Evidently we don’t share enough common experience or vocabulary to have a meaningful discussion.
However, your post does trigger the following . . .
1. Evidently the “Dear” in “Dear Quix”
was a mistake, an error, a fraud or a lie.
2. I wonder which “Saint” you’d credit with funneling such sweetness to you for sharing with me.
3. What attractive aspect of Roman Catholicism were you displaying in that post?
1. “Dear” is a fairly common salutation used in correspondence.
I recently wrote both my US Senators and my US Representative. All three are liberals. Nonetheless, I addressed each as “dear.”
Thus, it's hardly an error, fraud or lie, but merely a matter of preferred etiquette.
Another valuable effect of this minor social grace is that it should serve as a reminder to us to try to write charitably to each other. Not that we always do so, but then the use of the salutation can serve as a reminder of our failures, which is a good thing as well.
In the case of the post that I wrote to you, the use of the salutation had the desired effect.
You shoulda seen the first draft of the post.
Or the second.
Or the third.
2. I'm not sure what saints have to do with the discussion, unless you're merely trying to get in the seemingly obligatory anti-Catholic rant. I can't read your mind, so it's just a guess on my part.
3. “What attractive aspect of Roman Catholicism were you displaying in that post?”
I didn't know that I was trying to display any.
Did you want to discuss the assertion that you made about beginning with, “I remain unimpressed by . . . some folks’ . . . shrill efforts to sabotage the efforts of those who disagree with their constructions on reality.” and then, this, "Folks trying to rabidly find loop-holes in your criteria that will allow them to disrupt and soil the nest of a Charismatic caucus seem to have a foolishly low estimate of your alertness and comprehensive understanding."?
It is you who initially posted to me. I was of a mind to exclude you from the discussion with the Religion Moderator of your post. But I thought in fairness, it IS your post, and if you want in on the discussion, I suppose that the case could be made for it.
But if not, tant mieux!
sitetest
Hey Quix! You can count me in as a Charismatic! Though I wish I was more useful.
Thank you so mush for giving me the honor of being a part of your special ping group. You can’t really know what it means to me.
You know it’s funny. I feel the same way about sitetest as he claims to feel about you. I say ‘claims’ because with him who can tell what is true?
He claims that he is writing civilly yet his post is so filled with hate that it is actually painful to read. He also claims he has no idea what you are talking about with regards to disruptors, yet here he is disrupting. Nothing he has posted at all adds to the topic thread discussion. And, most strangely, he chastises you for “pinging” him, when all you did was reply to a post he had written ABOUT YOU! All he has left to do is claim that you are “making it personal” simply by responding to his making this personal about you. lol.
You know, I’m no psychologist, but maybe he’s a paranoia. At least it seems so regarding the RCO. Anyway, I hope he doesn’t respond to this post as I don’t want him to “ping” me and I just wanted to discuss this with you.