Satanists kill and eat goth teenagers

[MegearaErotica]

Uhhh.... I'm going to stop posting on this topic now....

[Verdandi]

But if you're polite and courteous with people, you are more likely to sway them, or have them understand what you're saying
Isn't it just easier to correct someone without trying to corner them, or argue with them? People respond better to kinder things.

[Wynneth]

Originally Posted by gothicusmaximus

Wynneth, what I think certain people find to be bothersome about you is that you constantly maintain this veneer of being boundlessly compassionate, poised, and understanding, when in reality, you aren't.

How is it that you know me well enough, in reality, to make such an assessment?

Originally Posted by gothicusmaximus

As sarcastic and condescending as anything JCC said.

I really don't think so. I merely asked a question. Certainly, it's a pointed question, one that reflected how one may view his behavior.

Originally Posted by gothicusmaximus

An unfounded, critical accusation.

In order to accuse someone of something, one must make an accusation. In order to make an accusation, one must charge someone with having done something wrong or offensive. A question, by its very nature, is incapable of charging. I asked him a question in order to aid in the furthering of my understanding of his point of view.

Originally Posted by gothicusmaximus

JCC is simply saying that he prefers his company to not mount affectations, and immaculate politeness and courtesy under even the most inflammatory circumstances is an affectation-- benign as it may be, it can still irritate someone inclined toward more forthright discourse.

It's unfortunate that my polite and calm words are, in the face of an inflammatory situation, considered to be incapable of being said without being an "affectation." The things I say, I mean. I can't control how you or anyone else takes them, especially when the concepts of truth and forthrightness, in my case, are almost immediately thrown out as a possibility. It shows a certain lack of flexibility to be unable to look past one's frustrations with a person and see that they could have a point or be a decent, intelligent person.

I understand that, for whatever reason, I irritate the dickens out of both you and JCC. The irritation seems to manifest itself whenever one (or both) of you engage me in some sort of debate. It's been almost a constant, since I came to this board, with one (or both) of you nipping at my proverbial heels. I take this in stride, reply to your every question/accusation/assumption/extrapolation with the best composure as one can, given the circumstances. This seems to only make matters worse. It's a pity, as it's meant to do the opposite.

I figure that, one day, you'll both tire of singling me out and decide I'm not worth tapping your intellect or that I'm not all that bad. I'm willing to ride it out, if you are.

Originally Posted by Verdandi

But if you're polite and courteous with people, you are more likely to sway them, or have them understand what you're saying
Isn't it just easier to correct someone without trying to corner them, or argue with them? People respond better to kinder things.

Thank you! -beam- That's precisely the point I was attempting to make.

[Tam Li Hua]

Originally Posted by Verdandi

But if you're polite and courteous with people, you are more likely to sway them, or have them understand what you're saying
Isn't it just easier to correct someone without trying to corner them, or argue with them? People respond better to kinder things.

Couldn't agree more.

[MegearaErotica]

wow... good monologue wynneth. It was actually kind of what I go through on these boards...

[Wynneth]

Originally Posted by MegearaErotica

wow... good monologue wynneth. It was actually kind of what I go through on these boards...

It's unsurprising, MegearaErotica. It's pretty much the same, wherever you go. You're new, you're different, you get hazed.

Then, you've four options:
a.) leave,
b.) shut up/lurk,
c.) fight back,
d.) stand up for yourself without stooping to their level.

I'm not saying it's completely, unequivocally true of everywhere--even here--but, as a generalization, that's been mostly my experience.

[Disaffected Shoelaces]

Originally Posted by Wynneth

How is it that you know me well enough, in reality, to make such an assessment?.

Originally Posted by Wynneth

-beam-

Just a guess, but I'd assume you're not physically grinning at the screen in delight when you write -beam-. That would make it a partially fair assessment, though in an admittedly small matter.

Or maybe you are, in which case, you scare me slightly.

[Wynneth]

Originally Posted by Disaffected Shoelaces

Just a guess, but I'd assume you're not physically grinning at the screen in delight when you write -beam-. That would make it a partially fair assessment, though in an admittedly small matter.

Or maybe you are, in which case, you scare me slightly.

-laugh- No. But, neither does one always physically smile when they type the smiley face emoticon. It's simply meant to convey an emotion. In this case, it was one of happiness and relief--finally, someone understood me.

