Re^18: What is "aggressive" argument?by BrowserUk (Pope)
|on Nov 10, 2010 at 23:12 UTC||Need Help??|
The latter part, whether true or not, is easily seen as inflammatory, etc.
And we come full circle. That you are going to bat for a sock puppet id who's sole purpose in existance is to allow its cowardly controller to ply his 'art'--the very things you are judging me for, but 100x worse--safe in the knowledge that his real id is thus protected from any fall out. That speaks volumes.
The conclusion is obvious -- if you want to do something about the situation then you need to change your approach.
Firstly, changing my approach won't correct the prejudgement that you apply when you see my name attached to a post. That boat sailed long ago. It might have some small effect on the perceptions of me by newbies; but I don't have run ins with them.
Secondly, I don't perceive the need for change. You're the one sitting in judgement of me, but you make no attempts to apply your standards to my sparring partners. Not even the non-contributory, wholly vacuous, deeds of an insipid, cowardly sock puppet.
do you really think the rest of us care about your inflammatory sock-puppet diatribe?
I wasn't talking to "the rest of you", only you.
Do I think you care? I don't have to "think", you've made it very clear. And confirmed everything I've been saying all over again.
A more interesting question is: Do I think you should care about the actions of someone holding (at least) two accounts, and using one of them to get away with spewing foul, if vacuous and insipid, rancour, safe from redress. Yes. I think you should.
That you seek to protect him from me; that should give you pause for thought.
I'm not keen on bible quotes, but there is one that comes to mind: judge not others lest you too be judged.
What I do, I do in my own name, and take full responsibility for whatever consequences arise--good or bad.
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.