Mark Kent wrote:
> begin oe_protect.scr
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> > __/ [ Mark Kent ] on Thursday 29 June 2006 17:56 \__
> >
> >> begin oe_protect.scr
> >> chrisv <chrisv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> >>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>__/ [ chrisv ] on Thursday 29 June 2006 13:43 \__
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Larry's had similar tantrums in the past. He once
> >>>>> called someone's mother a whore, IIRC...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> He's a real class act.
> >>>>
> >>>>Like flatfish, he changes colours (personality/temper). Unlike Flatfish, I
> >>>>don't think he does this as part of a grand plan -- a tactic if you like.
> >>>>He's just having good days bad days.
> >>>
> >>> I think you're right. He's generally civil, but if you get him really
> >>> mad, he can behave unacceptably, even by usenet flame-war standards.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Apparently, this kind of behaviour is becoming recognised as some kind
> >> of illness, but the psychologists working on it noted that it seems to
> >> be much much more prevalent in the US than anywhere else in the world -
> >> thought to be a cultural issue.
> >
> > To comment on words I would rather not reply too directly (it's like stepping
> > on coal over there...):
>
> Well, I've had a look through - our qualig troll has a serious problem,
Let's see... you're the one who randomly insults people in your posts
for no reason whatsoever but I'm the one with the serious problem. Are
you forgetting your meds?
> I think.
Think again.
> >
> > __/ [ L ] on Thursday 29 June 2006 17:28 \__
> >
> >> Mr. T wrote:
> >>> In article <1151592529.005017.9310@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, L wrote:
> >>> >> Mark falsely (yet politely and innocently) pointed something out.
> >>> >
> >>> > Politely and innocently???? Are you kidding me. His response was: "The
> >>> > qualig troll is wrong" Feel free to point out the "polite and innocent"
> >>> > portion of his response. He then proceeded to call me a troll in another
> >>> > post for absolutely not reason.
> >
> >
> > True.
>
> Well, the Qualig troll was, and remains, wrong. Can't really see
> anything wrong with that statement, it's not rude, and I can back it up.
So you believe that randomly calling someone a troll in your posts for
no reason at all is not rude? And you see nothing wrong with doing
that? What color is the sky on your planet?
> >
> >
> >>> Not surprising, consider how Mark approaches usenet. His basic procedure
> >>> is to quickly killfile people who annoy him, then whenever he sees a
> >>> fragment from them quoted by someone else, to jump in and tell everyone
> >>> how he killfiled them (does he expect a gold star or something?), and to
> >>> also throw
> >>> random insults their way in other posts. (Killfiling people is fine, but
> >>> when you do that, you should (1) shut the fuck up about it--it is not a
> >>> major accomplishment to use a kill file, and (2) stop talking about them
> >>> or making remarks to them in your posts).
> >
> >
> > If the intent of the participant was truly benevolent and the posting history
> > likewise, this would be a different scenario altogether.
>
> I used to give people a lot more rope than I do now, but I do draw the
> line at continuous abusive language. Generally, I ask people to stop
> the abuse, and if they do so, I'll continue.
"Abusive language" - you mean like randomly insulting people for no
reason at all. People who you aren't even debating with. Is that the
type of "abusive language" you have issue with. Are you at all familiar
with the word HYPOCRITE?
> If they do not, in the end,
> they get into the killfile. They might get out again if I see evidence
> that it's deserved, but if not, there they stay. I generally don't say
> anything to people when I do such a thing, but in the middle of a debate,
> I prefer to say what I've done and why, because it seems to me that this
> is less rude than just being plain ignorant. I know others have different
> views on this, but declaring that I've kfiled someone and saying why is
> again no crime, and is not insulting in any way that I can see.
>
> A common problem I see is that folks like qualig seem to take comments
> on their behaviour as personal insult - these are not the same things,
> but many people seem to lack the maturity to recognise this. Again,
> there's not much I can do to help them with that, other than point out
> where their behaviour is, to my mind, unacceptable.
>
> In the end, if qualig doesn't want to read my posts, he doesn't have to.
>
> >
> >
> >> Bingo - you've hit the nail on the head with your description. If he
> >> and someone else wants to killfile me then go right ahead. I really
> >> don't care. But the killfile is a 2-way street. You can't killfile
> >> someone and then talk about them in every other post you make and
> >> randomly throw insults at them for no reason what-so-ever. If he wants
> >> to killfile me then fine, but since he's not reading any of my posts he
> >> should simply STFU and quit talking about me since it's clearly out of
> >> context since he never read my posts.
>
> Again, if I want to talk about other people's behaviour, then I will; so
> long as it's relevant to this group, I'll do it here.
>
> >>
> >> Emphasis on the "throw random insults their way in other posts" because
> >> this is precisely the reason I started this thread.
> >
> >
> > You too, Larry, have degraded to the level of personal insults, driven by the
> > observation that not all others behave and think in the same way yourself.
> > That's why I added a scoring rule.
> >
> >
> >>> So, if you post 1 thing that annoys him and 10 things that he would agree
> >>> with, he only sees the 1, because you were in the killfile for the other
> >>> 10, and he then judges you forever based on that 1 thing.
>
> This is a very good illustration of why it's better to speak of people's
> behaviour rather than trying to determine what they're thinking. The
> above is, naturally, quite wrong.
>
> >>>
> >>> Since one of the things that annoys him is when someone who knows more
> >>> about a subject points out a flaw in one of his posts, the net result is
> >>> that everyone who knows more than him will eventually end up in his
> >>> killfile.
>
> I never have a problem with people knowing things I do not, although I
> very rarely find people who do. The people I have a problem with are
> those who think they know more, but do not, and do not listen and learn.
> I'm always happy to learn from people who know things I do not, it's
> one of the reasons why I know so much!
(Quote) - "I never have a problem with people knowing things I do not,
although I very rarely find people who do.... It's one of the reasons
why I know so much."
Now I get it, you really are a "Legend in your own mind."
|
|