(No, I didn't physically laugh when I typed it at the beginning of this post, but the same feeling that causes me to laugh occurred, which prompted me to -laugh-.)

[Verdandi]

Originally Posted by Wynneth

Thank you! -beam- That's precisely the point I was attempting to make.

Well, I'm glad we are in a state of agreement.
You seem very nice, and you seemed to have realized, at some point in your life, that keeping a cool and level head will get you places in life.
Well, when dealing with people face to face, at the very least.

[Wynneth]

Originally Posted by Verdandi

Well, I'm glad we are in a state of agreement.
You seem very nice, and you seemed to have realized, at some point in your life, that keeping a cool and level head will get you places in life.
Well, when dealing with people face to face, at the very least.

I really appreciate you saying this, because it's something on which I've had to really work. It's not my first instinct to keep a cool head, but I've realized that I yield better results when I remain calm. I'm glad you can see that my efforts are proving fruitful! Thank you. -smile-

[Tam Li Hua]

Me personally, I have to wonder how bored we have to be to actually hold a long, deeply 'intellectual' conversation on whether to type '-smile-' or or nothing at all.

Emoticons were created to convey emotion over Internet and cellphone because it just takes too blasted long to type out every emotion by hand. Now, while I can see that using too many emotes [as I admit I have a habit of doing at times] can be annoying, using them at all isn't a bad thing. In fact, I'd say anything that helps the lines of communication be clearer is a -good- thing. ^___^

But that may just be me.

Man, I'm ready to be done with work today. >_<

[gothicusmaximus]

Originally Posted by Wynneth

How is it that you know me well enough, in reality, to make such an assessment?

From reading your posts. You do attack people, just in a more subtle, veiled fashion than others might.

I really don't think so. I merely asked a question. Certainly, it's a pointed question, one that reflected how one may view his behavior.

Let's begin with the first sentence. You obviously don't find what JCC said to be 'FANTASTIC!". I don't think even JCC feels it to be particularly "fantastic!", and he believes its a valid position. In the second sentence, rather than simply saying "You're not addressing the issue at hand", you choose to convey that through mockery, voicing your agreement with a point you think is irrelevant, and then, when you could have said "but you bash opinions rather than simply challenge them", you chose to pose a condescending 'pointed' question.

In order to accuse someone of something, one must make an accusation. In order to make an accusation, one must charge someone with having done something wrong or offensive. A question, by its very nature, is incapable of charging. I asked him a question in order to aid in the furthering of my understanding of his point of view.

So... you don't believe in rhetorical or leading questions? You're being curt with me even now, in implying that in asking that question you didn't mean to allege the affirmative, that JCC preferred crass discourse because it provided him with 'ammunition'.

It shows a certain lack of flexibility to be unable to look past one's frustrations with a person and see that they could have a point or be a decent, intelligent person.

I don't think you're a foul person, nor do I think you're dumb. I'm reasonably sure I've agreed with you on certain things before. In fact, I even said in my last post that your position in this argument was valid.

I understand that, for whatever reason, I irritate the dickens out of both you and JCC. The irritation seems to manifest itself whenever one (or both) of you engage me in some sort of debate. It's been almost a constant, since I came to this board, with one (or both) of you nipping at my proverbial heels. I take this in stride, reply to your every question/accusation/assumption/extrapolation with the best composure as one can, given the circumstances. This seems to only make matters worse. It's a pity, as it's meant to do the opposite.


I figure that, one day, you'll both tire of singling me out and decide I'm not worth tapping your intellect or that I'm not all that bad. I'm willing to ride it out, if you are.

I fight with and make fun of everyone here, so I don't know from where you derive the impression of me 'singling you out'.

[Disaffected Shoelaces]

Originally Posted by Wynneth

-laugh- No. But, neither does one always physically smile when they type the smiley face emoticon. It's simply meant to convey an emotion. In this case, it was one of happiness and relief--finally, someone understood me.

(No, I didn't physically laugh when I typed it at the beginning of this post, but the same feeling that causes me to laugh occurred, which prompted me to -laugh-.)

Christ, you actually explained that to me in literal terms? Just tell me to get fucked! I was ASKING FOR IT!!

