Jump to content

Recommended Posts

For those interested, ITATM launched a personal attack on me on another thread for having the temerity to disagree with his/her views. Rather than carry on an unedifying argument in public, I sent him/her a polite private message defending myself. S/he responded saying s/he refused to read my message, so I answered saying it was a shame that s/he is so arrogant that they can't even bring themselves to read any criticism of their opinion. That's all - for reasons best known to him/herself s/he now wants to appear some hounded martyr. Rather pathetic really.

Always cracks me up when people are happy to get passive aggressive or on their high horse in a public discussion, but as soon as someone tries to discuss something privately ?oh on, I don?t do PM?s?. There?s a few people on here who can dish it out but can?t take it.



Childish...

"I see you've sent a PM .

While I agree that we shouldn't continue on the thread - I've made my points - I will not be reading any Pm's from you .


You are so judgemental and spoiling for a fight on the public thread ,I am not keen to read what you may voice on a PM .

Please leave me alone ."




Fair enough Rendel - you didn't like being told that you were judgemental and spoiling for a fight - I can understand that you'd want to respond .


I prefer ( though it may well be against EDF protocol ) to conduct such exchanges in public as opposed to PM .Though on reflection ,I'd prefer you to leave me alone .

You really can't see the irony in whining about not being left alone because someone sent you a PM and a reply to your response, on the one hand, and starting a whole new thread specifically to attack someone on the other?


Do unto others, etc...

intexasatthe moment Wrote:

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

> Entiteled to your view JoeLeg ,but you might want

> to ask yourself why ,if the "unable to take it "

> party says don't send me PMs the "disher out"

> continues ?



Dude, stop digging.


You lost all moral high ground as soon as you started this thread.

I can see the difference Rendel .A public exchange means that all the posters can read what we both say .A private exchange means that they can't .


I started this thread because I'd asked you not to send me PMs and you ignored me .If you see that as a personal attack ,so be it .If the cap fits and all that .

Rendall, i will answer here as do not want to divert from the real issue in other thread. I can understand

when people do not want to continue diffrent opinions

through private messages, for many reasons. We can have different opinions, but I do believe when things become to personal , the real issue is often lost. Nothing is black or white, if people have opinions that are diffrent from your own, this should not invalidate either views. Rights and wrongs become very restrictive.

All that would be fine if people didn?t then continue discussion publicly, or state publicallyvthat they do not wish to receive PM?s etc.


It?s the internet, no one is forcing anyone to respond. It?s hypocritical to try and avoid debate but then continue to talk about it.

intexasatthe moment Wrote:

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

> Joeleg - is that why you think people /I post ?

>

> To obtain the moral high ground ?

>

> You can't imagine that there might be other

> reasons - to express their views ,to hear others

> ,to correct an incorrect quote ?



You?ve completely missed the point. And I really can?t be bothered with this any more. Enjoy your cognitive dissonance.

I'm not trying to avoid the debate - I'd I've thought that was obvious - but if there's going to be one I prefer it to be conducted in public and not in private .


And as I've said ,my first choice would be if Rendelharris left me alone .But if he's going to continue criticising me ,I will respond .

intexasatthe moment Wrote:

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


> And as I've said ,my first choice would be if

> Rendelharris left me alone .But if he's going to

> continue criticising me ,I will respond .


Passing lightly over the fact that it was you who moved the discussion on the other thread from a debate to personal insults, for future reference I would suggest if you want someone to "leave you alone" (i.e. allow you to state your opinions unchallenged) starting a whole thread about them is not the best way to achieve that aim.

rendelharris Wrote:

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

> I really think it's a very slippery slope to allow

> posters to start threads to "call out" others

> personally in public, quite surprised it's

> permitted.


I'd agree with that - not the purpose of the forum and people can block each other surely


Not that I'm on either side of this argument, or even know anything about it

"passing lightly" - please don't .Let's have some examples .


Full quotes this time please ,not leaving out as you've previously done the important bits like "I'm guilty of this " and " for me it's a knee jerk reaction and makes me feel...." although I appreciate that it might undermine your argument that I'm patronising ,judgemental ,negative etc .


I would prefer you to leave me alone and not send me PMs ,you ignored the request which is why I started this thread .As I've said before if there's going to be criticism of me I would prefer it to be conducted openly .


It's got nothing to do with being allowed to state opinions unchallenged . Although you may want to work on your method of challenge - think about the opinion and don't leap to the belief that it constitutes an attack or is patronising .

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I was in Forest Hill Road today, just past the Rye, and noticed there is a dentist next to the Herne (pub) that has NHS signs outside. I've never had any problems getting NHS dental treatment in East Dulwich, and I get regular check ups. I've been to three  different dental practices here over the years, all with NHS treatment. I think the difficulties are in other parts of the country. Malumbu has a good explanation above. I didn't hear the Radio 4 programme, but I'm guessing that a  radio programme is not going to have time to say where you CAN easily get NHS treatment, and is bound to focus on the negatives and the horror stories, otherwise it would be very boring! ETA: Re children's teeth, I think the major issue is not lack of dentists, it is children being given sugary food, drinks and confectionery which rots their teeth. The education of parents needs to be about this, not just about tooth brushing. And in some cases the poor diet may also be due to lack of money for healthy food. Though of course the lack of dentists doesn't help, if  the tooth rotting can't be rectified by fillings or extraction.
    • Well, I hope you like what you see, the hot air, lack of answers and continual blaming things on the last Government and the made up blackhole, I find are nauseating. The man needs to see reality, because I'd guess that if we had a snap election tomorrow and based on the first six months of this parliament, Labour would get trounced. When the election does finally happen and if that isn't before the people rise up and throw this lot out, Labour will not be voted back in for a millennium.  
    • Yes thanks that's exactly the choices I get.  I will block and if somehow they find a way back I'll report.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...