Re: dammit, why can't i just leave questions unanswered???

Subject:

Comments:
: : have we really seen where specifics lead? : --You haven't, I have. :) : : i think diarmuid would benefit from picking up the book because, tho he may have no problem dealing with 5s irl, he seems to online, and i believe that the information contained in that book may be helpful. was that unclear? : --Yes. In my opinion, if you have no problem getting along with certain people in real life, it's irrelevant wheter or not you do online. (Online you can't even know if they are members of that certain group anyway) : : : --No, many unhealthy people trash things outside their nest. : : i take it this is not your nest? : --Ah, now you proved the Five take an specifics. I specifically stated that *unhealthy* people trash things outside their nest. You immediatelly suggested that I'm trashing this place, even though I'm not unhealthy. No wonder trying to spend time to provide specifics is lost on some Fives. : However, that is an intersting question, Isaac. It can be approached in many ways. One way is to think of the history of this board. Becca noticed that there was a lot of activity on the Type 5 comment boards and thought introducing a new board for Fives would help people speak up more. I did voice my concerns about that idea because I thought, think and will think that type is an entrapment, not a vehicle for self-definition and having a board for a specific type only makes people identify more with their type and mingling is really the only way to go. But there was already a Type 4 board and dealing with issues is a personal thing anyway, so I didn't strongly oppose the idea. : : : --Tell me, Isaac, how posting on a board where there is strong moderation makes it impossible to carry on self-moderating? If you're saying that the existance of rules and a visible moderator means you can stop taking responsibility for your actions and assume the moderator takes care of what ever you do, you have some serious growing up to do. : : bleakh! ptooey! i spit out those words you put in my mouth!! did i say it was impossible? did i say that the existance of a moderator means we don't take responsibility for what we do? i don't remember typing that, and i don't see it in my post. you should learn to take me more literally. : --No one should take you literally because you never say anything straight. If you did, then I would. And I'm beginning to see you are rude, spitting at a computer display isn't polite. : : : in my perfect objectivist world, an argument is a series of premises tied together to support a necessary conclusion. an insult is a verbal attack. how is it in your imperfect altruist world? : --"altruist world"? I didn't even suggest or hint that my world is "altruist." And you are asking me to take you literally. Besides that, your defenition of an argument doesn't exclude insults. : : : i have provided specifics. i told him exactly which messages i was referring to. : --No, you didn't. Give us links, Isaac. That's specific. "That message that is the continuation of the thread on the other board I posted before Paul did but after Liz did" isn't exactly specific. And nevermind that, you haven't provided me any specifics. You've made random comments about me and my ideas but never gave any specific proof. Let's see..."you wanted to have a pissing contest" was one of your frequent lines earlier. Yet you never stated where I had said or suggested so. : : : --Actually, that post contained mostly very, very bad comments by you, while I was calm as a cucumber. : : and every bit as sharp as one, too! : : see, THATS an insult. not an argument. : --LMAO! 'sharp' as a cucumber? Pointy like a potato? : : : : --You were lying, because you were interested. Otherwise you wouldn't have kept on replying to me. I just called your bluff, that's all. Letting you think you manipulated me to replying to you...that was surprisingly easy. : : i was lying, because i was interested... what was i lying about? what was in interested in? mikko, i genuinely was confident in your ability to help me rationally critique my enneagram model. : --And given that you are a Five seriously building something new in that field, you are oddly more intersted in fighting with me. Maybe you realized how non-functional your model was. : : for that, i admit my foolishness. you didn't call any bluff. you just proved that i was wrong, that's all. : --Yes, I proved that it's impossible for anyone to rationally critque that model. : : i should never have believed that you'd be of any use to me whatsoever, or that you'd ever be able to have a productive disagreement with me. so, i decided to play your game for a while, and antagonize you and say that i was predicting your every move, just like you seem to do, complete with the "i'm manipulating you into thinking you're manipulating me, nya nya!" crap, but with a little of my own style. if you notice, i got bored of that game rather quickly, : --LMAO! You're still playing that game! You just can't quit. No matter how alledgely 'bored' you are. : :and tho i'm a little impressed at the stir i've caused, i'd be pleased as punch if anyone at all could think of anything else to talk about. : --Anyone? Maybe you yourself? : : : --Isaac, isn't it amusing that when you try to joke you aren't fun at all, but when you try to be serious, you make people laugh? : : do you even know when i'm joking and when i'm serious? i don't think so. : --Of course I do when you specifically say "I'm JOKING" and later "seriously..." : : : isaac : : Mikko

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL: