Note to both RP and Gruff: You both are intelligent and valued posters here. And, for the obvious reason(s), we at ME have a specific list of posting standards… one of which is to not use ad hominem attacks no matter how carefully veiled.
As moderators, we can and surely do miss and/or overlook some infractions. In the current fray, I ask both RP and gruff to cease any attacks against the other’s person … in any way at all… and return to what is a great thread otherwise. As an additional comment, for those who don’t know it, attacks against the person (ad hominem) may or may not be grounded in perceived truth, so this fact alone does not justify doing so. On Aug 18, 10:23 am, 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.
