moved thread

[_Jersey Girl]

Rule #1: Never say that you're logging off and put the computer in sleep mode. You'll just make a big fat liar out of yourself. Or, at the very least, a small medium weight liar.

dart...nowhere on this thread or on this board or on any board will you find a post by me describing JAK as "brilliant". I just briefly scanned your recent post so don't expect me to reply to all of it. I noted that "brilliant" line though.

I still don't understand why you haven't seen fit to post the exchanges that I requested.

In any case, in spite of your refusal to meet my request, I will look at the thread you refer to. If I see a reason to respond to it, I will but beyond that, I have no intention of continuing on this thread and my best advice to all concerned is to fend for yourselves.

I'm really going now...shutting down...I mean it!

p.s. Please do NOT confuse me with marg. She would tell you, as I am now, that she and I are two very different people. We rarely interact with eachother on this board because we tend to aggravate the hell out of eachother and end up going nowhere. She would not like your confusing the two of us any more than I do.

I'm really going....seriously...I'm gone!

[_Moniker]

If I see a reason to respond to it, I will but beyond that, I have no intention of continuing on this thread and my best advice to all concerned is to fend for yourselves.

My best advice for you is to not concern yourself with things that don't have anything to do with you.

[_dartagnan]

Jersey Girl,

Will you at least admit that when JAK and I had our first encounter, he did leave the debate?

Will you at least admit that I didn't insult him in that exchange?

If you can admit these two basic points of fact, then that's a start.

I want to put to rest this silly claim that JAK deals with arguments, that he is capable, and that he only leaves when insulted.

[_harmony]

Jersey Girl,

Will you at least admit that when JAK and I had our first encounter, he did leave the debate?

Will you at least admit that I didn't insult him in that exchange?

If you can admit these two basic points of fact, then that's a start.

I want to put to rest this silly claim that JAK deals with arguments, that he is capable, and that he only leaves when insulted.

Anyone who leaves a thread because they can't deal with what's being said has no business trying to live in the real world. in real life, insults, put downs, bad arguments, stupidity (usually from one's managers), and downright dishonesty all have to be dealt with on a daily basis.

[_marg]

Anyone who leaves a thread because they can't deal with what's being said has no business trying to live in the real world. in real life, insults, put downs, bad arguments, stupidity (usually from one's managers), and downright dishonesty all have to be dealt with on a daily basis.

In school kids have no choice, they can not walk away from bullying for example, school authorities often need to step in. In the workplace a person does have choices, they can stay and ignore the person, they can quit, sometimes they can seek legal action. It is dependent on the situation, what people's choices are. One can choose to involve themselves in situations even though they know no value will result or one can choose to shrug/ignore. Certainly there is no personal obligation to engage any stranger in discussion on a message board. In real life generally one has obligation to family, friends, fellow co workers to engage in discussion but even then one can ignore. It is basic in debate/discussion/argumentation that both parties need to be sincere/honest. Otherwise it is not likely anything fruitful will result. This is why fallacies are pointed out to another person in discussion. The fallacies have been given latin names and if enables those in discussion a quick way of pointing out where the discussion is going wrong logically. At times people may not be aware they are arguing fallaciously so by pointing out a fallacy being made, and if both are intellectually honest, the party commiting fallacious argumentation should stop. If they don't it indicates lack of sincerity and at that point there is no reason or point to continue to engage.

[_harmony]

Anyone who leaves a thread because they can't deal with what's being said has no business trying to live in the real world. in real life, insults, put downs, bad arguments, stupidity (usually from one's managers), and downright dishonesty all have to be dealt with on a daily basis.

In school kids have no choice, they can not walk away from bullying for example, school authorities often need to step in. In the workplace a person does have choices, they can stay and ignore the person, they can quit, sometimes they can seek legal action. It is dependent on the situation, what people's choices are. One can choose to involve themselves in situations even though they know no value will result or one can choose to shrug/ignore. Certainly there is no personal obligation to engage any stranger in discussion on a message board. In real life generally one has obligation to family, friends, fellow co workers to engage in discussion but even then one can ignore. It is basic in debate/discussion/argumentation that both parties need to be sincere/honest. Otherwise it is not likely anything fruitful will result. This is why fallacies are pointed out to another person in discussion. The fallacies have been given latin names and if enables those in discussion a quick way of pointing out where the discussion is going wrong logically. At times people may not be aware they are arguing fallaciously so by pointing out a fallacy being made, and if both are intellectually honest, the party commiting fallacious argumentation should stop. If they don't it indicates lack of sincerity and at that point there is no reason or point to continue to engage.

"Nothing fruitful"? "Should stop"? "lack of sincerity"?

In the words of one of my esteemed friends: deal.

