odeon's ask away-thread

[Lucifer]

You go after Callaway if given half an opportunity, Cal. I've seen it happen time and again. You bringing it up says more about you than it does about her.

Nothing wrong with that.

  etc....

i read all that, and the short response is, "so?"

in other words, why is this germane to the points odeon was asking you to answer?

[Calandale]

Merely pointing out things that I'm not thrilled
with about her fighting style, and the lack of
relevance to whatever topic she's supposedly
involved with. As well as the actual issue which
changed her view of me. Both points show a
lot about her character. Some may not care.

Others, should be warned. And should know
how her attacks have driven people from here,
by alienating them from the vast majority of the
members. Because, her little cadre of devotees
is quite large here.

Mainly, I'm trying to prevent it from expanding
to those I have some liking for, as I'd rather not
lose their respect, due to her style of attack. I won't
(and maybe can't - especially given that she hides
her own personal information, not being really willing
to share with the members here, probably because
she suspects others would give her a taste of her
own methods - though I doubt many here are
truly that sick) stoop to her style, so this is the
best that I can do, in order to defend myself.

[Lucifer]

but defending yourself by trying to slide focus and attention onto someone else is no real defence at all, to anyone with enough brain to recognise it.

you know that, cal.

[Calandale]

but defending yourself by trying to slide focus and attention onto someone else is no real defence at all, to anyone with enough brain to recognise it.

you know that, cal.

Actually, it's rather effective, until called out. 

Why else do politicians go negative.
Hell, even calling attention to it
doesn't kill it entirely.

Just like the mud she's slinging, I too
shall fight with what I can, in my conscience,
manage.

I'm sure she thinks that such attacks are actually
more honorable, even whilst making herself immune,
by not sharing herself with us, as I have. I do trust that
those who aren't already entirely in her camp are more
inclined to think as I do.

[odeon]

You go after Callaway if given half an opportunity, Cal. I've seen it happen time and again. You bringing it up says more about you than it does about her.

Nothing wrong with that. Any more than there would
be with her cleanly attacking aspects of my behaviour.
Here, or otherwise.

So it's OK when you do it, then? That how I should read this? That it's fine if you get to decide what's "clean"? Thing is, you keep on ranting about this, telliing us how nasty Callaway is, but you never actually back it up. What does that say about your behaviour?

Callaway using "personal shit" is a claim you often make but haven't been able to prove. The last time, re Scrap's use of Viagra, that you considered "personal", was something he revealed, you made pertinent in the thread in question with your hint, and that Callaway then pointed out, perfectly on topic.

1. Something he revealed, but NOTHING to
do with the discussion that they were having.

2. 'hint' nothing. A completely off the cuff joke,
not really targeting anyone. Actually, an attempt
to defuse what was looking like an ugly argument.
One which only turned nastier, with her usage.

Targeting Callaway, as I remember it. "Scrap's wood" was the off the cuff joke, and it was nothing but innocent, considering how Scrap had made Callaway a target. It was nasty with YOUR usage, Callaway followed suit. Neither you nor Scrap were innocent so don't try to bullshit people now.

Callaway's reply was perfectly on topic.

But, once she doesn't like someone, she does pull
such points out more often. Sometimes completely
at random. An example is the fact that I am a rapist.
Early on, before she had come to her epiphany moment
(which was the prank I pulled) she more or less allowed this
to remain under the radar, unless I brought it up. She's brought
that, and other things that she considers damning, up since then,
with alarming frequency. I feel completely justified in attacking
her, for her actual style on the site, based upon this. Hell, had
she been always antagonistic about me, after I mentioned such,
I'd have no problem whatsoever about her fixating on attacking
it. Same with other issues (such as my views of my mother). But,
to have blatantly switched as she did - based upon something
completely unrelated - strikes me as unreasonable.

What's the "alarming frequency" here? Prove your point, do your homework. I have not noticed her bringing it up with any frequency at all. I know I did, once, and I still think I was justified.

And since you mention it, YOU brought up the fact that you are a rapist. A lot of people, women in particular, react.

As for "high school clique behavior", since when is it clique-ish to laugh at a point made by a member? Or is it that you don't get that sort of yay's very often?

When it's funny? Yeah. When every single crappy
assed attempt pulls it? It's just spite. She doesn't
laugh at such attacks in general, unless they are
well done. But, she's been doing so with anything
aimed at me, recently. That's personalities, not any
actual indication of skill. And, it's fucking pathetic,
if you ask me.

Or is it that you feel cornered and lash out? Is it that you, in fact, are getting pwned, that people won't buy your bullshit? And specifically regarding Callaway, why should she be charitable towards you when all you do is to go after her?

Then again, your own desire to defend her,
and not concede any of the points that I'm
making, clearly puts you into just such a clique.
So, it makes sense that you can't see beyond
your biases either.

I knew you'd bring that up. Accusing people of clique behaviour is typically a knee-jerk reaction of people cornered and unable to back up their shit; rarely is it worth more than questioning someone's dx.

The easier explanation, certainly now and often enough otherwise, is that you don't have any points.

