Larry's Comics at it again...

[hockey&comicsguy]

 

Sigh. This isn't about trying to control what others say.

 

That's b/c you've entrenched yourself into your position and cannot see anything beyond it. Incapable of doing so? Or simply too stubborn to do so?

You're trying to solve the equation by using the way you think it should be done. It's like you've decided the only way to get a sum of 4 is to add 2+2. The issue at hand is control. You're asking for self control. So am I. Only i'm asking it of one person, you're asking it of another. Why is the only acceptable solution (in your mind) to ask people not to react? Do you see no benefit in addressing the person uttering the words? If your child comes to you and says "dad, she called me an idjit", do you tell your child that they ought not let that person's words affect them? I hope so. That's what I do. Now flip the coin. Your child comes home, you get a call from school that they're bullying and saying hateful things to another student. What are you going to do, call up the other kid and tell him to suck it up and ignore it? Or are you going to address the issue with your child and there inappropriate behavior?

 

It's about not letting other people say affect YOU.

 

I KNOW. I KNOW. I KNOW. That's what you've decided are the parameters for this discussion.

YOU have no control over what other people say.

 

You DO have complete control over how you react to it.

 

If you can control the latter, the former becomes a NON-ISSUE.

 

Amazing!

 

Case in point of your penchant for dooshery. Have I argued this point of yours to the contrary? NOPE. So why are you being so redundant? It's unnecessary.

 

 

It is utterly idealistic to imagine that you can control what other people say.

 

It is not only NOT idealistic, it is preferable, to gain control over one's emotions and not let what other people say affect you.

Preferable, yes. NOT idealistic? If it weren't idealistic to at least some measurable degree, we'd not be having this discussion now would we?

 

It is no less idealistic for me to point my finger at the perpetrators and ask them to refrain than it is for you to point your finger at the "victims" (and that's what they are if they feel as such you don't get to decide for them)

 

Never said I did. You're doing the typical message board dance.

 

Pay attention, because this is important: there is no "finger pointing."

 

My choice of word usage has more to do with the approach you take to most things. Perhaps I'll elaborate at a later time.

 

Do you think encouraging people to not let what others say bother them is "finger pointing"...?

 

Not what I said. What I'm saying is you've decided to target one variable of the equation. I've decided to target the other. It's really quite simple. I know you want people to debate the issue under your rules but shet happens, right?

 

 

Silly overemotionalism, as usual.

 

and ask them to turn the other cheek or simply not feel a certain way. As if we're all robots or capable of incredible feats of self control.

 

So Jackie Robinson was a robot?

 

Ah yes, pluck out one of many famous names that have conquered hate and pawn them off as if it's oh so easy. Ok, you've got Jackie Robinson. I'd say I can safely estimate there's probably 4 billion people on the planet who've been offended at some point by something someone has said to them. So is Jackie the norm and billions of others the exception? Who's being idealistic now?

 

If we are capable of such control, then so are those who would use such hateful words.

 

I'm not missing any point. I'm just open minded enough to see multiple angles on this.

 

 

Sorry, but the examples of people like Jackie Robinson, and COUNTLESS others, proves you wrong.

 

Careful with your usage of the word wrong. You're perilously close to abusing it, and incorrectly so. Jackie Robinson proves i'm wrong? I'd say billions of other human beings would say i'm more right than you are.

 

Totally unrelated question: do you ever knowingly post things you know are wrong? And if not, don't you think YOU are always right, to?

No. I try to not post incorrect things. I try to refrain from posting incorrect statements about factual things. Although I am getting better and better at claiming my rightness or another person's wrongness about matters of opinion. Anyone hanging around you and Thing long enough tends to pick that up.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Who's desperate now Abraham Lincoln.

 

Did you know Abraham Lincoln was the first real person to be depicted on a US mint coin?

 

No I didn't, thank you for the info. (thumbs u

 

Did you know, that much like our beloved president, Abraham Lincoln, RMA is also a self taught attorney?

 

You insult because you have nothing to contribute.

 

Sad but true.

 

I find his posts insightful and often humorous.

 

The words argue and discuss have slightly different connotations. You tend to lean to the former. It seems you fail to differentiate between challenging someones intellect and attempting to demean it.

