boy and can take care of himself, and this was never about Zegh.

Not interested in repeating myself either. You're a big boy, too, and so I'm sure you will live, even though you've not been able to change my mind.

It makes good sense not to repeat yourself. Repeating a weak position over and over will not make it any better or stronger. It will just look worse by each repetition.

I  mentioned Zegh in the last post just as to say that it looks as though this is pretty much where we leave things off and I go back to feuding with Zegh as though this callout and what preceded it had never happened. I am no worse or better for it. Slightly disappointed in you, but that is neither here nor there.

You've mentioned me in every second post, in an argument that was about YOUR credibility, Ross.
You aren't very into deep self analysis, are you? You just bark whatever hits your mind, whenever it hits it, and that's what makes you interesting. Interesting, and slightly pathetic, but interesting none the less.
I see you are back stalking me with lame ass memes again. That is very "in control" of you, Ross. Way to show everyone :]

Pathetic old fuck.

Lots of words there Zegh. But how much of it was bullshit and bluster?
I know your one month of silent treatment of DFG and myself is almost up. Only a few days to go. That was a raging success wasn't it, asshat?

Yes? I was mostly quiet as a mouse. Not only did I do exactly what promised: Not play along with your cat-meme crap, but I even took a little pause from posting altogether. That was something I did NOT promise, but something YOU held against me "you are still posting on the forum, you said you wouldn't", NO, you fucking manipulative sociopathic shit-for-brains, I would NEVER promise to fuck off FOR YOU. EVER. But, in the end, I did that. I fucked off, from the entire forum, for a week or so.
And on top of that
on top of that
You use it against me, at the best of your effort

You, on the other hand, didn't know where to put yourself while I was being quiet, so you launched at Odeon, DFG launched at Some Bloke. Spazzy-spazz.

Have fun, tin-foil heads.

[Al Swearegen]

I don't actually care if you've given Zegh a break or not. He is a big boy and can take care of himself, and this was never about Zegh.

Not interested in repeating myself either. You're a big boy, too, and so I'm sure you will live, even though you've not been able to change my mind.

It makes good sense not to repeat yourself. Repeating a weak position over and over will not make it any better or stronger. It will just look worse by each repetition.

I  mentioned Zegh in the last post just as to say that it looks as though this is pretty much where we leave things off and I go back to feuding with Zegh as though this callout and what preceded it had never happened. I am no worse or better for it. Slightly disappointed in you, but that is neither here nor there.

You've mentioned me in every second post, in an argument that was about YOUR credibility, Ross.
You aren't very into deep self analysis, are you? You just bark whatever hits your mind, whenever it hits it, and that's what makes you interesting. Interesting, and slightly pathetic, but interesting none the less.
I see you are back stalking me with lame ass memes again. That is very "in control" of you, Ross. Way to show everyone :]

Pathetic old fuck.

Lots of words there Zegh. But how much of it was bullshit and bluster?
I know your one month of silent treatment of DFG and myself is almost up. Only a few days to go. That was a raging success wasn't it, asshat?

Yes? I was mostly quiet as a mouse. Not only did I do exactly what promised: Not play along with your cat-meme crap, but I even took a little pause from posting altogether. That was something I did NOT promise, but something YOU held against me "you are still posting on the forum, you said you wouldn't", NO, you fucking manipulative sociopathic shit-for-brains, I would NEVER promise to fuck off FOR YOU. EVER. But, in the end, I did that. I fucked off, from the entire forum, for a week or so.
And on top of that
on top of that
You use it against me, at the best of your effort

You, on the other hand, didn't know where to put yourself while I was being quiet, so you launched at Odeon, DFG launched at Some Bloke. Spazzy-spazz.

Have fun, tin-foil heads.

["couldbecousin"]

I don't actually care if you've given Zegh a break or not. He is a big boy and can take care of himself, and this was never about Zegh.

Not interested in repeating myself either. You're a big boy, too, and so I'm sure you will live, even though you've not been able to change my mind.

It makes good sense not to repeat yourself. Repeating a weak position over and over will not make it any better or stronger. It will just look worse by each repetition.

