Page 1 of 2
in reference to CK calling Gee a liar
Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 8:15 pm
by _CaliforniaKid
From MADB:
in reference to CK calling Gee a liar
I realize this distinction probably doesn't matter much to anyone but me, but just for the record I used the word "lies" with regard to statements in Gee's book, but never called Gee personally a "liar". The subtle difference is that I felt he had succumbed to the temptation to disingenuity, but I did not state that this means he's a bad or uniformly untrustworthy person.
Of course, I've apologized even for what I did say, so hopefully this will eventually be forgotten and I can get on with my lonely life unmolested and unashamed.
-CK
Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 9:46 pm
by _CaliforniaKid
Just to clarify, the "lonely" bit was tongue-in-cheek. :-P
Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 9:49 pm
by _silentkid
CaliforniaKid wrote:Just to clarify, the "lonely" bit was tongue-in-cheek. :-P
Yeah right. You know we're all just a bunch of single, thirty-somethings who still live in our parents' basements and play on computers all day. ;)
Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 9:54 pm
by _Doctor Steuss
CaliforniaKid wrote:Just to clarify, the "lonely" bit was tongue-in-cheek. :-P
What about the part of you hoping to be "unmolested"?
Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 9:56 pm
by _CaliforniaKid
lol!
Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 9:57 pm
by _Runtu
I think that's important, CK, that you have repeatedly apologized for that statement. It says a lot about your character.
This whole thing has gotten way out of hand. Dr. Peterson suggested that I am a liar, and you don't see me threatening legal action. sheesh.
Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2007 2:02 pm
by _Dr. Shades
Is there any reason that Gee needs to be treated with kid gloves? It's like everyone wants to pussyfoot around, acting like Gee is made of glass or something.
Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2007 2:08 pm
by _Runtu
Dr. Shades wrote:Is there any reason that Gee needs to be treated with kid gloves? It's like everyone wants to pussyfoot around, acting like Gee is made of glass or something.
I don't think it's ever appropriate to throw accusations of lying around, unless you have solid and damning evidence. It doesn't matter who is on the receiving end of it or who is doing the accusing.
Is it just me, or is it just a bit ironic that the person who chastises CK for calling Gee a liar won't even respond to my email asking him to explain why he called me a liar?
Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2007 2:14 pm
by _Dr. Shades
Runtu wrote:I don't think it's ever appropriate to throw accusations of lying around, unless you have solid and damning evidence. It doesn't matter who is on the receiving end of it or who is doing the accusing.
I thought he
did have such evidence. And not just him, but several others.
Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2007 2:17 pm
by _Runtu
Dr. Shades wrote:Runtu wrote:I don't think it's ever appropriate to throw accusations of lying around, unless you have solid and damning evidence. It doesn't matter who is on the receiving end of it or who is doing the accusing.
I thought he
did have such evidence. And not just him, but several others.
I think the distinction was that he had evidence that Gee was wrong. That led him to believe he was either duplicitous or incompetent. As they say, it goes to motive, and I'm not sure any of us has any solid evidence that Gee was intentionally dishonest.
Just my two cents. Like I said, I don't like being called a liar, particularly when it's done without reason.