 

I don't think I need to reenacte you typical "discussion" to get my point across.

 

I don't understand why you cannot just debate in a friendly and respectful manner. Yeah, what you say can be insightful and could challenge someone to think. People don't provoke you to be a d ick, you provoke people to argue and wield bitterness. This isn't a romanticized world, people get cross and offended. Stop deflecting with the "well if people didn't react". We are all humans and we are innately instilled with emotions. Rational or irrational, they are there. Being a know-it-all and demeaning your opponents intelligence doesn't help your argument.

 

Oh God, here we go again...

 

 

Can't you guys have ANY discussion without feeling the need to have all this side commentary about the people involved in the discussion?

 

Stick to the topic.

 

Quit being so oversensitive.

 

Quit reading "anger" and "demeaning" into everything you read. I haven't been demeaning to anybody who doesn't already have a history of being demeaning themselves, and even THEN, it's 92% tweak.

 

Do lighten up.

[hulksmashdave]

Who's desperate now Abraham Lincoln.

 

Did you know Abraham Lincoln was the first real person to be depicted on a US mint coin?

 

No I didn't, thank you for the info. (thumbs u

 

Did you know, that much like our beloved president, Abraham Lincoln, RMA is also a self taught attorney?

 

You insult because you have nothing to contribute.

 

Sad but true.

 

You are ignoring this user.

 

And being a huge obnoxious, delusional, confrontational, know it all, who incites anger from anyone willing to try and have a healthy debate does not equate to being a contributor.

 

I'm only obnoxious, confrontational, know-it-all, and anger inciting to people who are obnoxious, confrontational, know-it-all, and who incite anger.

 

Delusional? That's all you, baby.

 

Ah yes, the old "I'm rubber, you're glue" approach.

 

You will never, should you post for 10,000 years, contribute as much to these boards as I have. Not because you cannot, but simply because it's not your nature.

 

You can see the future? How is The Dark Knight Rises?

 

 

Oh, look, hulksmashdave inserting himself into a slapfight to take shots at RMA.

 

Really, Dave, you take totally, completely unprovoked shots at me, then whine about how big a d ick I am?

 

Really?

 

Do you just not see the irony, here?

 

I used to do the same thing to bullies in elementary school. Shoot me.

 

No, I'll just call you what you are. A hypocrite.

 

There are no "bullies" on this, or any, board. If you don't like what someone says, ignore them. You cannot be "bullied", because bullies, by definition, are unavoidable.

 

One could say, by your definition, that YOU are the bully for taking unprovoked shots at someone else. That's what bullies at my schools used to do...take unprovoked shots at people.

 

Aren't you a bully, Dave?

 

Did you just choose to ignore the point of my post? If I see someone who either is or thinks they are better than someone else making a lot of noise and belittling someone else, I feel the need to step in.

 

Also, you didn't answer my question. How was The Dark Knight Rises?

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

Sigh. This isn't about trying to control what others say.

 

That's b/c you've entrenched yourself into your position and cannot see anything beyond it. Incapable of doing so? Or simply too stubborn to do so?

You're trying to solve the equation by using the way you think it should be done. It's like you've decided the only way to get a sum of 4 is to add 2+2. The issue at hand is control. You're asking for self control. So am I. Only i'm asking it of one person, you're asking it of another. Why is the only acceptable solution (in your mind) to ask people not to react? Do you see no benefit in addressing the person uttering the words? If your child comes to you and says "dad, she called me an idjit", do you tell your child that they ought not let that person's words affect them? I hope so. That's what I do. Now flip the coin. Your child comes home, you get a call from school that they're bullying and saying hateful things to another student. What are you going to do, call up the other kid and tell him to suck it up and ignore it? Or are you going to address the issue with your child and there inappropriate behavior?

 

It's about not letting other people say affect YOU.

 

I KNOW. I KNOW. I KNOW. That's what you've decided are the parameters for this discussion.

YOU have no control over what other people say.

 

You DO have complete control over how you react to it.

 

If you can control the latter, the former becomes a NON-ISSUE.

 

Amazing!

