Replies

(Snip)we have a lot more posters these days who cannot:

......2) post a reply without adding some sort of insult

Excellent example, right there in your very post!

Or maybe you don't see that you just did what you accused others of doing on this one either.

That's funny. I knew when I posted it that you would call me out for insulting you somehow. I'll admit that I feel the temptation to insult people now and then, especially when I think a person is deliberately refusing to acknowledge a particular point just so he/she can keep arguing. As it is, my comment was this:

"As I said before, I refuse to believe that you are not capable of seeing the difference. You might very well prove me wrong, though."

That is not an insult. It may seem like a bit of a condescending statement, but the "insults" I was referring to are actual insults, such as "You're too stupid to have children", or "You are an illiterate moron", both of which are examples of insults that I have received as first responses to posts in which I have made no insulting or condescending remarks. If you think my statement above was an insult, just wait until you get some real insults.

My personal policy on FR is that I don't insult anybody until they insult me, and then it's "game on". Another pet peeve I have which may result in sarcastic or condescending statements is when people make things personal, rather than simply debating the topic. For example, if I post an opinion and I get a response from someone who has decided that my opinion is based purely on thoughts and feelings that the responder has assigned to me, I tend believe that the poster is not attempting to engage in any serious debate, but is instead merely on some kind of ego trip. An example of that kind of response would be "You only think that because you are insecure in your manhood" or some such nonsense.

As it is, my statement above was made because we've gone back and forth on the question of whether posting a critical response to an opus is the same as starting an opus thread, and you appear to remain firm in your opinin that it is. So, my statement means exactly what it says - that you might prove me wrong in my belief that you do recognize a difference between the two acts, because you appear to be defending the idea that they are the same.

I knew when I posted it that you would call me out for insulting you somehow.

Just for the record, I don't "call people out" on the internet. I just pointed out the disconnect between what you were complaining about and what you were saying.

I had actully written this... "I assumed you would be smart enough to figure it out, but you may yet prove me wrong."

But even though you contend it is not an insult, it still sounds like an insult to me, and I'm not going to play that game.