[odeon]

Others, should be warned. And should know
how her attacks have driven people from here,
by alienating them from the vast majority of the
members. Because, her little cadre of devotees
is quite large here.

Prove it. Again, you're making sweeping accusations but won't back them up.

[Calandale]

So it's OK when you do it, then? That how I should read this? That it's fine if you get to decide what's "clean"? Thing is, you keep on ranting about this, telliing us how nasty Callaway is, but you never actually back it up. What does that say about your behaviour?

I have backed it up. You just can't see it.
I understand that. I'm not going to convince you,
no matter what I do. Callaway could go far beyond
what she's done, and still you'd stick by her. Of this,
I have no question. Hell, you stuck by your friends
over the hounding of lit, you stuck by them when
scrap was driven away, and I'm sure that there were
prior instances, as well.

Targeting Callaway, as I remember it. "Scrap's wood" was the off the cuff joke, and it was nothing but innocent, considering how Scrap had made Callaway a target. It was nasty with YOUR usage, Callaway followed suit. Neither you nor Scrap were innocent so don't try to bullshit people now.

Scrap and Callaway had entered into an ugly
fight. She and I had no real beef, at that point.
My statement was simply humor. Based upon
the cross. She turned that into an opportunity
to launch a particularly low blow on him. The one
which sticks in my head as the true exemplar of her
fighting style. And, I am consistently noting when
she stoops to it.

What's the "alarming frequency" here? Prove your point, do your homework. I have not noticed her bringing it up with any frequency at all. I know I did, once, and I still think I was justified.

Why bother? As I said, I'm not trying to reach you.
And those who are not blinded will find their
own examples, just as I did. Though, it certainly
didn't hurt to have my suspicions enhanced by
statements of others, who noticed the same.

And since you mention it, YOU brought up the fact that you are a rapist. A lot of people, women in particular, react.

Again, I do mention it. Actually, I feel that it is
important for me to do so. Had that been her
beef with me, I'd have little objection. Given
that her primary objection to me didn't sway
anyone, rather than "sounding like a broken
record" and trying to show WHY it bothered
her so much, instead, she sought things which
might bother others.

Or is it that you feel cornered and lash out?

Of course that's there. It's just like
I did feel in school. When the whole
crowd is picking on someone, just
because the popular kid starts it.
And yeah, I reacted then, and I
react now.

Is it that you, in fact, are getting pwned, that people won't buy your bullshit?

Actually, I've been rather asking this about her,
of myself. Wondering if this line is actually touching
whatever conscience she has.

And specifically regarding Callaway, why should she be charitable towards you when all you do is to go after her?

Actually, I feel that my debates with her
were on a higher plane than with most,
and that I showed her a good deal of respect,
even in disagreement, UNTIL she started sniping,
after my prank. Now, I DO understand why she saw
that as such an egregious sin, but don't see why
my explanation wouldn't suffice. No matter; her
attacks, few of which had anything to do with that,
began from that moment. And, with enough low blows,
I've also become a bit more disturbed by her behavior.

I don't know what great evils that others committed
to earn her foul attacks, but I suspect that they were
equally inane.

I knew you'd bring that up. Accusing people of clique behaviour is typically a knee-jerk reaction of people cornered and unable to back up their shit; rarely is it worth more than questioning someone's dx.

What term would you rather I use
for a group who tends to side together
in any disagreement, and who collectively
mock those outside of it?

The easier explanation, certainly now and often enough otherwise, is that you don't have any points.

Whatever soothes YOUR conscience.

[odeon]

So it's OK when you do it, then? That how I should read this? That it's fine if you get to decide what's "clean"? Thing is, you keep on ranting about this, telliing us how nasty Callaway is, but you never actually back it up. What does that say about your behaviour?

I have backed it up. You just can't see it.
I understand that. I'm not going to convince you,
no matter what I do. Callaway could go far beyond
what she's done, and still you'd stick by her. Of this,
I have no question. Hell, you stuck by your friends
over the hounding of lit, you stuck by them when
scrap was driven away, and I'm sure that there were
prior instances, as well.

Rewriting history much? You have no idea of what went on between me and Lit, do you? As for Scrap, just because you say he was driven away doesn't make it so.

Targeting Callaway, as I remember it. "Scrap's wood" was the off the cuff joke, and it was nothing but innocent, considering how Scrap had made Callaway a target. It was nasty with YOUR usage, Callaway followed suit. Neither you nor Scrap were innocent so don't try to bullshit people now.

Scrap and Callaway had entered into an ugly
fight. She and I had no real beef, at that point.
My statement was simply humor. Based upon
the cross. She turned that into an opportunity
to launch a particularly low blow on him. The one
which sticks in my head as the true exemplar of her
fighting style. And, I am consistently noting when
she stoops to it.

That's YOUR take. But then, you weren't on the receiving end there, were you? I had no problems seeing the relevance of Callaway's reply to you. Apparently you still don't see it.

/shrugs

Not much I can do to help you further, in that case.

It's funny to note that it's still just about the only example of her "fighting style" you bring up. Do your homework, do it now.

What's the "alarming frequency" here? Prove your point, do your homework. I have not noticed her bringing it up with any frequency at all. I know I did, once, and I still think I was justified.

