Re: CLAX Moderation Discussion

"Nathan Baker" <nathancbaker@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:h09mcs$che$1@xxxxxxxxxxx
,---
| Rod Pemberton
,---
and try to keep your present "bout of trolling"

What? I don't know to what you're referring. I don't see anything in
clax,
posted by me in this thread, that could even remotely be considered such.

Ok, still *ZERO* justification from you about your claim of me "trolling" in
*CLAX*...

Now in a.l.a, I did ask you truly serious question, in an properly tagged
thread, to which you very rudely ignored by only providing a flippant and
nonchalant response. You also responded to the same thread on a.l.a. on
different topics with similar content with which you are now apparently
claiming is offensive to you.
`---

My response to you (in the said ALA thread) was to demonstrate to you how
"flippant" and immature I think it is for you to accuse me of being a DOS
basher.

You've made a number of hostile remarks towards DOS. This wasn't the first
time. So, I asked why. I explained why DOS is still useful to me. I
understand DOS has some very serious limitations and stated such and
_seriously_ wanted to know what you used for programming. Is that really
_hard_ for you to understand?

I called your behaviour "trolling" because it is clear that you
intended to provoke me into a negative response toward DOS -- thereby
confirming your foregone conclusion.

Wow, you're paranoia is totally off the charts. Because, that's not true at
all. After stating why I thought DOS was useful for programming, I asked
you what OS you used for programming and why, recall this sentence:

"So, what's right with whatever OS you're using?"

To wit, you gave a flippant and nonchalant response... And, again, you
projected non-characteristic motivations onto me. Do you do this alot?
This is (at least) twice now.

Could you please indicate *where* in
my response to Herbert did I say, or even hint, that it is my oppinion
that
there exist something "wrong" with DOS??

Um, perhaps this:

"When I see the acronym "DOS" in a source listing, I start to question if
_I_ have a vision problem. :)"

Which, as far as I'm concerned, is *IDENTICAL* to me saying to Alex in
regards to his spelling error:

"Asleep are we? You need to switch from coffee to Mt. Dew dude! :-)"

Yup, they both have smileys...

What insult and flames? AFAIK, I did _not_ state that Mac's suck. AFAIK,
I
did _not_ state x86 is the superior cpu. And, I still haven't. If I had,
then you could claim that my statements perhaps intentionally constituted
insults and flames.
`---

An insult is defined as one's behaviour toward another person -- not that
toward an inanimate object.

And, solidly implying indicrectly that one is _stupid_ for using a Mac, or
not using an x86 or CISC, is not a personal insult since the insult directly
involves an inanimate object? Absurd! In what world do you live in that
you can't _imply_ one is stupid, but are so _paranoid_ that everything I ask
you is an insult, flame, or bait? I know you've implied you're 40-ish, but
I *seriously* feel I'm talking with a 14-year old. That may be insulting to
you, but wasn't meant as an insult. I honestly think you need to grow up.


Rod Pemberton


.

Relevant Pages

  • OT: CLAX Moderation Discussion
    ... | Rod Pemberton ... My response to you was to demonstrate to you how ... "flippant" and immature I think it is for you to accuse me of being a DOS ... What insult and flames? ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: Why the BF hate? Cant we all get along?
    ... yeah, out of context my response looks mean and hateful, BUT when you ... did not insult that person. ... Being ignorant or something means you simply are unaware of it. ... said boring because I hear him say what he said ALL the time, ...
    (rec.music.artists.kiss)
  • Re: Why the BF hate? Cant we all get along?
    ... yeah, out of context my response looks mean and hateful, BUT when you ... did not insult that person. ... Being ignorant or something means you simply are unaware of it. ... said boring because I hear him say what he said ALL the time, ...
    (rec.music.artists.kiss)
  • Re: Book review: The Twilight of Atheism (Alister McGrath)
    ... >> <Clip a lot of stuff complaining that the references I cited do not prove ... >> the point you were, I assume, objecting to. ... >> objecting to the statement you are responding to since your response was ... >> simply an insult to the original author and hade no substantive content.> ...
    (rec.arts.books)
  • Re: Watch how fast this happens
    ... appeared in talk.origins, posted by el cid ... Tough to refute a non-assertion, ... an insult even though there wasn't any idiocy to refute. ... I was referring to the collective response. ...
    (talk.origins)