Now I know what those weird culty types are on about when they speak of "conquering the world with love". I'm losing the will to fight here. Your extreme pleasantness is lethargy-inducing.

[MegearaErotica]

Rofl.... I'm almost literally rolling on the floor laughing at all of you... almost. God I love this website.

[Verdandi]

Originally Posted by Disaffected Shoelaces

Christ, you actually explained that to me in literal terms? Just tell me to get fucked! I was ASKING FOR IT!!

Now I know what those weird culty types are on about when they speak of "conquering the world with love". I'm losing the will to fight here. Your extreme pleasantness is lethargy-inducing.

"Conquering the world with love?"
I'd never thought about that, what of you Wynneth?
Had you ever considered that?
It's a rather interesting idea.

[Wynneth]

Originally Posted by gothicusmaximus

From reading your posts. You do attack people, just in a more subtle, veiled fashion than others might.

If that's the way you or others choose to see it, that's no concern of mine. As I said, I write what I mean and, from there, it's out of my hands.

Originally Posted by gothicusmaximus

Let's begin with the first sentence. You obvious don't find what JCC said to be 'FANTASTIC!". I don't think even JCC feels it to be particularly "fantastic!", and he believes its a valid position.

Yes. I felt it was "fantastic!" that he would prefer someone to inform him of something, to further himself, rather than root himself in the belief that he could never be wrong.

Originally Posted by gothicusmaximus

In the second sentence, rather than simply saying "You're not addressing the issue at hand", you choose to convey that through mockery, stating that you agree with a point you think is irrelevant, and then, when you could have said "but you bash opinions rather than simply challenge them", you chose a condescending 'pointed' question.

I really dislike how you've stated what I think is irrelevant. You, at the risk of repeating myself for the billionth time, don't know me. I do agree that opinions should be challenged. How else might someone further themselves by seeing a situation from more than one point of view? I simply disagreed with the method in which he challenged MegearaErotica's opinion. So, in order to learn more about the method--perhaps offering myself a chance to find something good about it--I asked. How is that condescending?

Originally Posted by gothicusmaximus

So... you don't believe in rhetorical or leading questions? You're being curt with me even now, in implying that in asking that question you didn't mean to allege the affirmative, that JCC preferred crass discourse because it provided him with ammunition.

I asked him about the "ammunition" thing because it was a thought--a possible explanation--that presented itself to me. I wasn't saying that, without question, is what he did. Certainly, I'm being curt with you. You're attacking me, once more, and I'm in the position of needing to defend myself. How may one better do that without seeming curt? If you've any suggestions, I'll take them into consideration.

Originally Posted by gothicusmaximus

I don't think you're a foul person, nor do I think you're dumb. I'm reasonably sure I've agreed with you on certain things before. In fact, I even said in my last post that your position in this argument was valid.

Then, why do you persist in antagonizing me through these break-downs of things I've said? If, in fact, you're not meaning to antagonize me, please, enlighten me as to your intent. I realize I may be wrong in feeling singled out in your well-known manner.

Originally Posted by gothicusmaximus

I fight with and make fun of everyone here, so I don't know from where you derive the impression of me 'singling you out'.

The term "singling out" wasn't meant in a literal fashion, here. I meant that you "single me out" whenever I make posts such as these. It seems as though you decide that you want to pick apart everything I've said and show me where you think I've done or said something wrong. Personally, I feel this could be based on past prejudices you may harbor against me, as a person. I've done my best to be as accommodating to others as possible and still maintain my self-respect. Is that reprehensible?

[gothicusmaximus]

Originally Posted by MegearaErotica

God I love this website.

We all do, in our own way. I love this website like Joey loved Dawson-- Pacey has my heart, but gnet has my soul.

[Wynneth]

Originally Posted by Verdandi

"Conquering the world with love?"
I'd never thought about that, what of you Wynneth?
Had you ever considered that?
It's a rather interesting idea.

I hadn't really thought of it like that. But, I suppose it does hearken back to that old adage: Kill 'em with kindness.

[gothicusmaximus]

Originally Posted by Wynneth

Yes. I felt it was "fantastic!" that he would prefer someone to inform him of something, to further himself, rather than root himself in the belief that he could never be wrong.

