Why You Suck

Pages

AuthorTopic: Why You Suck
Infiltrator
Member # 5410
Profile #100
quote:
Come on Fatman and Diki, hearing yourself talk is what the internet is all about!

In Spidweb form: This should really read seeing yourself talk is what the internet is all about!

IF I really wanted to hear myself talk I could simply play back one of my lectures I've recorded. However, apparently my family has no interest - they don't even think I'm as good as the Am. Idol rejects.

--------------------
"Dikiyoba ... is demon ... drives people mad and ... do all sorts of strange things."

"You Spiderwebbians are mad, mad, mad as March hares."
Posts: 687 | Registered: Wednesday, January 19 2005 08:00
Law Bringer
Member # 335
Profile Homepage #101
I'm sorry I annoyed you, Kel. I haven't particularly noticed anything wrong with how either one of you has been debating, but in several discussions now it's come down to Synergy complaining that you're not responding properly and your assertions that you have been. Regardless of fault, I'd rather see two intelligent people disagree on contents rather than on technicalities.

—Alorael, who knows it's more than a technicality when it's a straw man setup. He also knows that he's now probably throwing fuel on the fire, so please disregard him.
Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
Profile Homepage #102
Alo: That was exactly the purpose of my last post to Synergy. I'm surprised that you didn't pick up on that.

[ Thursday, February 22, 2007 19:47: Message edited by: Kelandon ]

--------------------
Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens.
Smoo: Get ready to face the walls!
Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr.

Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me
The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever
Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00
Law Bringer
Member # 6785
Profile #103
This is part of the trouble with Synergy's last major debate and several others. Definitions of terms was different enough that boths sides may have had valid points that the other was misunderstanding. Synergy doesn't have the many years of physics coursework that several members including myself have, while most of us don't have extensive medical backgrounds.

Maybe spending a day defining terms will help, but I doubt it.
Posts: 4643 | Registered: Friday, February 10 2006 08:00
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #104
quote:
Originally written by Randomizer:

Synergy doesn't have the many years of physics coursework that several members including myself have, while most of us don't have extensive medical backgrounds.
If you're implying that Synergy has an extensive medical background, that's the best joke I've heard all day.

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Shaper
Member # 6292
Profile #105
My responses to Kel are based on precisely what Alo first pointed out. Kel snipes at me with politely-couched, yet insulting implications such as that I operate by "circular reasoning," while ignoring the spirit of my words or of my heart behind them. It's soulless nitpicking of technique. It's not reserving judgement before asking questions to better understand or to clarify first what I am saying. It doesn't demonstrate any genuine interest in my perspective or passion. It's not honoring. It's technical sniping, and it just feels mean. Why? To continually seek to put me in my place? It's unimportant, though. Kel will forever disapprove of how I communicate, think, feel...whatever...apparently, and that's fine by me. Maybe just ignore me and my hopelessly convoluted logic, thinking, and communication.

-S-

--------------------
A4 Item Locations A4 Singleton G4 Items List G4 Forging List The Insidious Infiltrator
Posts: 2009 | Registered: Monday, September 12 2005 07:00
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #106
Oddly enough, you haven't yet taken your own advice and ignored him.

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Shaper
Member # 6292
Profile #107
I'm getting better. I've ignored most of what he wrote here. Maybe next time I'll have finally worked up to ignoring all of it.

-S-

EDIT: Note that I was ignoring Kel's dialog in this thread until he saw fit to comment disparagingly on the logic behind everything I was saying. I am already aware that Kel and I will predictably see a great many things quite differently, and I do not seek to engage his perspectives any longer accordingly.

[ Friday, February 23, 2007 00:01: Message edited by: Synergy ]

--------------------
A4 Item Locations A4 Singleton G4 Items List G4 Forging List The Insidious Infiltrator
Posts: 2009 | Registered: Monday, September 12 2005 07:00
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
Profile Homepage #108
Synergy, I'm disappointed in you. You're behaving like a child, and you've gotten upset with me for no reason at all. I thought we talked online. I thought we came to an understanding. I find now, sadly, that I was mistaken.

I disagree with you about a lot of things, but that doesn't mean that I think less of you as a person. One of my best friends in high school was a conservative Christian (and I'm just about the opposite), but we didn't let that get in the way of our friendship. Likewise, here, the fact that I disagree with you is not an indication that I'm trying to be mean to you.

