--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@...> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" <anartaxius@> > wrote: >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote: >>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" >>> <anartaxius@> wrote: >> >>> As I believe I said above, "You can imagine to a certain >>> extent what it would be like for *you* to be a bat or to >>> be your identical twin brother..." >>> >>> Now, I know you read that, because you asked me what "a >>> certain extent" was. So why are you asking that question >>> as though I hadn't already covered it? >> >> I was inquiring as to the range of that extent, perhaps not >> clearly. In other words, how far from 100% accuracy would >> you say your descriptions of people's motives range? 10%, 30%? > > That also varies. > > But you aren't really describing your question accurately, > are you? It was actually confrontational and accusatory, > wasn't it?
To make the question more precise, for any given person on FFL, in your own estimation, based on the replies you get and the posts directed to you either directly or indirectly, is there a range somewhere within 0% to 100% for which you feel you can accurately estimate or guesstimate the motives a person has in making such a post? I would assume that the percentage would vary with the person. Now your last comment above is not relevant to my question in the previous post, but since you brought it up, this last comment of yours seems to me a diversion, and to me sounds confrontational and accusatory. Now I said sounds, since I might be mistaken, but to me it is in line with your posting 'style'. Why do you feel you are being accused? Further, in *my opinion* I do sometimes think you go over the top in describing other people's motives, and my subjective interpretation is you are projecting your internal state, your opinion of the situation, onto that person. Now that is *my* projection. Now take Barry. He grossly exaggerates often in his posts, is often rather unkind, exceptionally unkind occasionally. But overall, my subjective interpretation of what he writes is he is not usually intense about it, but when you do it, it feels very intense. That is, what he says in like vein is not important to him nearly to the degree what you say is important to you. Getting blasted by Barry, and getting blasted by you are, for me, entirely different experiences. For me, that recent post to Share was the only one, of the ones of Barry's I have read recently that comes close to your intensity. It makes me wonder if somewhere in your life history your method of responding to people developed in response to some less than pleasant events, or it could a family characteristic. Some people seem inclined to confrontation and argument more than others. So in reply to your last comment, aside from the question I asked about percentages, I do think you are confrontational and accusatory. I am stating this as if it were a fact. But the other side of the coin is, do you think yourself that you are this way or not? Do the people on the forum who are generally favourable to you think you are confrontational and accusatory? There would seem to be a range of opinion on this issue. I would assume that those who thought you were would tend to be more favourable in Barry's direction, and those who felt you were not would not be favourable to Barry, and even if they thought you were confrontational and accusatory, would feel it was justified as you championed ideas and an outlook on life they were more comfortable with.
