Mutual respect, prejudice, safety, and personal responsibility

[sarkeizen]

When entering into a discussion

Which requires at least two people talking around a point.  Which you can't do very long or very well.

insist that things be done 'your way.'

Like the way you demand and coerce people to your beliefs before you will treat them like rational people. 

I'm not demanding anyone converse with me.  I just think it's silly to call the propagandizing you do as "conversation".

[Jimboot]

Well in my opinion in this discussion you have been a faker.  Try to be real if there is a next time where we end up debating something.

LOL I have learned more about you in this thread than any of your other posts. I get it now. I don't even know what you mean by the above statement. It's like something my Grandson would say.

[MileHigh]

Here's a prime example of you being a disingenuous faker:

<<< No. I have no opinion as I have not spent time in the military. Have you?  >>>

[sarkeizen]

I don't even know what you mean by the above statement. It's like something my Grandson would say.

Probably what he means is that you seem to be acting hypersensitive.  I'd guess that's because most of the things you appear to be calling disrespectful are considerably more obscure than calling someone a shill.  That's not meant to invalidate how you feel about things.  I'd just say that I often hear, even in a business context people refer to someone as "playing dumb" without it coming to blows.  I'm pretty sure if I called someone in the board room (of the shadow government for whom I work) a "shill".  That might just happen and if it wasn't a physical blow then I might expect some papers served.

Again, I expect that MH thinks this behavior of yours is an attempt to invalidate his argument that people shouldn't say "shill".  So he believe that your objections are not things you are actually offended by but rather foils to make a point.  People do this all the time as far as I can tell.

Anyway when you need a statistician to explain emotional nuance of a conversation to you.  I think that's a good sign you need to get out more.

[Jimboot]

Probably what he means is that you seem to be acting hypersensitive.  I'd guess that's because most of the things you appear to be calling disrespectful are considerably more obscure than calling someone a shill.  That's not meant to invalidate how you feel about things.  I'd just say that I often hear, even in a business context people refer to someone as "playing dumb" without it coming to blows.  I'm pretty sure if I called someone in the board room (of the shadow government for whom I work) a "shill".  That might just happen and if it wasn't a physical blow then I might expect some papers served.

Again, I expect that MH thinks this behavior of yours is an attempt to invalidate his argument that people shouldn't say "shill".  So he believe that your objections are not things you are actually offended by but rather foils to make a point.  People do this all the time as far as I can tell.

Well I'm certainly not trying to invalidate his first post in this thread. I think that is a lofty goal. A robust discussion is good but personal attacks are not. SO I certainly agree with him. Shill is not a word used here in AU so you may as well call me a flibbertygibbet . It's not offensive to me. I'm in no way hypersensitive. I think I've been very measured in my responses and have avoided using colourful labels unlike others.


My main issue is that if we want to pursue the goal of mutual respect and personal responsibility we will not get there if individuals think they can use personal abuse when they think it's "appropriate". That's a nonsense. He only seems to want mutual respect if it's on his terms with his rules.