Forums of the Megaverse®

The generic unecessary might carry you through.

Killer Cyborg wrote:You started this mess off by trying to tell me what I meant, but now you don't like it when the shoe's on the other foot?

I never told you what you meant. I only disagreed with you. If I said what you meant to say was... please point it out so I can apologise for the goof.

Natasha wrote:I am very sorry about that. I forgot to log him out before posting. That post was all me all the way.

You cannot tell me what I meant. You agree with that?

So when I tell you that I did not imply you are blinded by arrogance that means I did not imply you are blinded by arrogance nevermind what you think. So when I tell you that did not intend insult when I said 'childish' that means I did not intend insult when I said 'childish' nevermind what you think. You may have felt insulted but I was not insulting you.

Regarding constructive criticism that is exactly what I had been saying. I was operating on the fact that I was not accusing you of being blinded by arrogance and that I did not mean insult with the word 'childish'. I said that all along.

Is 'juvenile' the appropriate word? And, yes, I am asking because I really want to know because I really do not know. 'childish' is the only word I knew and no one ever pushed back when I used it before. You are the first to push back.

Juvenile is fine, as is childish. They mean the same thing.

Natasha wrote:I am very sorry about that. I forgot to log him out before posting. That post was all me all the way.

Thanks for the clarity.

You cannot tell me what I meant. You agree with that?

Oh, I can tell you; I just might be incorrect about it.

If you want to get down to distinctions:
Your words were phrased as insults, whether you intended them to be or not.
If I were to say to somebody, "You're a moron", that would be an insult.
Whether or not I meant it as constructive criticism.

People might not be right when they say that I meant insult, but they wouldn't be wrong if they said that I was insulting.

So when I tell you that I did not imply you are blinded by arrogance that means I did not imply you are blinded by arrogance nevermind what you think.

Are you saying that people never imply things by accident?

So when I tell you that did not intend insult when I said 'childish' that means I did not intend insult when I said 'childish' nevermind what you think. You may have felt insulted but I was not insulting you.

in·sult [v. in-suhlt; n. in-suhlt] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–verb (used with object)
1. to treat or speak to insolently or with contemptuous rudeness; affront.
2. to affect as an affront; offend or demean.
3. Archaic. to attack; assault.
–verb (used without object)
4. Archaic. to behave with insolent triumph; exult contemptuously (usually fol. by on, upon, or over).
–noun
5. an insolent or contemptuously rude action or remark; affront.

I disagree with you on that count.

Regarding constructive criticism that is exactly what I had been saying. I was operating on the fact that I was not accusing you of being blinded by arrogance and that I did not mean insult with the word 'childish'. I said that all along.

IF you didn't mean insult, then you're very bad at being poilite.

Is 'juvenile' the appropriate word? And, yes, I am asking because I really want to know because I really do not know. 'childish' is the only word I knew and no one ever pushed back when I used it before. You are the first to push back.

Neither is appropriate.
All I did was to say that I am right about something.
Just as you keep doing above (I presume that you don't believe that you're being childish there?).
Damon S asked if I was "simply declaring myself to be right", and I said that no, I was merely pointing out that I am right.
He apparently missed the distinction, and asked again, so I simply told him Yes, since that's the answer that he was looking for.
Nothing really childish/juvenile about that, not on my part.

lather wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:You started this mess off by trying to tell me what I meant, but now you don't like it when the shoe's on the other foot?

I never told you what you meant. I only disagreed with you. If I said what you meant to say was... please point it out so I can apologise for the goof.

You disagreed with me about what definitions of the terms "evidence" and "indication" I was using.

lather wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

asajosh wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:Lack of indication means that there's no reason to believe that whatever isn't being indicated is true.

Lack of indication would mean that nothing is indicated.

What I think you meant was: Lack of EVIDENCE means there is no reason to believe what your being told.

But that simply isn't true...

Actually, I mean Indication.

Doesn't matter. Same thing.

Indication and Evidence only mean the same thing under certain definitions of each term.
Clearly, I was operating under the definitions that meant slightly different things; I even explained the distinction.

But you persisted in claiming that, in MY post, in what I was talking about, the terms meant the same thing; you were trying to tell me what I meant.

Lost Waif wrote:Before I get sucked into the debate . . .

Natasha, give it a break. You're talking to a wall.
Killer Cyborg, give her (Natasha) a break. She's not from America and she's bilingual at that. It's difficult to learn, let alone communicate, in a second language.

Yes, I realize I'm sounding high and mighty. I apologize. But honestly, you guys haven't made any leeway at all. It reads like a ball being bounced forth.

hear hear