Dem Bones

Post Reply New Topic

Hi. I am Philologos and I am a recovering bourgeois saboteur. It is two months since my last self criticism.

My counsellor says I need to curb my arrogant individualism, so I will start by following the well established practice of posting a humorous and sententious link or two:

http://www.dilbert.com/dyn/str_strip/00 ... .print.gif


http://www.dilbert.com/dyn/str_strip/00 ... .strip.gif

Gosh, that feels better.

Golly gee whillikers, it has been pointed out that I have been - wait for it - CONTENTIOUS! Like the Serpent in Eden, like Eris with the OTHER Apple [you see now why that second strip?] I, even I have introduced a CONTENTIOUS spirit into PPR where before my coming harmony and sweet reason reigned.

I am SO ashamed.

Shucks, I thought I was just critiquing poor lexical choice and faulty reasoning, complaining about the use of loaded slogans in place of data.

But all the time I was CONTENTIOUS, driving people of good will away from PPR.

Well, comrades, I assure you I have seen the bright light of right thought, and I shall, with the help of my comrades and the inspiration of the Leader and his Lieder, reform.

-------------

Henceforth when Fnord recites his mantra misdefining faith I shall not correct him.

Henceforth when ruveyn maintains that Christians worship three gods and a goddess and have no right to distort HIS religion which he does not believe, I shall not correct or protest.

Henceforth I shall not respond to bitl or raml, and when motl goes into one of his endless tongue in cheek sequences I shall not question is sincerity.

Henceforth, if Vexcalibur posts a video - well, I am human, I may still point out I could not watch it even if I had reason to believe there was a point.

AND - if any of you henceforth sees fit to point to me as being contentious - well, it is a verdoemd bloedig lie.

---------

I'm still okay witrh being pedantic and annoying - those do not sabotage PPR.

Also Sprach Sartresue topic

I have been known to be this way also. The most notable difference between you and me, Phil, is that I choose my battles. So I do not engage Vex or Visa or Fnord as quickly, and I do pick apart posts to make sure I am retaliating in the most reasonable way possible. You are right on many occasions but I wonder why some of the criticisms seem, well, somewhat petty? Perhaps it is your extensive erudition and superior intellect (both of which I lack). These challenges might make me a tad more humble.

(NB I erased the typo witrh, and inserted with ) Sometimes it is easier to find fault!!

Of course I am a trained professional and licensed Linguist, and I am too elevated of thought to worry about a slip of the finger on a keyboard allegedly designed to slow the user.

I try to catch the worst ones, though, out of courtesy. But an extra r or two in "with" - je m'en fiche de cela - to quote PG Wodehouse.

As I say, I am trying - one more time - to test a new policy. Trying to avoid the contention [I am so ashamed that JakobVirgil and Inuyasha would be best buddies if not for my influence].

I do have a tendency to get more annoying in proportion to perceived unreason.

But I do not think many of my points are picayune. I rather tend, in fact, to pull my punches.

But I have spent a lifetime trying to get others to make their points clearly and fairly - and correcting them when they do not. The PROPER definition - or at least a mutually agreed definition - is essential.

It matters less whether I agree - I am working mainly for well-formed presentation. Still - when someone asserts an obvious falsehood as if chiselled at Sinai ....

For what it's worth, I'll try to describe the source of my little squabble with you. I seemed to be getting an insinuation from you that you perceive me as "stupid and unthinking" (something I'm not used to being labelled as). The origin of this perception seemed to be the fact that I am intensely offended by claims of the anti-homosexual crowd that insists on diminishing and discrediting the love experienced between same-sex partners as compared to heterosexual partners.

Any such perception would have nothing to do with your being intensely offended. I get intensely offended, for example, by - well, that is either obvious or need to know.

Nor am I bothered by the specifics of what offends you, which is to you as to me mine.

"unthinking" is the diagnosis to which I gravitate when somebody goes into voluble diatribe in response to a person who is simply making straightforward statements.

"stupid" I have been known to extend to individuals who when in unthinking mode come up with repeated stupid statements.

As for example I would if someone assumed me to be a conservative bigot or a liberal bigot or an advocate of anything but reason.

Do you always consider a diatribe unthinking? If so, why?

There are no situations where injustice cuts so deep and is so hurtful to warrent anger?

I already said - okay, maybe I did not use the words, so I will say it now - I get angry.

Call me a racist and find out.

Call me a hypocrite and find out.

Diss one of my friends and find out.

Accuse me of saying what I did not say and find out.

But you do not make your point by blowing someone up or blowing up at him. You do not make your point by coming up withy rants that do not address anything the other guy said.

May I give you just a role play sample?

-------------

I am SICK of dealing with you people. Government and bondage is NOTHING but a sick dictator's attempt to hold ono power in a world that will not long tolerate his bloedig Scheissdreck. Chomsky's Stormtroops destroyed the best of linguistics. They made life almost impossible for me and forced people better but more sensitive than I am toi find jobs as janitors.

Do not try to tell me you do not buy into Chomsky's drool. The positions you have defended are exactly the sort of knee jerk 50s pinko stuff he throws out every time he sees a headline. If you like him so much, why don't you just move in with him and I hope you will be very happy.

----------------

There. It wasn't easy. Slogan Unsinn does not come naturally. I found myself pirating snatches from other folk's slanging matches.

But of course, that is what it is about - it is stereotyped, choreographed, not an examined position.

If someone hit you with something like the sample - how convincing, mind-changing woulds it be? Or would you just say "This stupid idiot lives where they sewed up the hyena!"

It has taken me a few reads of this thread to find my way into it.

I allow my buttons to be pushed. Time and again I have risen to the bait and taken on that which does not merit response.

I have contributed to the weedy threads whose proliferation threatens to choke out the attractive, desirable threads. Though I can do nothing to excise the former, I will do what I can to deprive them of oxygen (metaphorically speaking) and stick to substance.

Your norm, Citoyen visagrunt, is at a level of clarity and sweet reason that puts my occasionally frustrate and reactive density to shame.