9
   

Is the ignore user choice the most ignorant choice?

 
 
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sat 2 Oct, 2010 03:23 pm
@plainoldme,
plainoldme wrote:

That's an interesting round of responses!

msolga and engineer -- While it is true that if you ignore a person, they might never know they are being ignored, it is also true that some posters start haunting you, demanding that you answer their questions/accept their challenges/look back through 27 pages of posts to find the original statement that started the mess!

One prominent rightie was stamping his little feet at the liberals and those he sees as liberals (who often tell him they are not), demanding that we take his quiz. To shut him up, I took it. He didn't mention it again. On the other hand, when I have told a poster that I am not going back several months to find a remark which may be on anyone of three threads, I received an angry dismissal.

There is no pleasing some folks!

intrepid -- How you play the game! Ahh, there's the rub! Sounds a little like Survival. I admit that I have not seen more than five consecutive minutes at a time and have only subjected myself to no more than four glimpses, that there could be a strategy in Survival is just puffery. Really?

The only games I like are Scrabble, Bogle, Text Twist and Sudoku. I detest games that involve strategy.

But I have to say that I was raised to ignore people who annoy/taunt/ridicule me. Not that I haven't rebelled against my upbringing! That is why the headline of this thread bothers me? How can ignoring someone be considered ignorant unless the person being ignored is your child who is in distress? Ignoring someone who is rude/childish/utterly stupid is simply the adult way of handling certain situations.

And, I have been guilty of not being adult. Why? Because sometimes I think people just need mirrors held up to their faces.

Granted, we all have types of people we hate and certain sets of words that set us off like a match to a fuse. I hate the sort of woman I might call a cheerleader and that has made males on this forum and its parent abuzz really angry with me!

setanta -- Some of those trolls are sock puppets created by people who are having a bad day and who assume an identity, go one a2k for a weekend and blow off steam by picking on a poster -- in this case, you -- then disappear as that incarnation.

That's why I think fora like this are safety nets. Someone who is borderline can sign on, assume an alias, vent and leave without pulling a trigger.



I find it odd that you hate cheerleaders because you seem to be a cheerleader of reasoning.

Not that I understand nor agree with all that you write but you sure seem to try to find good reasoning for every thing. I find this to be a good thing!
Eorl
 
  1  
Reply Sat 2 Oct, 2010 05:38 pm
@reasoning logic,
Setanta wrote:

Eorl wrote:
"Ignore" is definitely the most ignorant choice. By definition. Duh.


Not so . . . people get ignored because of a previous history which has convinced the member ignoring them that they are not worth reading. They make that decision based on knowledge, not ignorance.


Ignore and ignorant are versions of the same word. By choosing to ignore you are choosing to remain ignorant of their posts. Does that make you the kind of person people describe as ignorant? I wouldn't think so, but that wasn't the question that was asked. (It may have been what was meant though, certainly most responded that way).
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Sat 2 Oct, 2010 09:22 pm
@reasoning logic,
Thank you!

However, when I refer to cheerleaders -- which I seldom do at the present time and have not done for a few years -- I mean women who are very conformist, very much looking for the latest trend, very into surpassing (rather than keeping up with) the Joneses.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Oct, 2010 05:29 am
@Eorl,
I believe the author of the thread was attempting a little cleverness with the thread title--although i ceratainly cannot know what the author thinks or intended. However, i objected to the claim that ignoring someone is ignorant by defintion, in that the decision is likely to be predicated on one's knowledge of the person who will be in future ignored, and not ignorance of them.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Oct, 2010 07:06 pm
@plainoldme,
plainoldme wrote:

Quote:
Well, it depends on how you use it.

If you use it freely and impulsively then your point may have relevance.


Who are you to say how someone else should use their account or to judge someone for not being your identical twin?


This has to be one of the most fatuous comments you've made.

I shudder to think that you are attempting to teach English to anyone.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

What is the most valuable thing you own? - Discussion by BumbleBeeBoogie
Has there been a roll call? - Discussion by gustavratzenhofer
Here's another Trump thread... - Discussion by tsarstepan
Should I be offended? - Question by the prince
How desperate can a christian get? - Discussion by reasoning logic
Is A2K A Religion? - Question by mark noble
Top o' the Mornin' to Ya! - Question by Transcend
8/31/05 : Gas Prices - Discussion by Ken cv
 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/18/2019 at 03:34:49