Craven de Kere wrote:Setanta,
Calling ILZ obsessed and sensitive to criticism is hillarious. Are you as comfortable with being criticized for "obsessions" as you would have ILZ be?
I am criticized quite frequently, as well you know, and more often than not, by you. I have no reason to withdraw the characterization of ILZ getting nasty with those who have a different point of view, and consider this thread to be an example, virtually an ambush thread. And, you repeat the fallacy which ILZ voiced above--the enumeration of favorable circumstances. By taking notice of threads in which i have criticized him, and ignoring all of those in which there is no comment from me, you attempt to construct a contention that i'm "following him around." I read this thread for quite awhile without comment, until he came out with the "shouldn't be allowed to breed" comment. And i reacted specifically to that. I have participated in other threads of his, such as "age of my fellow A2Ker's," without finding anything which i would criticize--and so i didn't.
Quote:What of your own obsession spewing out historical diatribes paraphrased from books on threads where they have little relevance? Or your self-proclaimed status as resident French expert where if anyone dares use a word of French you try to assert said title belligerently?
Diatribe is a freighted term. I have frequently added my perspective, and it should surprise no one that it is an historical perspective. That is a far cry from "spewing . . . diatribes." Your comment about paraphrased from books implies that you consider that none of what i express represents synthesis or original thought, a charge which you are of course free to make, but one which i rather doubt you can support. But that is of little import to me, as in most situations in which one cannot perform replicable experiments or do field research on available artifacts, organism, geological formations and the like, books are the source from which we glean information to make our own judgments. The relevance is open to the judgment and opinion of those who read, just as is anything which you write.
I've never made myself out to be an expert on french, and when i don't know what a word or expression means, i say as much. I have had parts of translations i made (considering it a courtesy to those who don't read French) corrected or criticized here, and haven't reacted with either hostility or petulance. I would be interested to know how you think it reasonable to suggest that i'm trying to belligerently assert any title--even were you to point to an example, unless you can demonstrate a pattern among all the posts in which that language has made a part, you've simply availed yourself again of the fallacy of the enumeration of favorable circumstances, adverting to one, or if you think you can so demonstrate, a few examples, and attempting to imply that they stand for the whole. Frankly, for whatever motivates your hostility, i suggest that you are expressing a resentment which is unfounded, and which you are not able to demonstrate.
Quote:You have indeed been following ILZ around making wisecracks about him and quite frequently call him ignorant and the like. Picking on his spelling and youth.
In fact, i've surmised that ILZ is well educated and literate, as well as articulate and capable of cogent observation. And i've also stated that in my opinion he is ignorant of people, due to a lack of life experience, and therefore often fails to show compassion for other members here. The remark about not breeding, which he attempts to characterize as humor is the example which has sparked my response here. I had no doubt that he considered it humorous when first i read it. I also had no doubt, based on my experience of people and life, that it wounds nonetheless, those who are the object of his contempt, which had been expressed with sufficient force in this thread as to make the contention that the remark was harmless fun ridiculous. I have been hard on people when i thought them religious ranters--i have also written things which have wounded others, which was not my intent--and i apologized on an occasion when someone of religious conviction commented upon, and have made a sincere effort to mend my ways. Which is why the issue of maturity is in question to my mind. ILZ might simply have commented that he was attempting humor, and hadn't meant of injure anyone's feelings. Instead, he continues to make snide coments to JBB about what he surmises her belief leads her too, in this case an accusation: "You may not be the president - and thank Yahweh for that - but its largely your ilk that put him in office. Which, is, like, kinda the point, man." Hardly the kind of response which is likely to lead to more civilized discussion. JBB has been criticized for expecting to express her belief in a debate forum, and not have it debated. I did not comment on that, as i cannot object to the charge; comments about not breeding, about "you and your ilk," when JBB is unknown to us deserve comment themselves, and that is what i've done.
Quote:You've been doing this for some time now, ever since you thought he was a Jew based on his username and found out you were wrong about that.
Once again, you are attempting to construct a pattern from an incident. In fact, the first post of ILZ's which i read was of a "some of my best friends are Arabs" character, and a subsequent post lead me to question whether he were Jewish with a prejudice against Arabs. He denied this,
and i haven't brought it up again since then. Your assumption of why i raised that issue is based upon pure speculation on your part, which characterizes much of what you've written about me here.
Quote:Here you call him ignorant, and pull your usual innane game where you disparage him as "callow" in your usual haughty sneer and then when he responds you disparage him, once again, for his objections to your insults.
In fact, it was the tenor and language of his response which i disdained. When ILZ so constantly parades his opinion of his own superior excellence, whether he contends it is humorous or not, and then descends in to a resonse such as: "Reach back, and pull the tightly bunched panties out of your crusted ass crack"--hardly matches your attempt to color the exchange as you have above. Anyone reading your post alone might assume that ILZ had been the soul of innocent reason, wantonly set upon by the vile Setanta. It is a completely specious characterization not only of the response, but of so many responses ILZ makes to other members here.
Quote:So when others find you "dumping" on others from and "spewing gross bs" and then proceed to criticize you for it do you take it any better than ILZ would?
You may continue to contend that my reactions are over the top, and i will continue to deny as much. As i've already noted, suggesting that someone ought not breed because of their beliefs, while posting in a debate forum, is fair game for harsh criticism, given the harsh nature of such a remark as it affects those to whom it is directed, despite any appeal to alleged humor. Although your selective reading of my posts doesn't seem to have taken you to any examples, there are examples in these fora of my apologizing for my remarks, and i frankly don't measure my worth by your criticism, and repeat what i've said in the past. I don't see you react to others here who have been far nastier than i, and often for less cause than you contend is the case here.
Quote:You make it plain that "callow" is not restricted to youth.
And you make it plain that it is something to which you are not immune either. Now, having launched, or should i write spew?
your diatribe, don't forget to include your customary comment that rather than answering you, i have simply attacked you. That's your most common way of dealing with such situations.