I  mentioned Zegh in the last post just as to say that it looks as though this is pretty much where we leave things off and I go back to feuding with Zegh as though this callout and what preceded it had never happened. I am no worse or better for it. Slightly disappointed in you, but that is neither here nor there.

You've mentioned me in every second post, in an argument that was about YOUR credibility, Ross.
You aren't very into deep self analysis, are you? You just bark whatever hits your mind, whenever it hits it, and that's what makes you interesting. Interesting, and slightly pathetic, but interesting none the less.
I see you are back stalking me with lame ass memes again. That is very "in control" of you, Ross. Way to show everyone :]

Pathetic old fuck.

Lots of words there Zegh. But how much of it was bullshit and bluster?
I know your one month of silent treatment of DFG and myself is almost up. Only a few days to go. That was a raging success wasn't it, asshat?

Yes? I was mostly quiet as a mouse. Not only did I do exactly what promised: Not play along with your cat-meme crap, but I even took a little pause from posting altogether. That was something I did NOT promise, but something YOU held against me "you are still posting on the forum, you said you wouldn't", NO, you fucking manipulative sociopathic shit-for-brains, I would NEVER promise to fuck off FOR YOU. EVER. But, in the end, I did that. I fucked off, from the entire forum, for a week or so.
And on top of that
on top of that
You use it against me, at the best of your effort

You, on the other hand, didn't know where to put yourself while I was being quiet, so you launched at Odeon, DFG launched at Some Bloke. Spazzy-spazz.

Have fun, tin-foil heads.

  That's one cranky-looking cat. 

[Al Swearegen]

AND.....here it is.

Well, I think my argument does have substance. The message is a simple one: if you don't read Zegh's posts, you can't actually know he is full of shit. You can make assumptions but you can't know.

I would never have reacted if you had posted such opinions once or twice, but this has been going on for months. It's becoming one of the constants in this forum.

Why you don't see this is anyone's guess. I certainly don't know.

I don't see a point with continuing this, as we are basically running around in circles and none of us is likely to change the other's views in any significant way. I will give you this, however: I regret using the word "pretend" in the posts that preceded this callout when intellectual dishonesty is what I actually wanted to highlight. My message is unchanged, but my choice of words could have been better.

We really should leave this to the peanut gallery now.

I have been trying to work out why you have been so invested in such pitifully weak premises and arguments. What was the agenda? What was the "real reason"?

What would drive YOU a decent communicator, a good debaters and a smart man to make the claims in the first place and then hold on to them. I am not stupid, Odeon and I know YOU are not stupid and would not believe me to be stupid.

I did however let this evade me, somehow.

There was something behind this distraction. Some reason that you would make indefensible points. This is what it is.

I would never have reacted if you had posted such opinions once or twice, but this has been going on for months. It's becoming one of the constants in this forum.

You reacted BECAUSE you dislike me feuding with Zegh and saying bad things to him. You think it has gone on long enough and want me to lay off him and no longer be a constant in the forum.

THAT actually makes sense. It also makes sense that you would make a bad claim to start with and throw worse claim after worse to obfuscate things. It would also mean that you would "dig in" and not see what you would otherwise see in others as really shit arguments. You are invested in this argument but not because you actually agree with your shit arguments particularly but the reason behind you making them in the first place are important to you. Also perhaps explains the reason I was getting a vibe of righteous indignation from you.

That said, do you imagine your efforts here have achieved anything?
When you said:

I would never have reacted if you had posted such opinions once or twice, but this has been going on for months. It's becoming one of the constants in this forum.

Do you imagine in reacting, that I would not double down? Do you imagine that doing this would put winding things down about as far from my mind as possible? Curious.

[ZEGH8578]

That said, do you imagine your efforts here have achieved anything?

I wonder if you hear yourself, when you say stuff like this.
Or when you compare yourself to "a mighty bear"

What I'm suspecting now, though, is that you DO hear yourself, and that you nod - to yourself - and even give yourself a little applause. I also suspect that if you were to read an article about narcissism, you'd think "How is this a diagnosis? Everyone feels this way! I know I do!"

