Replies

It has been my understanding that all of us who hold forth in public forums expect observations and comments about what we write.

That discourse is part of the fun and intensity of the public dialogue in such forums.

We analyze what each other say and where each other seem to be coming from all the time. It's pretty standard SOP around her from a number of perspectives. And, we all do it differently as well as do it from different perspectives. But normally there's some mutual respect for that fact, process and phenomenon.

How would it even be conceivably possible to comment on any post without making observations about what one is responding to, first?

And responding to word content without an appreciation for the inner as well as interpersonal context it derives from is not very scientific, logical nor complete.

You seemed to feel free enough to make comments about the rationallity of the post and person starting the thread--and to do so with a bit of a cheeky attitude, IMhO.

But when comments got uncomfortably close to rationality about your posts, stance etc., then you wanted everyone out of the pool so to speak. Doesn't seem very consistent at all.

Nevertheless, I will try and file it away somewhere that you are evidently a fairly brittle one about such matters and I will try to avoid rattling your comfort zone. I have now posted your screen name on a post it note near my computer to help me avoid breathing on you any further.

But your seemingly double standards are not overly impressive, to me.

Your posts are not fun.
You are not responding to what I wrote. You are making comments about what you perceive to be my personality. Stop it now.
There are no double standards here. I made one lousy statement about the story on that post being hokey and from that you have deduced all kinds of untruths. If I wanted to be analyzed, I would consult a shrink. I do not wish to hear another word about this. It's tedious.