I don't believe it's possible you could have mustered so much enthusiasm regarding an admirable, but almost obligatory, trait in someone else's character. I felt more that your "fantastic!" was a snide replacement for "well, buddy, that's great, but..."
Maybe I'm wrong, and you just get effervescently happy whenever you hear that someone doesn't torture cats.

I really dislike how you've stated what I think is irrelevant. You, at the risk of repeating myself for the billionth time, don't know me. I do agree that opinions should be challenged. How else might someone further themselves by seeing a situation from more than one point of view? I simply disagreed with the method in which he challenged MegearaErotica's opinion. So, in order to learn more about the method--perhaps offering myself a chance to find something good about it--I asked. How is that condescending?

Whether or not you agree was not my concern. If I understand your argument-- and hey, maybe I just don't-- I'm pretty sure that you judged the question as to whether opinions should be challenged as irrelevant to your point.
Really? You wanted to understand the method? From all of your posts I've received the distinct impression that you don't really find the method worth knowing about, as yours is totally superior. Moreover, you seem to already have a great number of opinions concerning from where JCC's attitude proceeds.

I asked him about the "ammunition" thing because it was a thought--a possible explanation--that presented itself to me. I wasn't saying that, without question, is what he did.

So you perceived a possibility that JCC might answer 'yes, I need to belligerently retaliate against those with whom I argue in order to feel validated'? Really, I'm curious to know, that's not a rhetorical question designed to point out a weakness in your argument, those aren't real.

Then, why do you persist in antagonizing me through these break-downs of things I've said? If, in fact, you're not meaning to antagonize me, please, enlighten me as to your intent. I realize I may be wrong in feeling singled out in your well-known manner.

My father has a drinking problem and stopped loving me early in my life, so I fight with people on the internet. It's nothing personal. -Weep-.

The term "singling out" wasn't meant in a literal fashion, here. I meant that you "single me out" whenever I make posts such as these. It seems as though you decide that you want to pick apart everything I've said and show me where you think I've done or said something wrong. Personally, I feel this could be based on past prejudices you may harbor against me, as a person. I've done my best to be as accommodating to others as possible and still maintain my self-respect. Is that reprehensible?

You're welcome to your theories, however dumb they may be. As I said, I don't really treat you differently than I treat anyone who says something with which I disagree. You tend to make long posts, so when I address them, I address them one point at a time, as I do with all long posts regardless of their authorship. I'm not going to make believe I like you, but that's hardly of much importance as I like about 2% of the members on this forum. I respect you more than certain others, if you're sensible to that minor compliment.

[Wynneth]

Originally Posted by gothicusmaximus

I don't believe it's possible you could have mustered so much enthusiasm regarding an admirable, but almost obligatory, trait in someone else's character. I felt more that your "fantastic!" was a snide replacement for "well, buddy, that's great, but..."
Maybe I'm wrong, and you just get effervescently happy whenever you hear that someone doesn't torture cats.

Something that I've noticed is that many people--more than I'd prefer--don't do something as simple and "almost obligatory" as what JCC said. So, I truly was happy to hear it.

Originally Posted by gothicusmaximus

Whether or not you agree was not my concern. If I understand your argument-- and hey, maybe I just don't-- I'm pretty sure that you judged the question as to whether opinions should be challenged as irrelevant to your point.

No. I didn't say it was irrelevant to my point. It was an oblique fact, but it's one with which I agree, never the less.

Originally Posted by gothicusmaximus

Really? You wanted to understand the method? From all of your posts I've received the distinct impression that you don't really find the method worth knowing about, as yours is totally superior. Moreover, you seem to already have a great number of opinions concerning from where JCC's attitude proceeds.

Just like you've got a very distinct opinion concerning from where my attitude proceeds? Impressions are all we have in an online setting, unless we ask to learn more.

Originally Posted by gothicusmaximus

So you perceived a possibility that JCC might answer 'yes, I need to belligerently retaliate against those with whom I argue in order to feel validated'? Really, I'm curious to know, that's not a rhetorical question designed to point out a weakness in your argument, those aren't real.