[odeon]

AND.....here it is.

Well, I think my argument does have substance. The message is a simple one: if you don't read Zegh's posts, you can't actually know he is full of shit. You can make assumptions but you can't know.

I would never have reacted if you had posted such opinions once or twice, but this has been going on for months. It's becoming one of the constants in this forum.

Why you don't see this is anyone's guess. I certainly don't know.

I don't see a point with continuing this, as we are basically running around in circles and none of us is likely to change the other's views in any significant way. I will give you this, however: I regret using the word "pretend" in the posts that preceded this callout when intellectual dishonesty is what I actually wanted to highlight. My message is unchanged, but my choice of words could have been better.

We really should leave this to the peanut gallery now.

I have been trying to work out why you have been so invested in such pitifully weak premises and arguments. What was the agenda? What was the "real reason"?

What would drive YOU a decent communicator, a good debaters and a smart man to make the claims in the first place and then hold on to them. I am not stupid, Odeon and I know YOU are not stupid and would not believe me to be stupid.

I did however let this evade me, somehow.

There was something behind this distraction. Some reason that you would make indefensible points. This is what it is.

I would never have reacted if you had posted such opinions once or twice, but this has been going on for months. It's becoming one of the constants in this forum.

You reacted BECAUSE you dislike me feuding with Zegh and saying bad things to him. You think it has gone on long enough and want me to lay off him and no longer be a constant in the forum.

THAT actually makes sense. It also makes sense that you would make a bad claim to start with and throw worse claim after worse to obfuscate things. It would also mean that you would "dig in" and not see what you would otherwise see in others as really shit arguments. You are invested in this argument but not because you actually agree with your shit arguments particularly but the reason behind you making them in the first place are important to you. Also perhaps explains the reason I was getting a vibe of righteous indignation from you.

That said, do you imagine your efforts here have achieved anything?
When you said:

I would never have reacted if you had posted such opinions once or twice, but this has been going on for months. It's becoming one of the constants in this forum.

Do you imagine in reacting, that I would not double down? Do you imagine that doing this would put winding things down about as far from my mind as possible? Curious.

I don't actually care if you wind it down or not. You going after Zegh is not the issue, it never was. He is a big boy and can take care of himself, just as you can. Just as DFG can, for that matter.

What is really strange is that you refuse to accept what I've been saying all along. It's as if you almost get it, sometimes. Almost but not quite. You even highlight a key trigger, yet you seem to think that it must be something else, something BIGGER, not something as simple and straight-forward as me being annoyed by the intellectual dishonesty you've displayed.

You also fail to see that your tiptoeing around DFG (and yes, it's my perception, it's not objective and never was, but the more I think about it, the more it fits, so fucking live with it) is not just something incidental, it's directly connected to this. Maybe it's why you don't see it, that blindness I think I mentioned in a post. I don't know. And what's sad is that you probably don't either.

Which could mean that it's not intellectual dishonesty now, but a blind spot.

[Al Swearegen]

AND.....here it is.

Well, I think my argument does have substance. The message is a simple one: if you don't read Zegh's posts, you can't actually know he is full of shit. You can make assumptions but you can't know.

I would never have reacted if you had posted such opinions once or twice, but this has been going on for months. It's becoming one of the constants in this forum.

Why you don't see this is anyone's guess. I certainly don't know.

I don't see a point with continuing this, as we are basically running around in circles and none of us is likely to change the other's views in any significant way. I will give you this, however: I regret using the word "pretend" in the posts that preceded this callout when intellectual dishonesty is what I actually wanted to highlight. My message is unchanged, but my choice of words could have been better.

We really should leave this to the peanut gallery now.

I have been trying to work out why you have been so invested in such pitifully weak premises and arguments. What was the agenda? What was the "real reason"?

What would drive YOU a decent communicator, a good debaters and a smart man to make the claims in the first place and then hold on to them. I am not stupid, Odeon and I know YOU are not stupid and would not believe me to be stupid.

