Shyteddy - you seem to be avoiding absolutely everything I wrote. And, as with others who have replied, simply saying 'you're missing my point' would appear to be obfuscation on your behalf.
shyteddy wrote:
Woah..... I'm not quite sure what to say to all that.
Responding to each point made would be a good start?
shyteddy wrote:
You, like they, seem to have radically misinterpreted the point of my message, taken my words way too literally instead of looking at the message as a whole, and expressed your dissent with sardonic comments and outright hatred,
If I've misinterpreted, let me know specifically where.
I looked at your message as a whole. In short: it is typically grandiose, yet lacking in clarity of detail. I'm trying to find out the specifics of your ideas, as presently they appear to be nothing more than ideals.
How this is dissent is beyond me. Consider the time I took to reply to you.
shyteddy wrote:
even including the subtle suggestion I commit suicide (well, to be fair, you said "not existing" and "you go first" but the gist of it was that I'm sure)
...And it is you who completely misunderstands me.
I assumed you'd have realised I was suggesting that if we are talking about 'ultimate problems', perhaps the most important issue is the value of life itself - and if it has any value.
If I wanted to suggest you kill yourself, I'd simply tell you to bugger off and kill yourself.
Your misunderstanding of what I wrote is total.
shyteddy wrote:
If I had given the same speech from a pulpit or a soapbox would you have the gall to respond with the same cynicism in person?
Completely and absolutely.
But I didn't reply with cynicism and scorn. I replied with very valid points - none of which you have addressed.
shyteddy wrote:
and you resolve to join my cause
I'm still completely at a loss as to exactly what your cause is.
Please let us know instead of avoiding specifics.
It is good form to be respectful when someone takes the time to think through the points you've made.