|
|
Post by arisha on Mar 17, 2013 4:37:43 GMT -5
You say the best thing a person can do is only point out the things they see, yet you don't do this.
Here's just a very small sample of you telling people what to see.
............ ....... You are not just pointing out what you see, you are claiming what you see are the facts of the situation, and if anyone disagrees with your observations, you then claim they are wrong or blind. You offer no open communication to discover if what you see is true or not, you state at the very beginning that it's true and others better wise up and fall in line and accept this.
I'm just pointing stuff out. The rest is just your believed speculations. You are not pointing out. You only make such an appearance you do. And what M-G says is very much true. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 17, 2013 5:30:50 GMT -5
Bonus! it was the thread where Andrew posted his picture:  how can anyone be mean to such a sweet lookin' guy! That's Andrew? |
|
|
|
Post by topology on Mar 17, 2013 8:31:43 GMT -5
Bonus! it was the thread where Andrew posted his picture: how can anyone be mean to such a sweet lookin' guy! That's Andrew? And his wife. Now where is your mugshot?  |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 17, 2013 8:53:25 GMT -5
And his wife. Now where is your mugshot? Cool. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Mar 17, 2013 9:28:44 GMT -5
Might as well go the whole hog now and meet the whole family...here is one of the kids... Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Mar 17, 2013 10:35:52 GMT -5
Greetings.. I am still of the opinion that enigma literally cannot see these things that he does. The really odd thing is that you think you do. No.. the really odd thing.. is that you play these games without any conscience as to the effects.. your interest is your own amusement.. Be well.. |
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Mar 17, 2013 10:57:25 GMT -5
This is a simple matter. You asked me to contemplate and answer a question sincerely, yet you asked from a place of being slightly disrespectful, so the movement to answer that question was not there. It doesn't seem like you are going to edit, and its no big surprise that the movement to answer these other questions is currently also not there. So, in this context, it appears that the system of thought insists that a) any discussion must be kept personal, and b)that oops, company has arrived...will have to wait until tomorrow. Apologies. So, in this context, it appears that the system of thought insists that a) any discussion must be kept personal, and b)that its assumption about the origin of said question was from a place of being "disrespectful" is true. Additionally, there is c) the system of thought also appears to deny the other part of the "movement to answer". There actually IS a movement to answer as has been stated, but only if certain conditions are met. Is the need for propriety still overriding the potential that might come from being open and allowing the discussion to unfold? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Mar 17, 2013 11:14:25 GMT -5
So, in this context, it appears that the system of thought insists that a) any discussion must be kept personal, and b)that oops, company has arrived...will have to wait until tomorrow. Apologies. So, in this context, it appears that the system of thought insists that a) any discussion must be kept personal, and b)that its assumption about the origin of said question was from a place of being "disrespectful" is true. Additionally, there is c) the system of thought also appears to deny the other part of the "movement to answer". There actually IS a movement to answer as has been stated, but only if certain conditions are met. Is the need for propriety still overriding the potential that might come from being open and allowing the discussion to unfold? In asking you to edit, I would say I was really asking for the discussion to be a bit more impersonal, and I think you sometimes speak with the intention of being a bit disrespectful, yes. I'm still not going to answer the question you asked until you edit, it would take you approximately 20 seconds to do so which doesn't seem like a big ask to me if you are interested in an answer. |
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Mar 17, 2013 11:18:00 GMT -5
So, in this context, it appears that the system of thought insists that a) any discussion must be kept personal, and b)that its assumption about the origin of said question was from a place of being "disrespectful" is true. Additionally, there is c) the system of thought also appears to deny the other part of the "movement to answer". There actually IS a movement to answer as has been stated, but only if certain conditions are met. Is the need for propriety still overriding the potential that might come from being open and allowing the discussion to unfold? In asking you to edit, I would say I was really asking for the discussion to be a bit more impersonal, and I think you sometimes speak with the intention of being a bit disrespectful, yes. I'm still not going to answer the question you asked until you edit, it would take you approximately 20 seconds to do so which doesn't seem like a big ask to me if you are interested in an answer. There you go, again, with the movement to answer why you won't answer. Andrew, straight up--why can't you just let it go? |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 17, 2013 11:18:57 GMT -5
So, in this context, it appears that the system of thought insists that a) any discussion must be kept personal, and b)that its assumption about the origin of said question was from a place of being "disrespectful" is true. Additionally, there is c) the system of thought also appears to deny the other part of the "movement to answer". There actually IS a movement to answer as has been stated, but only if certain conditions are met. Is the need for propriety still overriding the potential that might come from being open and allowing the discussion to unfold? In asking you to edit, I would say I was really asking for the discussion to be a bit more impersonal, and I think you sometimes speak with the intention of being a bit disrespectful, yes. I'm still not going to answer the question you asked until you edit, it would take you approximately 20 seconds to do so which doesn't seem like a big ask to me if you are interested in an answer. That's similar to the OHDM.  |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Mar 17, 2013 11:25:14 GMT -5
In asking you to edit, I would say I was really asking for the discussion to be a bit more impersonal, and I think you sometimes speak with the intention of being a bit disrespectful, yes. I'm still not going to answer the question you asked until you edit, it would take you approximately 20 seconds to do so which doesn't seem like a big ask to me if you are interested in an answer. There you go, again, with the movement to answer why you won't answer. Andrew, straight up--why can't you just let it go? I haven't turned my back on sN which means I am okay to speak to him, I am saying that if he wants that question answered, them I'm going to require an edit. I think a more interesting question is 'why not edit?'. It would only take a few seconds, and regardless of whether it was intended a bit disrespectfully or not, it came through as a bit disrespectful. Why not edit sN? |
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Mar 17, 2013 11:27:51 GMT -5
There you go, again, with the movement to answer why you won't answer. Andrew, straight up--why can't you just let it go? I haven't turned my back on sN which means I am okay to speak to him, I am saying that if he wants that question answered, them I'm going to require an edit. I think a more interesting question is 'why not edit?'. It would only take a few seconds, and regardless of whether it was intended a bit disrespectfully or not, it came through as a bit disrespectful. Why not edit sN? Sounds like you've got an attachment to his editing that post. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Mar 17, 2013 11:29:43 GMT -5
I haven't turned my back on sN which means I am okay to speak to him, I am saying that if he wants that question answered, them I'm going to require an edit. I think a more interesting question is 'why not edit?'. It would only take a few seconds, and regardless of whether it was intended a bit disrespectfully or not, it came through as a bit disrespectful. Why not edit sN? Sounds like you've got an attachment to his editing that post. I really don't mind at all if he does or doesn't. If he does, I will answer the question, if he doesn't, I won't. Either way is really okay. |
|
|
|
Post by silence on Mar 17, 2013 11:45:18 GMT -5
Sounds like you've got an attachment to his editing that post. I really don't mind at all if he does or doesn't. I'd say that's a flat out lie. |
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Mar 17, 2013 11:47:24 GMT -5
I really don't mind at all if he does or doesn't. I'd say that's a flat out lie. I'd agree, though I think it's more significant that he's lying to himself. |
|