The thing is, I'm pretty sure that the only part of my post that you read was the tiny part that said "circular reasoning." I urge you to re-read what I wrote and find the point that I was actually making, which had nothing to do with nitpicking your argument or putting things in black and white or any of the other things you've said since then.

Look, I don't want to waste everyone else's time with this. I sought you out before because I wanted to resolve our differences. If you want to unload yourself of the burden of the anger that you seem to carry against me, all you have to do is take down the walls that you've built up around yourself and just talk to me (ideally online). I'm here whenever you're ready.

[ Thursday, February 22, 2007 22:57: Message edited by: Kelandon ]

--------------------
Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens.
Smoo: Get ready to face the walls!
Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr.

Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me
The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever
Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00
Shaper
Member # 6292
Profile #109
Kel, you misunderstand. I'm not angry at you. Your pinning "circular reasoning" on me in your opening comment felt very much like an outright attempt to insult, knowing the great value you place on reasoning. If you didn't intend to immediately put me off, I can think of many ways you might have worded it more graciously and made an inquiry for clarification before pronouncing my logic worthless.

-S-

--------------------
A4 Item Locations A4 Singleton G4 Items List G4 Forging List The Insidious Infiltrator
Posts: 2009 | Registered: Monday, September 12 2005 07:00
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
Profile Homepage #110
See above about not wasting other people's time. IM me.

[ Thursday, February 22, 2007 23:28: Message edited by: Kelandon ]

--------------------
Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens.
Smoo: Get ready to face the walls!
Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr.

Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me
The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever
Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00
Master
Member # 5977
Profile Homepage #111
quote:
Originally written by When That Was:

S [quote=Thralni[b]
Alorael] I fear that you are right. Most posts here probably are a product of on-the-spot thinking. We are in a fast-paced society here. Thinking isn't much of an option anymore. Things have to be quick, and at a message boards where people seem to want intelectual discussions problems start to arise. Mind you, i don't like the "intelectual" discussions here or anywhere else on the internet, and I don't want them.

I don't see how that's any different from a conversation in person. In fact, I'd say posts have slightly more thought because we do have more time to think if we want it. I don't know about you, but most of my conversations are pretty meaningless. I do enjoy conversing intellectually, though, whether online or off.

—Alorael, who isn't quite sure how Kel and Syn started picking fights with each other in serious threads. It's become quite a habit, though, and it's unfortunate.[/b][/quote]I didn't say it was any different in the thinking part of the conversation....

quote:
Originally written by Thuryl:
quote:
Originally written by Thralni:
Thuryl: Was there any initiative to make many of these topics before this thread?
You mean, was there an initiative to make many of these topics before someone took the initiative to make these topics? Don't you see how unfair that question is?
No, I don't see it. I think it's a perfectly fair question, actually. What I see in this topic, is that people want to have long, intelectual debates. So my question for you remains: if people wanted it so much, why didn't they make them before this thread was started, before somebody pointed it out to them? I say a lack of initiative caused by something of which I don't know what it is, but probably a lack of patience.

--------------------
Play and rate my scenarios:

Where the rivers meet
View my upcoming scenario: The Nephil Search: Escape.

Give us your drek!
Posts: 3029 | Registered: Saturday, June 18 2005 07:00
Shaper
Member # 6292
Profile #112
quote:
Originally written by Kelandon:

See above about not wasting other people's time. IM me.
Not this time. It may be your estimation that people working out differences is a waste of time for others to witness. but I often feel much otherwise. Here's your original statement in response to my thoughts contributed to this thread:

quote:
I've been trying not to point out the circularity in everything that you're saying
If you wish to clarify or modify your intent in starting with this, please do so publicly, as you made this statement publicly.

How would anyone else perceive someone's intentions, with this being his opening line to your thoughts on a topic?

-S-

[ Thursday, February 22, 2007 23:45: Message edited by: Synergy ]

--------------------
A4 Item Locations A4 Singleton G4 Items List G4 Forging List The Insidious Infiltrator
Posts: 2009 | Registered: Monday, September 12 2005 07:00
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
Profile #113
Dude. People just want to see themselves say stuff that someone else might think is smart/funny/clever. That is it. If it is this topic, then fine. If it is the joke topic, then fine. Whatever! This is not discourse leading to a degree, it's idle chit-chat.

Although, most here do recognize that it is a valuable resource given the wide range of skills and nationalities represented here.

