--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1" <lurkernomore20002000@...> wrote: > > Share, > You got yourself a bogey at six o'clock, and I don't think > it's ever going to go away. > There is no tactic or maneuver you will be able engage to > get this bogey off your ass. > I'm sorry.
I'm so happy someone said this first, so I wasn't the first to do so. :-) This mindset -- I have "rebutted" what you said about me, so you *owe* me a response so that I can keep the argument going -- is in my opinion the crux of what is wrong with FFL. This is the mindset -- and tactic -- employed by a number of people on this forum. It's almost as if they have become conditioned to believe that because *they* want to have an argument that they can convince them- selves they've "won," that *entitles* them to an argument in response. I don't think I have to delineate who specializes in this mindset and tactic. Just think back to the last conversations you remember degenerating into noise and argument here, and then remember who it was who reacted...uh...badly when the other person wished to withdraw from the argument? I think this mindset is fucked up. I wish that the people who employ it would grow the fuck up. > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@> > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: > > > > > > As for caring what someone thinks of me, there are many > > > posters on FFL whose opinion, including of me, I care > > > about. This is also why I reply, especially to Judy's > > > accusations. > > > > Note that Share has not replied to my rebuttal of her > > accusations against me. > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > Sent: Sunday, December 2, 2012 3:08 AM > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: to Judy > > > > > > > > > Â > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" > <anartaxius@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@> > wrote: > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long <sharelong60@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > You began misinterpreting me on Sept 9 post 319521 and have > > > > > > continued to do so up to the present. > > > > > > > > > No, no, Share, generalizations are not acceptable. They're one > > > > > of your many ways of avoiding accountability for what you say. > > > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > > > There are those who see forests and those who see trees. Share > > > > seems to be a generalist, a caretaker of forests. You are far > > > > more specific, taking care of individual trees. I do not think > > > > you two will ever connect. There is something to say for each > > > > of these views, but such a divergence between them will never > > > > line up as an argument. Your thinking styles are simply not > > > > compatible. She cannot understand you, and you cannot understand > > > > her, though I suspect you feel you have Share pegged, and she > > > > feels she has you pegged. This is an opinion, not a fact. If > > > > it were a fact, it would be hopeless to continue, unless > > > > bickering is the gold standard for social congress. > > > > > > That's a compassionate way of seeing things, but I see > > > them a little differently. For one thing, I think that > > > Share and Judy (and the rest of the pile-on persecutors > > > of her) are remarkably ALIKE, in that they all 1) have > > > large egos that constantly require stroking, 2) have a > > > near-constant need to attract attention, and 3) have > > > a near-desperate compulsion to "get in the last word" > > > or "win" arguments that don't matter to anyone else in > > > the world *but* their large egos. > > > > > > The fact that Share CARES what any of these bitches > > > think of her makes her a perfect victim for their > > > assaults, and from her side SHE keeps restarting the > > > arguments and thus *making* herself the victim every > > > time it dies down, because that gets her attention. > > > > > > I think it's all a little tacky, and too much like a > > > bitchy high school girl clique ( and I include both > > > Robin and Ravi as "girls" :-) to watch any of it. It's > > > all too predictable at this point, and too Drama Queens > > > On Parade to bother with. > > > > > > Share could stop it at any point by just *letting* the > > > cliquebitches have the last word and moving on to more > > > sane topics. Then when they tried to restart it again, > > > just ignore them again. But she doesn't, because IMO > > > 1) she's hungry to be the focus of attention and have > > > everything be "all about her," and 2) SHE'S JUST > > > LIKE THE WOMEN PILING ONTO HER. > > > > > > All I can say is that by now my "Next" finger is almost > > > worn out from zipping past anything that ANY of them say, > > > and I suspect other people's are, too. I just wish the > > > whole lot of them would grow up. > > > > > >