I never said anything about him doing anything in order to feel validated. I perceived the possibility of JCC saying "yes," because there's a 50/50 chance in the asking of a yes or no question. I expected him to say "yes" or "no," but spiced with "and, this is why." Also, your last comment in that paragraph insinuates the idea that I don't think I could ever have a weakness in an argument. I believe I've always made it clear to you and many others that I am not infallible. When someone shows me that I'm incorrect, I accept that correction, make amends (if necessary,) and am grateful to've learned something from the situation.

Originally Posted by gothicusmaximus

My father has a drinking problem and stopped loving me early in my life, so I fight with people on the internet. It's nothing personal. -Weep-.

Inflammatory remarks. What a surprise. Backhanded sarcasm. -yawn-

Originally Posted by gothicusmaximus

You're welcome to your theories, however dumb they may be.

Weren't you just lecturing me about making critical, unfounded accusations?

Originally Posted by gothicusmaximus

As I said, I don't really treat you differently than I treat anyone who says something with which I disagree.

Ah, so you subscribe to JCC's preferred method of relaying your opinions? Or, does he subscribe to yours? Either way, I'm still hoping to gain some enlightenment on it. Would you care to explain why your way is better than mine?

Originally Posted by gothicusmaximus

You tend to make long posts, so when I address them, I address them one point at a time, as I do with all long posts regardless of their authorship.

Understandable. I do the same. But, again, I think you took me more literally than I meant.

Originally Posted by gothicusmaximus

I'm not going to make believe I like you, but that's hardly of much importance as I like about 2% of the members on this forum.

Fair enough. I don't need you to like me. It'd be nice if you did, but I'm not upset that you don't. Some people's personalities simply clash. That's kind of my outlook on life, really. Some people get along, others don't. It's pointless for me to waste time and effort attempting to convert others to my way of thinking, but I still feel it's worth the effort to voice my thoughts and opinions as clearly as I can, and answer any questions that may be asked of me.

Originally Posted by gothicusmaximus

I respect you more than certain others, if you're sensible to that minor compliment.

I appreciate your compliment, however backhanded it ended up being, at the end. Perhaps it's just your certain brand of savoir faire. That's how I'm choosing to take it, at any rate. Thank you.

[JCC]

To answer your question, I don't feel that I need ammunition as such, but to have your ideas attacked leads you to a distinct ultimatum: you either have to find a way to defend your position, or concede and rethink it. I recently had a debate with Jillian about Nihilism. He thought that my points were stupid, he told me why, and through defending my position I was able to further my own understanding of what I believe. Criticism is necessary, and I don't think that being nice about it works most of the time, let alone all of the time. I would rather be humiliated once than a fool forever.

[Wynneth]

Originally Posted by JCC

To answer your question, I don't feel that I need ammunition as such, but to have your ideas attacked leads you to a distinct ultimatum: you either have to find a way to defend your position, or concede and rethink it. I recently had a debate with Jillian about Nihilism. He thought that my points were stupid, he told me why, and through defending my position I was able to further my own understanding of what I believe. Criticism is necessary, and I don't think that being nice about it works most of the time, let alone all of the time. I would rather be humiliated once than a fool forever.

Thank you very much for telling me your position on this matter. I can see where you're coming from, certainly. It's similar to a discussion that was had on a different thread, somewhere. It was regarding someone who was in emotional turmoil about someone and, when a couple of people were very confrontational and accusatory toward the emotionally troubled person, others stepped in and asked why.

While I can see that working for some people, I've found that even more are truly affronted by that method of dealing with them. Now, a friend telling you that you're a moron is one thing--a stranger telling you that is another. I understand what you're saying and agree that, at times, it's probably the best way of going about it. I'm not so sure about all the time. Personally, when someone verbally attacks me in such a way, my instinctual response isn't a positive one. I find that, through calm discourse, I learn just as much--if not more--than if I were verbally flambéd. -grin- But, again, this is another subjective topic and, as such, I'm sensing the agreement to disagree coming on--old hat, I know.

But, seriously, thank you.

[ChapterIX]

Obvious hoax or misrepresentation of facts.

[Godslayer Jillian]

The last two pages were about A FUCKING WORD!
I can see that happening, but either way, here's my opinion:



SHUT THE FUCK UP
See? Straight to the point and still far superior to anything else in this page.

[MegearaErotica]

I can't believe how long this argument has gone on... O.o
Twisted...logic...making brain...implode...!