Why bother? As I said, I'm not trying to reach you.
And those who are not blinded will find their
own examples, just as I did. Though, it certainly
didn't hurt to have my suspicions enhanced by
statements of others, who noticed the same.

Why? Because one would think that you'd want to back some of your bullshit up. Because it's about your credibility. Surely, you're not suggesting that others will have to do your homework for you? "And those who are not blinded will find their own examples, just as I did."

And since you mention it, YOU brought up the fact that you are a rapist. A lot of people, women in particular, react.

Again, I do mention it. Actually, I feel that it is
important for me to do so. Had that been her
beef with me, I'd have little objection. Given
that her primary objection to me didn't sway
anyone, rather than "sounding like a broken
record" and trying to show WHY it bothered
her so much, instead, she sought things which
might bother others.

Which you still have to point out. Where is that "alarming" frequency? Homework and all that.

Or is it that you feel cornered and lash out?

Of course that's there. It's just like
I did feel in school. When the whole
crowd is picking on someone, just
because the popular kid starts it.
And yeah, I reacted then, and I
react now.

How's this different when it's someone else on the receiving end? When it's not you? When it's Callaway?

But I was referring to you running out of examples. Poor choice of words, I'll admit, considering how you turn it into being about YOU being bullied when that's what you try to do with Callaway.

Is it that you, in fact, are getting pwned, that people won't buy your bullshit?

Actually, I've been rather asking this about her,
of myself. Wondering if this line is actually touching
whatever conscience she has.

This line is about you. Not her.

And specifically regarding Callaway, why should she be charitable towards you when all you do is to go after her?

Actually, I feel that my debates with her
were on a higher plane than with most,
and that I showed her a good deal of respect,
even in disagreement, UNTIL she started sniping,
after my prank. Now, I DO understand why she saw
that as such an egregious sin, but don't see why
my explanation wouldn't suffice. No matter; her
attacks, few of which had anything to do with that,
began from that moment. And, with enough low blows,
I've also become a bit more disturbed by her behavior.

Again, what attacks? What low blows? Vague accusations only get you so far. Prove your points, show us something. Homework, you know.

I don't know what great evils that others committed
to earn her foul attacks, but I suspect that they were
equally inane.

Homework, etc.

I knew you'd bring that up. Accusing people of clique behaviour is typically a knee-jerk reaction of people cornered and unable to back up their shit; rarely is it worth more than questioning someone's dx.

What term would you rather I use
for a group who tends to side together
in any disagreement, and who collectively
mock those outside of it?

I'd try to prove that I had a case before thinking of synonyms. Homework, etc.

The easier explanation, certainly now and often enough otherwise, is that you don't have any points.

Whatever soothes YOUR conscience.

Faulty logic. Prove at least some of your points before going for cheap rhetorics. Homework, etc.

[Lucifer]

 

[odeon]

QFT

I don't think I can get any further. One shouldn't feed a narcissist.

[Christopher McCandless]

well, there you are, then - it's the biology which is a fucker.  even i struggled to work out the answer to a few of the questions, and i've gt two fucking degrees in the subject (albeit more specialised, so i suppose i'm allowed to have forgotten the physiol).

Biology was a minor problem when I took it because I had slept though 2 years of lessons. I take it biology has moved on quite a bit since you took your exams in it, maybe that is what is making it appear difficult.

[odeon]

So would you consider yourself well rested, then?

[Christopher McCandless]

Have you seen how much physics has been dumbed down, they seem to have been doing their utmost to remove all calculations from it wherever possible.

Seems reasonable to me. The ability to
perform mechanical calculations is usually
overemphasized. That's not what really
is important.

At present you never use calculus at A-level. How can you dumb it down even further and say it is a good thing?

[Christopher McCandless]

So would you consider yourself well rested, then?

That is what school did for me, yup.

[Lucifer]

well, there you are, then - it's the biology which is a fucker.  even i struggled to work out the answer to a few of the questions, and i've gt two fucking degrees in the subject (albeit more specialised, so i suppose i'm allowed to have forgotten the physiol).

Biology was a minor problem when I took it because I had slept though 2 years of lessons. I take it biology has moved on quite a bit since you took your exams in it, maybe that is what is making it appear difficult.

everything has moved on since i took exams in science, of course they have, dur.    i have read things since, though, and not just google or wiki.

however, my point was that it's sometimes a matter of rhetoric - working out what the question is asking, or the answer is supposed to be, rather than lack of knowledge - and, as we all know, that's an AS thing.  just been talking to one of my team leaders, and that's across the board rather than me, btw.

part of why i say that exams haven't been dumbed down is that science has moved on since "my day", and does so continuously, and so the level of sophistication of what's required in the way of knowledge/concepts/level of response et al is higher.

having said all of which, this current attempt to use any excuse/post/subject as a means of trying to score a point against me has failed again, not least because you shot yourself in the foot with yet another contradiction:

they're not dumbed down, i can assure you.  one of them is a complete bastard.

I probably could own it, unless it was Biology

can't you even remember what you've written yourself, and so very recently?