OK Gruff I see your point as do others here but please just let it go!
I value much of what you contribute to this forum and would like to
see more from you. It's a disscusion, that's all! I do not see any
need for moderation where opinions are concerned as everyone is
entitled to theirs. I agree with Chris that this crap is beneath you.

On Aug 18, 1:23 pm, gruff <[email protected]> wrote:
> "... On Aug 18, 9:01 am, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]>
> wrote: ..."
>
> > I'm not concerned with your assessment of someone else's intentions, and
> > argumentum ad populum is beneath you. It is neither your responsibility, nor
> > acceptable in this venue, for you to try and play honor police, especially
> > given the unmitigated gall of your assumptiveness. Who are you to claim to
> > know the intentions of a stranger, participating in a conversation in an
> > online forum? Are you God? I might be led to believe so, given the avowed
> > veracity of your knowledge of the internal workings of others.
>
> RP Singh August 15, 7:14am "There are no gods..." wherein he exhibits
> the gall to tell me what I do not understand because I am not used to
> thinking a certain way and implies that I am ignorant and obtuse.
>
> RP Singh August 15, 11:09am "Dear Gruff, I am much impressed by your
> knowledge and application.  You are an intelligent man and think you
> will be able to understand what I have to say"  Herein he acknowledges
> that I am intelligent then goes on to assume certain things about me
> that he has no basis for stating.  He also directly implies that no
> one here on ME is sufficiently intelligent to understand him.  He
> makes no conditional statements in this post.  All this statements are
> arrogant and full of himself.
>
> RP Singh August 15, 6:41pm - Herein RP makes several absolute
> statement that are not.
>
> Rigsy01 August 16, 5:42 am - Herein are made several absolute
> antagonistic statements based on personal knowldge of me she acquired
> elsewhere.
>
> Gruff August 16, 12:35pm - Herein I contradict a couple of RP's
> absolute statements with supporting evidence and ask him a simple
> question in return.
>
> RP Singh August 16, 7:11pm - Herein I am told that I am arguing as
> thought I had all the answers, that all my arguments are baseless
> (assuming a foundation which is completely in error).  He also answers
> my earlier question with a question tied to an insult that my
> reasoning is bullshit and that I have failed to understand him.  Then
> he concludes by saying that I am not intelligent.  I consider this to
> be his first attack.
>
> Gruff August 17, 12:32am - Herein I respond to his attack and use such
> conditional terms as "it seems..., you seem...., I think..., I don't
> think..., I believe ..., and point out his arrogance and the reality
> of what we know.  Then I warn him that unless be begins to respond
> with civility and rational discourse I will no longer respond to him.
> (Disclaimer: However I did respond further on when his statements
> seems so absurd and attack-like that I could not refrain.  My fault.
> I should have continued to ignore him the way I do others who are of
> the same ilk.)
>
> Gruff August 17, 9:23am - Herein I respond generically with
> definitions of oblivon and the statement that for some oblivion is as
> ignorance -- bliss.  This is in response to his post to Slip on August
> 17 at 6:07am.
>
> If you doubt -- as you seem to -- that RP does not talk in absolutes
> as if he knows everything, I refer you to RP's post to Slip on August
> 17 at 10:28am wherein he speaks as if he were a god or a prophet.  He
> is neither.
>
> RP Singh August 17, 10:33am - Herein RP states flat out with absolute
> authority that I do not believe in a soul and implies that I will die
> in ignorance.  Even Deane Kellison opines that his words are
> uncharitable.  If this is not an attack, I don't know what is.
>
> Gruff August 17, 7:58pm - Herein I finally break my civility with my
> statement that RP does nothing but display his own ignorance and
> intolerance, both of which he has accused me of more than once.
>
> Gruff August 18, 2:50am - Herein in response to Slip's comments about
> RP, I state that RP's arrogance and disdain are untouched by any sense
> of humility or respect for anyone else.
>
> Then you accuse me of being denigrating and belittling all through
> this thread.  I think you are either biased against me or in favor of
> RP but it seems clear that you have not read this threat with an
> unbiased eye.
>
> Molly August 18, 8:59am - Herein Molly jumps in at an opportunity to
> make false accusations which I suspect are based in an earlier
> disagreement with her last year.  I believe she is being very
> disingenuous based on prior animosity at my expose of her marketing
> herself here on ME.
>
> Then you jump back in the fray stating that I make "absolutist
> statements" regarding another's intentions.  Please respond in kind
> and point these out to me?  If you can.
>
> You further accuse me of theatrical tricks, melodramatics and a
> deliberate display of emotion for effect with exaggerated,
> overemotional behavior calculated to elicit a response seemingly based
> on my statement that in politics it is a fallacy to not respond to an
> attack.  I'd appreciate having these histrionics pointed out
> specifically.
>
> Beyond this, I've been threatened with banishment before by the very
> people with whom I have disagreed.  Do as you will.  I will continue
> to be as I am.  If you value my input, then correct the people who
> deserve correction.  Otherwise, ban me.  I sincerely believe my
> behavior has been -- for the most part -- not only acceptable but my
> responses enhance the relevancy of this forum.

Reply via email to