In that spirit, could you please translate these two phrases.
"Dag-vlinders van de tweede bende."
"Nacht-vlinders van't Tweede Gezin der eerste bende"

Thanks.

Edit- Synergy posted in my place. Bad Synergy. Bad.

[ Thursday, February 22, 2007 23:44: Message edited by: Spent Salmon ]

--------------------
quote:
Originally written by Kelandon:

Well, I'm at least pretty sure that Salmon is losing.


Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #114
quote:
Originally written by Synergy:

Kel, you misunderstand. I'm not angry at you. Your pinning "circular reasoning" on me in your opening comment felt very much like an outright attempt to insult, knowing the great value you place on reasoning.
If placing great value on avoiding mistakes means that it's impossible to point out a mistake without you feeling insulted, so be it.

quote:
Originally written by Thralni:

No, I don't see it. I think it's a perfectly fair question, actually. What I see in this topic, is that people want to have long, intelectual debates. So my question for you remains: if people wanted it so much, why didn't they make them before this thread was started, before somebody pointed it out to them?
And if there was another debate thread before this thread was started (and there have been plenty of them over the years), you'd be asking why nobody else took the initiative to start a debate thread before that thread was started. :rolleyes:

[ Friday, February 23, 2007 00:05: Message edited by: Cryptozoology ]

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Infiltrator
Member # 3040
Profile #115
quote:
Originally written by Synergy:

quote:
Originally written by Kelandon:

See above about not wasting other people's time. IM me.
Not this time. It may be your estimation that people working out differences is a waste of time for others to witness. but I often feel much otherwise.

If "other people's" opinions count for anything here, then I agree with Synergy. The back-and-forth is pretty entertaining and doesn't waste my time at all. By all means, please continue to have the discussion publicly.

--------------------
5.0.1.0.0.0.0.1.0...
Posts: 508 | Registered: Thursday, May 29 2003 07:00
Shaper
Member # 6292
Profile #116
I don't acknowledge any mistakes here. I acknowledge a statement saying that everything I was saying was circular. I would love to see Kel elaborate on every sentence and point I made to demonstrate how he believes it is based on circular reasoning. Short of that, it's a hyperbolic statement which I would have a hard time as seeing as being intended to do anything other than belittle my integrity.

And Thuryl, apparently you haven't been paying attention. It's not what you say, it's how you say it. I make mistakes all the time, and quite frequently fess up readily when respectfully confronted with the possibility. When one is not given grace, honor, or dignity to do so, one might be far less inclined. Speaking of which, I can't say I've perceived much of anything I'd call gracious from your camp toward mine for some time now, subtle and subdued though your style may be. Anything you want to declare to me openly?

-S-

--------------------
A4 Item Locations A4 Singleton G4 Items List G4 Forging List The Insidious Infiltrator
Posts: 2009 | Registered: Monday, September 12 2005 07:00
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #117
quote:
Originally written by Synergy:

I don't acknowledge any mistakes here. I acknowledge a statement saying that everything I was saying was circular. I would love to see Kel elaborate on every sentence and point I made to demonstrate how he believes it is based on circular reasoning. Short of that, it's a hyperbolic statement which I would have a hard time as seeing as being intended to do anything other than belittle my integrity.
Acting offended at obvious hyperbole doesn't do anything to make you seem less shrill.

quote:
And Thuryl, apparently you haven't been paying attention. It's not what you say, it's how you say it.
Not caring is different from not paying attention. We don't particularly wish to spend our time walking on eggshells in order to avoid offending your delicate sensibilities rather than making actual arguments. If that bothers you, then this is very possibly not a forum on which you will enjoy engaging in debate.

quote:
Speaking of which, I can't say I've perceived much of anything I'd call gracious from your camp toward mine for some time now, subtle and subdued though your style may be. Anything you want to declare to me openly?
I can't speak for my "camp", as I wasn't aware I had one. If it makes you feel any better, I'm this way with pretty much everyone. A word of advice, though: if you want to avoid a repeat of this incident in the next thread in which you deign to grace us with your presence, I'd suggest that you ought to read up on the feeding habits of sharks. I'd make my point more directly, but apparently you don't bother to listen when people do that.

[ Friday, February 23, 2007 01:52: Message edited by: Cryptozoology ]

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
La Canaliste
Member # 5563
Profile #118
*Derails*

IMAGE(http://img139.imageshack.us/img139/1516/rampeu3.jpg)

--------------------
I am a mater of time and how .