I did however let this evade me, somehow.

There was something behind this distraction. Some reason that you would make indefensible points. This is what it is.

I would never have reacted if you had posted such opinions once or twice, but this has been going on for months. It's becoming one of the constants in this forum.

You reacted BECAUSE you dislike me feuding with Zegh and saying bad things to him. You think it has gone on long enough and want me to lay off him and no longer be a constant in the forum.

THAT actually makes sense. It also makes sense that you would make a bad claim to start with and throw worse claim after worse to obfuscate things. It would also mean that you would "dig in" and not see what you would otherwise see in others as really shit arguments. You are invested in this argument but not because you actually agree with your shit arguments particularly but the reason behind you making them in the first place are important to you. Also perhaps explains the reason I was getting a vibe of righteous indignation from you.

That said, do you imagine your efforts here have achieved anything?
When you said:

I would never have reacted if you had posted such opinions once or twice, but this has been going on for months. It's becoming one of the constants in this forum.

Do you imagine in reacting, that I would not double down? Do you imagine that doing this would put winding things down about as far from my mind as possible? Curious.

I don't actually care if you wind it down or not. You going after Zegh is not the issue, it never was. He is a big boy and can take care of himself, just as you can. Just as DFG can, for that matter.

What is really strange is that you refuse to accept what I've been saying all along. It's as if you almost get it, sometimes. Almost but not quite. You even highlight a key trigger, yet you seem to think that it must be something else, something BIGGER, not something as simple and straight-forward as me being annoyed by the intellectual dishonesty you've displayed.

You also fail to see that your tiptoeing around DFG (and yes, it's my perception, it's not objective and never was, but the more I think about it, the more it fits, so fucking live with it) is not just something incidental, it's directly connected to this. Maybe it's why you don't see it, that blindness I think I mentioned in a post. I don't know. And what's sad is that you probably don't either.

Which could mean that it's not intellectual dishonesty now, but a blind spot.

Not intellectual dishonesty.....or never was in the first place? I mean we have had me saying  over and over for how long now, that I was not being intellectually dishonest? Then we had you repeating that I was (in this instance) Intellectually Dishonest and other claims (and even pretence and dishonesty claims hanging off this) and now you are saying what exactly?

Be honest here, Odeon?

Yes your tiptoeing claim is subjective, as your blind spot claim...You think either or both of them fit? Don't care. You can't back them, they are horseshit claims if you admit they are subjective feeling based claims residing solely in your head I don't much care.

You can deal with that.

What possessed you to make these kinds of claims? You couldn't back them, you battled to find any objective evidence to support them, relied on repeating them over and over to try to sell the message.....and in the end retract most of them and roll on to inconsequential subjective claims that are transparently subjective and weak.

So now, do I have a blind spot. I don't think so. I like DFG and I like many others here. She like many others here, I have fought in the past. If she has a go at me I will likely fire back. If she isn't, I'm unlikely to care too much. If she something silly or irrelevant or uninteresting I will probably let it slide. I am likely to do the same for most people here.

Unless I am targeted in a callout or feud I am unlikely to fit up or join in. If anyone here fights anyone else I am pretty unfazed.  I don't feel a need to defend either party nor put myself into their grievance.  I reserve the right to agree (I did that recently with Jack). It doesn't mean I am being selective if I do not agree with that person's every pronouncement.

Where that leaves your blindspot claim, i don't know? Likely where it always was. A subjective feeling based claim with no substance. You believe otherwise that is fine. You make that claim you ought to back it and not say that you simply felt that way. Well that WAS the way.

[ZEGH8578]

We should analyze why Al finds it so impossible to accept subjectivity in others, while advertising his own right to be subjective

That could be the "blind spot" in question 

[odeon]

It is interesting, isn't it? If I hold a view I announce right from the beginning as being subjective (which, by the way, most of the opinions expressed here by most of us are), I need to back it up.

So what is it that I need to back up? That it's how I perceive something? How do I do that?

This is just odd.

[MLA]

I know this is a call-out and I am breaking the rules, but can I just accuse the both of you of not being autistic and end the whole thing via Dunc's Law?

