"A particular discussion of which I am part" = one of Xeno's repeated attempts to force me to respond to him so he can accuse me of "lying" when I said what he quotes (an utterly absurd canard he picked up from Barry).
His twisted, malevolent dishonesty is quite amazing in a person who has publicly asserted his freedom from such entanglements--when he is actually helpless even to unpress his own buttons. He pretends to need a reference for my "I could have sworn..." post when in fact he knows precisely which very recent post I'm talking about. And he got the number of the post he quotes wrong (deliberately?). Here's the right one: https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/358537 https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/358537 Note that his belligerent fury is at my response to his own knowingly false accusations about my purported "pattern of deviousness" and "lack of integrity"--which he himself admitted he could not document. In a subsequent post, I addressed his misrepresentation of what he quotes me as saying: I said I wouldn't discuss anything with you unless you withdraw your accusations (you can't document them because they're patently not true). I didn't say I wouldn't comment if I found it appropriate to do so (e.g., if you make any more false or insulting statements about me, I may respond to them). But your accusations, as long as they're on the table, have effectively foreclosed on the possibility of our having a friendly discussion of "philosophy or science or music" or any other neutral topic. You could have sworn (reference please) but I do not think that is it. In post #358357, 22 September 2013 you said: Why don't you fuck off? I'm not going to discuss anything with you until you've documented your accusations, or withdrawn them. Because those accusations have not been withdrawn, nor documented you, cannot enter into a discussion with me without having lied. You seem to skirt the edges of this pronouncement rather closely, by talking about me in the third person, by attempting to 'comment' to appear as if you are not involving yourself in a particular discussion of which I am part. The lengths to which you go to 'prove' you are the paragon of truth and honesty are beyond credulity. Advertising simply cannot cover up the basic fact of the matter. I could have sworn I made it clear I wasn't at all interested in commenting on what Xeno had to say unless he deliberately misrepresented me or something I said. If anyone else happens to be curious about the answers to the questions he asks, let me know.