Deep down, you know you should have voted for Alcritas!
Posts: 387 | Registered: Tuesday, March 1 2005 08:00
Master
Member # 5977
Profile Homepage #119
quote:
Originally written by Spent Salmon:

In that spirit, could you please translate these two phrases.
"Dag-vlinders van de tweede bende."
"Nacht-vlinders van't Tweede Gezin der eerste bende"

I think you probably wanted Synergy to do that, but I', Futch, so I'll try:

day-butterflies of the second gang
night-butterflies of the second family of the first gang

Day and night butterflies as in butterflies that only come out at that particulair time. I really don't know what you want this for, but I guess i don't really care.

Kelandon: I'm actually very interested in your discussion, so saying that your discussion probably waists people time is not entirely true.

Thuryl: I'm sure you did understand what I meant, but if you are gonne be nitpicky, then okay, now you have me :P

--------------------
Play and rate my scenarios:

Where the rivers meet
View my upcoming scenario: The Nephil Search: Escape.

Give us your drek!
Posts: 3029 | Registered: Saturday, June 18 2005 07:00
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #120
quote:
Originally written by Thralni:

Thuryl: I'm sure you did understand what I meant, but if you are gonne be nitpicky, then okay, now you have me :P
I know perfectly well what you meant, and I still think it's an unfair question. Debate topics spring up pretty often; it's unreasonable to expect there to be one active all the time.

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
Profile Homepage #121
quote:
Originally written by Synergy:

Not this time. It may be your estimation that people working out differences is a waste of time for others to witness. but I often feel much otherwise.
I've gotten complaints before. Apparently people's opinions have done an about-face since last time, though, so I will respond publicly.

quote:
Here's your original statement in response to my thoughts contributed to this thread:
quote:
I've been trying not to point out the circularity in everything that you're saying

That was not my original statement in response to your thoughts in this thread. As I suspected, you ignored the majority of my post, including the part that contained the main point. Here's my actual post.
quote:
Originally written by Kelandon:

I've been trying not to point out the circularity in everything that you're saying, and so far I've succeeded, but let me at least point out that there's no inherent reason why relationships that you have online can't have profound effects on your life that are equally as powerful as those in the "real world." I know at least one or two largely online relationships of mine that were deeply significant in parts of my life.
You saw read that I called your reasoning circular, freaked out, stopped reading, and started posting things that had nothing to do with what I actually said. I did say the first part, but I also said a lot more than that, and you totally ignored it.

quote:
If you wish to clarify or modify your intent in starting with this, please do so publicly, as you made this statement publicly.

How would anyone else perceive someone's intentions, with this being his opening line to your thoughts on a topic?
My intentions were not to slander you, as you seem to be suggesting. That's a ridiculous idea. If I wanted to slander you, I'd slander you. I'd suggest that your reading skills are minimal, that your critical thinking is sub-par, that your credulity in the face of pseudo-science is embarrassingly great, or that you molest young children. I didn't, and I'm not doing so now, either.

My intention with that part of the sentence was to suggest that you might want to revisit your thinking on the matter and check it for any potential circularity it might contain. The post was addressed to you (note the quote in front), not to everyone saying, "Look everybody, Synergy's made a fool of himself again with circular logic!"

My primary intention in that post, however, was to address the point that you were making, which was that online relationships are inherently worse than in-person ones, which I don't think is true and have personal experience against. Hence the rest of the post.

quote:
Originally written by Synergy:

I don't acknowledge any mistakes here.
It must be comforting to think that you're perfect. In the real world, though, you're fallible like everyone else, and it'd be nice if you started owning up to it publicly sometimes.

quote:
I acknowledge a statement saying that everything I was saying was circular. I would love to see Kel elaborate on every sentence and point I made to demonstrate how he believes it is based on circular reasoning.
I suppose I was referring to every main point of every post in the thread prior to that (with the possible exception of the meaningless ones, like "ET, phone home"), not every word of every post, but that comes to almost the same thing.

The whole point of saying that part of the post the way that I did was that I didn't want to explain precisely how each point was circular, because I don't really care enough to do so. I just wanted to suggest that the problem was there and move on to my main point. I freely admit that I have not justified my "circularity" comment at all, and if you don't want to believe it, you're within your rights to disagree (but it would be unwise not to go back and check your points for circularity now that it's been suggested to you). Ignore that part if you want to, but don't ignore the main point of the post.

quote:
Short of that, it's a hyperbolic statement which I would have a hard time as seeing as being intended to do anything other than belittle my integrity.
No, here you're being silly. Belittling your integrity sounds like this: "You're an idiot." "I can't believe that people come to you for treatment, you quack." "Your primary interest in the human race is in the backsides of kindergartners."

