|
Post by Reefs on Jan 24, 2014 0:06:28 GMT -5
I was thinking about what Laughter said, that Andrew isn't actually aware of what he is writing when he is writing, and reading when he is reading (which also applies to Figless). The question I'm still pondering is: Is there an actual difference between talking to Andrew/Figless and someone who suffers from dementia? I don't know. I don't see one at the moment. Maybe someone else can explain the difference to me. Comprendo.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jan 24, 2014 0:11:40 GMT -5
Seriously, straight up man, I don't understand the question. ... and, did you notice that you literally mocked what I wrote? Do you see the difference in what I wrote there and if I'd said "did you notice that you literally mocked me"? Similar to what happened to Quinn, isn't it? No actual conscious intention to mock but still they mocked anyway. It's kinda like the devil made them say it.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jan 24, 2014 0:13:33 GMT -5
The movement in that moment was to mirror your energy, the intention wasn't to outright mock. And yet, think back to all that you've said that mocking indicates on the part of the mocker. Have I mocked you in this conversation? Have I made you the butt of any joke? I will admit to having slipped up into old habits exactly once in the other thread, but here, you have literally become what you have relentlessly complained about to me over these past months, and that despite the fact that I've used no images or humor or disparagement in addressing you. So, who is the source of the mockery after all?Let me guess, it starts with an 'A' and ends with 'ndrew'?
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jan 24, 2014 0:19:25 GMT -5
Why do you keep avoiding a direct answer to Andrew's question? I've been reading along, and I too, am interested in your answer. So you avoid my question by claiming avoidance on my part. Is it difficult for you to admit feeling negative emotions?Hey, all the bickering is just to unwind and relax. Indeed, Reefs may frustrate me a bit at times, but there's really no sense of anger or emotional angst...it's all taken with a grain of salt....beyond saying this, I know there's nothing I can say to convince you that I don't get bent outa shape through engaging on this forum..... actually come here to unwind and relax...but anyway, you will perceive what you perceive...and whatever that may be, it's fine.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jan 24, 2014 0:24:08 GMT -5
No. Maybe its your anger or whatever you are feeling. If anything, there is some mild concern here for the state of the forum as whole, with you as moderator.....I wouldn't call it negative emotion though. Why do you ask? Do I seem angry or upset? O.k. gang we've arrived back at the exact same point we were the other night. Until you can admit to the obvious fact that what I'm saying to you, rather than the way it is being said, really pisses you off, then you're not being honest with me, and you're not being honest with yourselves. The conversation has devolved into a rather twisted form of weaponized cross-therapy, an d frankly, is all about wallowing in suffering.You pair can have that to yourselves, if that's what you really want, but if you're willing to get honest with yourselves and me, then we can start talking again. Yeah, they got free-floatingly fixated on some kind of alleged 'injustice' or something that they see going on here and then got sucked into their own figsments of imagination vortex which results in this rather bizarre crusadeless crusade full of blameless blame.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 24, 2014 1:26:31 GMT -5
O.k. gang we've arrived back at the exact same point we were the other night. Until you can admit to the obvious fact that what I'm saying to you, rather than the way it is being said, really pisses you off, then you're not being honest with me, and you're not being honest with yourselves. The conversation has devolved into a rather twisted form of weaponized cross-therapy, and frankly, is all about wallowing in suffering. You pair can have that to yourselves, if that's what you really want, but if you're willing to get honest with yourselves and me, then we can start talking again. Believe it or not, it is possible to have a conversation of diverging viewpoints, without the involvement of anger. The idea that diverging viewpoints and challenges must result in being p*ssed off and lashing out, is what I'm trying to talk about when I address the nasty mocking and such. Until you can admit to your own anger, there's really no more point to the conversation about what you perceive as the nastiness.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 24, 2014 1:29:09 GMT -5
... and, did you notice that you literally mocked what I wrote? Do you see the difference in what I wrote there and if I'd said "did you notice that you literally mocked me"? Similar to what happened to Quinn, isn't it? No actual conscious intention to mock but still they mocked anyway. It's kinda like the devil made them say it. The obvious unconsciousness of that particular instance as well as the constant stream of obviously unconscious self-contradiction would indicate that there's really no point to a conversation with him about or from a personal perspective. Why we resorted to satire becomes more and more obvious the longer I refrain from it.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 24, 2014 1:31:50 GMT -5
