Now, what do you think about my argument that his behavior here is not "super-annoying" but purposefully an attempt to be destructive?
I think a clear case was made that Atlantic Mike, Binger, and some others were attempting to be purposeful destructive.
I’m not as sure about MG. I think maybe a case could be made that he has at times acted like those others, but not always.
Fair enough. It's been almost 25 years since his first community-disparaging posts in the earliest renditions of this board, but I will agree to disagree.
For me personally however, his baseless attacks on grindael, even after his passing, are beyond the pale.
I was going to hop in and add my two cents on a thread or two, but then I thought...why? I'd like to see something new or interesting to comment on but, alas, that doesn't seem to be a possibility. Why join in on a thread if it's just a rehash of a rehash?
If I see something that sparks my interest...maybe.
MG,
I interpreted your intentions as a jab at the board or, worse, a drive by shooting to satisfy your personal needs to commit an offence. You couldn't resist the temptation by which you are tempted.
Anyway, what's the king's name? That would be something new for you discuss here. Or tell us about your feelings of the chiseled face on the lead plate.
I think a clear case was made that Atlantic Mike, Binger, and some others were attempting to be purposeful destructive.
I’m not as sure about MG. I think maybe a case could be made that he has at times acted like those others, but not always.
Fair enough. It's been almost 25 years since his first community-disparaging posts in the earliest renditions of this board, but I will agree to disagree.
For me personally however, his baseless attacks on grindael, even after his passing, are beyond the pale.
I’ll admit that was before my time and I don’t know the history there.
Now, what do you think about my argument that his behavior here is not "super-annoying" but purposefully an attempt to be destructive?
I think a clear case was made that Atlantic Mike, Binger, and some others were attempting to be intentionally destructive.
I’m not as sure about MG. I think maybe a case could be made that he has at times acted like those others, but not always.
Unlike AM, he actually has the capacity to engage meaningfully with the board and not just spew filth.
Case in point. drumdude, in our interactions do you believe/think that both you and I...generally speaking...have been civil with each other and been able to learn from each other?
Even though we each may have found one another a bit annoying at times?
Here's the thing (assuming your answer is that we have been able to talk with each other rather than past each other), what makes the difference?
I feel like I've had some positive interactions with you. Mostly so...even though we strongly disagree on Mormonism.
Fair enough. It's been almost 25 years since his first community-disparaging posts in the earliest renditions of this board, but I will agree to disagree.
For me personally however, his baseless attacks on grindael, even after his passing, are beyond the pale.
I’ll admit that was before my time and I don’t know the history there.
I think a clear case was made that Atlantic Mike, Binger, and some others were attempting to be intentionally destructive.
I’m not as sure about MG. I think maybe a case could be made that he has at times acted like those others, but not always.
Unlike AM, he actually has the capacity to engage meaningfully with the board and not just spew filth.
Case in point. drumdude, in our interactions do you believe/think that both you and I...generally speaking...have been civil with each other and been able to learn from each other?
Even though we each may have found one another a bit annoying at times?
Here's the thing (assuming your answer is that we have been able to talk with each other rather than past each other), what makes the difference?
I feel like I've had some positive interactions with you. Mostly so...even though we strongly disagree on Mormonism.
Regards,
MG
We strongly disagree and yet we’ve had some great discussions. I think it’s only natural that things get heated sometimes when we’re talking about very personal beliefs.
You haven't read what he's tried to defend in the past. Do some reading. It's not over the top. He's here only to troll, so he goes to extremes to justify things, all while presenting himself as a fully believing LDS. He does your religion no favors with his behavior here.
And look at how much the troll has been fed in this thread alone.
It's interesting that one person's so called 'troll' is another person's discussion companion. Difference? They talk with each other and try and understand where the other is coming from. Neither one has to agree. They agree to disagree. The folks that call out 'troll!', pointed at me, are generally those that I've had little or no interaction with except to trade barbs.
Case in point. How much interaction have you and I had where we could connect with one another without focusing on belittling the other?
Look to drumdude, Kishkumen, canpakes, and others for examples on how to do so.
Then do it. Rather than simply pointing fingers...or the finger.
It's interesting that one person's so called 'troll' is another person's discussion companion. Difference? * * *
Regards,
MG
It's interesting that one person's figment of his imagination is another person's God. Difference?
"Only the atheist realizes how morally objectionable it is for survivors of catastrophe to believe themselves spared by a loving god, while this same God drowned infants in their cribs." Sam Harris
I'd like to see something new or interesting to comment on but, alas, that doesn't seem to be a possibility. Why join in on a thread if it's just a rehash of a rehash?