[odeon]

 

There, just to make it more definitive.

[Jack]

I know this is a call-out and I am breaking the rules, but can I just accuse the both of you of not being autistic and end the whole thing via Dunc's Law?

Are you going to accuse them of not being autistic because they're both doing such a great job of understanding the other's perspective?

[Al Swearegen]

It is interesting, isn't it? If I hold a view I announce right from the beginning as being subjective (which, by the way, most of the opinions expressed here by most of us are), I need to back it up.

So what is it that I need to back up? That it's how I perceive something? How do I do that?

This is just odd.

Sure, Odeon. See if you follow this:

Let's say it was not you and your claims of me being intellectually dishonest and all those other associated claims. Hypothetically, let's say I had said you were a coward. I then throw some more claims about you being a weak character and an authoritarian.  (It doesn't really matter the claims, so long as they are out of character, subjective and unable to be backed up)

Now YOU may think "WTF? Why is Al saying that? That is out of character, he has to have some reasonable idea why he thought that because he is a reasonable person and a smart guy. If I press him, I will find a reasonable reason why he'd call me cowardly... And it had better be a good reason. It's likely a misunderstanding."

So you press and I start making vague anecdotal evidence and then point to the definition of coward. You contest that your behaviour doesn't match the definition . It makes no sense and by now you've introduced the other things like you being authoritarian and weak-willed. The cowardly claim is being repeated over and over and the condescending concession is that you are not always cowardly...just now.

You naturally suspect I'm not being entirely on the level, and why not? We have disagreed before but regardless of whether we disagreed or or indeed whether we were making arguments based on subjective opinion or speculation I had always managed in such disagreements to convey a reasoned approach to why I claimed what I claimed.

But now you suggesting this has me repeating my claim, but also asking to drop the matter and to facilitate this process, agreeing that you are not really weak-willed.

If you read this, and think about it, you may be struck with the thought that such a situation is odd at the least and unreasonable.

There is plenty strange here but I do not believe my reaction is one of them.

I can treat this as a test in adaptability.
I can at random, for no good reason, throw weak subjective claims, maybe reference a dictionary definition, repeat said claim without decent evidence or reasoning to back it and then tell you to drop it.

It's silly but I don't mind doing it if this is the new standard.

[odeon]

Al, please go on if you like. Me, I'm tired of this. I've repeated myself endlessly, told you I'm doing so, stating that I don't actually have more to add, but you're not listening. Hence the , which was more in jest, in case you think I was being serious.

We have differing views on this. I do think you were being intellectually dishonest with that whole "not reading Zegh but he is an ass anyway" thing. I've explained why I think so.

Obviously you have not accepted any of it. Obviously you've not admitted to being intellectually dishonest, but you've also not accepted that I can have this opinion or think that I am right about it.

Similarly, you've not admitted to tiptoeing around DFG, which really goes without saying, but you've not accepted or allowed me to hold such a view.

Objectively, the latter is unprovable. The former, in my humble opinion, is not. yet I don't think we will agree on either.

I happen to think that your behaviour in both cases was out of character. You don't. What can I say?

[Al Swearegen]

Al, please go on if you like. Me, I'm tired of this. I've repeated myself endlessly, told you I'm doing so, stating that I don't actually have more to add, but you're not listening. Hence the , which was more in jest, in case you think I was being serious.

We have differing views on this. I do think you were being intellectually dishonest with that whole "not reading Zegh but he is an ass anyway" thing. I've explained why I think so.

Obviously you have not accepted any of it. Obviously you've not admitted to being intellectually dishonest, but you've also not accepted that I can have this opinion or think that I am right about it.

Similarly, you've not admitted to tiptoeing around DFG, which really goes without saying, but you've not accepted or allowed me to hold such a view.

Objectively, the latter is unprovable. The former, in my humble opinion, is not. yet I don't think we will agree on either.

I happen to think that your behaviour in both cases was out of character. You don't. What can I say?

I am not sure why you were being so conceited and condescending?