Hyperbole? Maybe. Belittling? No. I could do that much more directly if I wanted. Besides, why would I belittle your integrity to you? I was speaking publicly, but I was addressing you personally.

quote:
And Thuryl, apparently you haven't been paying attention.
I'm going to be very, very blunt: this is generally a dumb thing to say. Thuryl is far more perceptive than most people here, and I will readily admit that he is more perceptive than I am. When he says something (at least when he's not obviously trolling a debate thread, which this is not), I pay attention.

quote:
It's not what you say, it's how you say it. I make mistakes all the time, and quite frequently fess up readily when respectfully confronted with the possibility.
You have yet to do so on Spiderweb. And don't try to cop out by saying that you have not been treated respectfully here, because, while that may be true with regard to some members' treatment of you, it is not true with regard to my treatment of you.

quote:
When one is not given grace, honor, or dignity to do so, one might be far less inclined.
I'm not sure exactly what you're expecting. It comes across as wanting people to say something like, "O Great Mighty Synergy, Prince of Princes, King among Men, may I humbly suggest that you perhaps may have erred slightly?" I have treated you with respect, except in one or two posts, and for those posts, I specifically sought you out and apologized on AIM (while you were being particularly ungracious, I might add).

quote:
Speaking of which, I can't say I've perceived much of anything I'd call gracious from your camp toward mine for some time now, subtle and subdued though your style may be.
Treating people as simply manifestations of a group instead of as individuals is one good way to irritate them. Here you're thinking of Alec, not Thuryl or me. You might notice, if you're paying as much attention as Thuryl, that I called Alec out for what I perceived as hypocrisy in a recent thread — we are not the same person.

quote:
Anything you want to declare to me openly?
Yes. I'd like you to do me the favor of responding to the major points in this post instead of ignoring most of it and focusing on a single sentence or two, as you have frequently done in the past. The way to do that is to quote several sections of the post, particularly the parts most reflective of main points, and respond to each, as I've done here. If you can single out two or three main points, that's fine, but you should say something that addressed the whole post, not just some tiny little part of it.

If you ignore 95% of what I've said again, I'm just not going to bother to say anything to you anymore, because you'll just ignore it anyway, and I'll point out in the third person where I think you've gone wrong in future posts.

EDIT: Gah, longer post than I intended, but I think that a lot of this is important. The main point I'm making here is this: That post was not intended to belittle you, and trying to construe it that way is difficult and requires a lot of effort. It could only be interpreted as nitpicking your logic if you didn't read three-quarters of it.

[ Friday, February 23, 2007 08:20: Message edited by: Kelandon ]

--------------------
Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens.
Smoo: Get ready to face the walls!
Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr.

Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me
The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever
Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00
Councilor
Member # 6600
Profile Homepage #122
Originally by Thralni:

quote:
I think you probably wanted Synergy to do that, but I', Futch, so I'll try:
Salmon was referring to you, which is why he said:

quote:
Edit- Synergy posted in my place. Bad Synergy. Bad.
Why he posted it here instead of in his translation thread on Shadow Vale is still uncertain. :P

Edit: "Gang" doesn't make a lot of sense in this context. Any synonyms?

Dikiyoba.

[ Friday, February 23, 2007 08:20: Message edited by: Dikiyoba ]
Posts: 4346 | Registered: Friday, December 23 2005 08:00
Law Bringer
Member # 2984
Profile Homepage #123
Group? Order? Family? Genus? I don't know the terms of Biological taxonomy in Dutch - or, indeed, Futch.

quote:
I', Futch


--------------------
Encyclopaedia ErmarianaForum ArchivesForum StatisticsRSS [Topic / Forum]
My BlogPolarisI eat novels for breakfast.
Polaris is dead, long live Polaris.
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair.
Posts: 8752 | Registered: Wednesday, May 14 2003 07:00
Warrior
Member # 7254
Profile Homepage #124
t Kelandon & Synergy

IMAGE(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v99/KommandoV/Tsundog.gif)
Posts: 73 | Registered: Monday, June 26 2006 07:00

Pages