Either grow a tougher skin or get a bigger umbrella. Leaving a discussion simply because someone slapped a label on you that you don't like is reminiscent of the threat to take your ball and go home so the rest of us can't play with it. Either grow up or be prepared to leave a lot of discussions (and be labeled a loser, since the first one to leave indicates surrender). We all left junior high a long time ago. We each express ourselves differently (personally, I'd rather pull my hair out with a pair of pliers than engage JAK in a conversation), but that doesn't limit the value of our contribution to a given discussion.

[_richardMdBorn]

Guess what happened to JAK?

Vanished as usual. What's the excuse going to be this time.... Richard was too mean to him too?

Kevin,

Thanks for your kind words. It's hard to understand why JAK didn't simply admit that he was wrong in his initial statement and continue the discussion after revising it. We all make mistakes. Why not just admit it and move on to the next point of interest.

[_marg]

Anyone who leaves a thread because they can't deal with what's being said has no business trying to live in the real world. in real life, insults, put downs, bad arguments, stupidity (usually from one's managers), and downright dishonesty all have to be dealt with on a daily basis.

In school kids have no choice, they can not walk away from bullying for example, school authorities often need to step in. In the workplace a person does have choices, they can stay and ignore the person, they can quit, sometimes they can seek legal action. It is dependent on the situation, what people's choices are. One can choose to involve themselves in situations even though they know no value will result or one can choose to shrug/ignore. Certainly there is no personal obligation to engage any stranger in discussion on a message board. In real life generally one has obligation to family, friends, fellow co workers to engage in discussion but even then one can ignore. It is basic in debate/discussion/argumentation that both parties need to be sincere/honest. Otherwise it is not likely anything fruitful will result. This is why fallacies are pointed out to another person in discussion. The fallacies have been given latin names and if enables those in discussion a quick way of pointing out where the discussion is going wrong logically. At times people may not be aware they are arguing fallaciously so by pointing out a fallacy being made, and if both are intellectually honest, the party commiting fallacious argumentation should stop. If they don't it indicates lack of sincerity and at that point there is no reason or point to continue to engage.

"Nothing fruitful"? "Should stop"? "lack of sincerity"?

You disingenously post a few phrases not in context.

First phrase "Nothing fruitful" taken from what I wrote " It is basic debate/discussion/argumentation that both parties need to be sincere/honest. Otherwise nothing fruitful will result." That is basic common sense which needs no explanation. Even in this small discussion between you and I dealing with concepts you are indicating your intent is not serious interest in being honest, in coming to a meeting of the minds. Your intent is to not address what I actually write with intellectually honestly but to distort, take words out of context, disagree not matter what and insult.

Second phrase taken out of context "Should stop". I wrote: "At times people may not be aware they are arguing fallaciously so by pointing out a fallacy being made, and if both are intellectually honest, the party commiting fallacious argumentation should stop." Again this is basic common sense, as long as you have an appreciation of argumentation fallacies. As long as both parties are intellectually honest it is in the best interests of both parties to not argue fallaciously. Only individual interested in game playing, intellectually dishonesty will continue to argue fallaciously.

Third phrase: "lack of sincerity" came from : "If they don't it indicates lack of sincerity and at that point there is no reason or point to continue to engage." Intellectually honest individuals who are informed they argued fallaciously will stop only individuals into game playing will not.

In the words of one of my esteemed friends: deal.

Some people are not worth the time and effort to deal with. Time is a resource, physical energy is limited.

Either grow a tougher skin or get a bigger umbrella. Leaving a discussion simply because someone slapped a label on you that you don't like is reminiscent of the threat to take your ball and go home so the rest of us can't play with it.

It is not being thin skinned to ignore individuals who don't deserve one's attention. And when it comes to message board discussions, it's actually in the best interest of the board. Why have meaningless petty minded bickering, insulting going on? And ignoring one or a few people on a message board is not analogous to threatening to go home with the ball so the rest can't play. Of course if one doesn't reply to an individual all the rest can still discuss if they so choose. But someone intent on harassing a discussion can destroy it for others who are interested in honest discussion.

[quoter] to leave a lot of discussions (and be labeled a loser, since the first one to leave indicates surrender). We all left junior high a long time ago. We each express ourselves differently (personally, I'd rather pull my hair out with a pair of pliers than engage JAK in a conversation), but that doesn't limit the value of our contribution to a given discussion.[/quote]

Leaving a discussion is not surrendering in the sense of acknowledging the other party has made any argumentation points, it can be but in cases where the other party is into insults and fallacious argumentation that is the more likely reason. Of course as you say we each express ourselves differently. But at no time is fallacious argumentation acceptable between honest parties.

[_dartagnan]

marg, you're still faced with the facts. None of your excuse making nonsense adds up.

Please illustrate how Richard or myself was "insulting" to JAK during our first exchanges.

We weren't, and JAK bailed, obviously for other reasons.

I'll let you figure out what those were.

[_marg]

Have to leave the thread for tonight, at this point I'm not sure which exchange you are talking about.