So you avoid my question by claiming avoidance on my part. Is it difficult for you to admit feeling negative emotions?Hey, all the bickering is just to unwind and relax. Indeed, Reefs may frustrate me a bit at times, but there's really no sense of anger or emotional angst...it's all taken with a grain of salt....beyond saying this, I know there's nothing I can say to convince you that I don't get bent outa shape through engaging on this forum..... actually come here to unwind and relax...but anyway, you will perceive what you perceive...and whatever that may be, it's fine. Right, vent their frustrations is more like it.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 24, 2014 1:31:55 GMT -5
Similar to what happened to Quinn, isn't it? No actual conscious intention to mock but still they mocked anyway. It's kinda like the devil made them say it. The obvious unconsciousness of that particular instance as well as the constant stream of obviously unconscious self-contradiction would indicate that there's really no point to a conversation with him about or from a personal perspective. Why we resorted to satire becomes more and more obvious the longer I refrain from it. Satire is at least a sane response to insanity.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 24, 2014 1:36:24 GMT -5
O.k. gang we've arrived back at the exact same point we were the other night. Until you can admit to the obvious fact that what I'm saying to you, rather than the way it is being said, really pisses you off, then you're not being honest with me, and you're not being honest with yourselves. The conversation has devolved into a rather twisted form of weaponized cross-therapy, an d frankly, is all about wallowing in suffering.You pair can have that to yourselves, if that's what you really want, but if you're willing to get honest with yourselves and me, then we can start talking again. Yeah, they got free-floatingly fixated on some kind of alleged 'injustice' or something that they see going on here and then got sucked into their own figsments of imagination vortex which results in this rather bizarre crusadeless crusade full of blameless blame. I'm no victim here, I'm of course completely responsible for my end of it and hey, I admit that I find the conversation frustrating, negative, repetitive and useless. It was obvious from the rapid-fire repetitive tangles-mess questions and the snark, with the crescendo being the literal mocking, that there's something negative on the other side of the screen, but they can't come out and admit to simply being human and getting pissed off at me. Why that is is pretty obvious and the more they deny it the more obvious the facade becomes.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 24, 2014 1:39:07 GMT -5
The obvious unconsciousness of that particular instance as well as the constant stream of obviously unconscious self-contradiction would indicate that there's really no point to a conversation with him about or from a personal perspective. Why we resorted to satire becomes more and more obvious the longer I refrain from it. Satire is at least a sane response to insanity. heh, with one specific exception, I haven't resorted to that particular lexicon in the conversation up to this point (except for another exception of saying just what you did there) because of the specific, repetitive and insistent objections to it, mostly by figgles.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2014 2:00:42 GMT -5
You can look up character in the dictionary if you need to. Somebody's 'tizziness' is a character trait, 'the troll' and 'the sherriff' represent a collection of character traits. Here is the conversation that the questions responded to. They are pretty simple and straight forward questions. And I've told you, yes, I'm pretty sure almost everybody here means what they say. Yes, I meant "tizzy". Yes, some believe folks are trolling. Yes, sheriff is a light-hearted way of referring to a moderator. Are there any other characters that you're not sure are believed? Ok. I disagree with you. I don't believe that everybody here believes in the characters that they or others create. There is illusion in character creation. And I believe that there are some here that have realised that. It's a conversation that perhaps will come at some point. There seems little point whilst people are solid in their characterisations of others.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jan 24, 2014 3:21:49 GMT -5
The obvious unconsciousness of that particular instance as well as the constant stream of obviously unconscious self-contradiction would indicate that there's really no point to a conversation with him about or from a personal perspective. Why we resorted to satire becomes more and more obvious the longer I refrain from it. Satire is at least a sane response to insanity. But flawless logic says that using satire means taking things very personal while complaining about someone using satire is not.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 24, 2014 10:37:39 GMT -5
Satire is at least a sane response to insanity. But flawless logic says that using satire means taking things very personal while complaining about someone using satire is not. Right, which is insane and invites satire.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 24, 2014 16:14:20 GMT -5
But flawless logic says that using satire means taking things very personal while complaining about someone using satire is not. Right, which is insane and invites satire. As does relentlessly complaining about satire and constantly bringing the conversation back to the topic and then denying that the complaints and the focus are actually either complaints or a focus.
|
|