 

Case in point of your penchant for dooshery. Have I argued this point of yours to the contrary? NOPE. So why are you being so redundant? It's unnecessary.

 

 

It is utterly idealistic to imagine that you can control what other people say.

 

It is not only NOT idealistic, it is preferable, to gain control over one's emotions and not let what other people say affect you.

Preferable, yes. NOT idealistic? If it weren't idealistic to at least some measurable degree, we'd not be having this discussion now would we?

 

It is no less idealistic for me to point my finger at the perpetrators and ask them to refrain than it is for you to point your finger at the "victims" (and that's what they are if they feel as such you don't get to decide for them)

 

Never said I did. You're doing the typical message board dance.

 

Pay attention, because this is important: there is no "finger pointing."

 

My choice of word usage has more to do with the approach you take to most things. Perhaps I'll elaborate at a later time.

 

Do you think encouraging people to not let what others say bother them is "finger pointing"...?

 

Not what I said. What I'm saying is you've decided to target one variable of the equation. I've decided to target the other. It's really quite simple. I know you want people to debate the issue under your rules but shet happens, right?

 

 

Silly overemotionalism, as usual.

 

and ask them to turn the other cheek or simply not feel a certain way. As if we're all robots or capable of incredible feats of self control.

 

So Jackie Robinson was a robot?

 

Ah yes, pluck out one of many famous names that have conquered hate and pawn them off as if it's oh so easy. Ok, you've got Jackie Robinson. I'd say I can safely estimate there's probably 4 billion people on the planet who've been offended at some point by something someone has said to them. So is Jackie the norm and billions of others the exception? Who's being idealistic now?

 

If we are capable of such control, then so are those who would use such hateful words.

 

I'm not missing any point. I'm just open minded enough to see multiple angles on this.

 

 

Sorry, but the examples of people like Jackie Robinson, and COUNTLESS others, proves you wrong.

 

Careful with your usage of the word wrong. You're perilously close to abusing it, and incorrectly so. Jackie Robinson proves i'm wrong? I'd say billions of other human beings would say i'm more right than you are.

 

Totally unrelated question: do you ever knowingly post things you know are wrong? And if not, don't you think YOU are always right, to?

No. I try to not post incorrect things. I try to refrain from posting incorrect statements about factual things. Although I am getting better and better at claiming my rightness or another person's wrongness about matters of opinion. Anyone hanging around you and Thing long enough tends to pick that up.

 

You cannot control what other people say.

 

You cannot, and the more you try, the more people will resist you.

 

You CAN control how you react to it.

 

Nothing more.

 

Nothing less.

[This is water]

Who's desperate now Abraham Lincoln.

 

Did you know Abraham Lincoln was the first real person to be depicted on a US mint coin?

 

No I didn't, thank you for the info. (thumbs u

 

Did you know, that much like our beloved president, Abraham Lincoln, RMA is also a self taught attorney?

 

You insult because you have nothing to contribute.

 

Sad but true.

 

I find his posts insightful and often humorous.

 

The words argue and discuss have slightly different connotations. You tend to lean to the former. It seems you fail to differentiate between challenging someones intellect and attempting to demean it.

 

I don't think I need to reenacte you typical "discussion" to get my point across.

 

I don't understand why you cannot just debate in a friendly and respectful manner. Yeah, what you say can be insightful and could challenge someone to think. People don't provoke you to be a d ick, you provoke people to argue and wield bitterness. This isn't a romanticized world, people get cross and offended. Stop deflecting with the "well if people didn't react". We are all humans and we are innately instilled with emotions. Rational or irrational, they are there. Being a know-it-all and demeaning your opponents intelligence doesn't help your argument.

 

Oh God, here we go again...

 

 

Can't you guys have ANY discussion without feeling the need to have all this side commentary about the people involved in the discussion?

 

Stick to the topic.

 

Quit being so oversensitive.

 

Quit reading "anger" and "demeaning" into everything you read. I haven't been demeaning to anybody who doesn't already have a history of being demeaning themselves, and even THEN, it's 92% tweak.

 

Do lighten up.

 

I could say the same thing to everything you post.

 

And nice deflection. (thumbs u

 

? Expand.

 

 

 

[USArmyParatrooper]

Guys, for future reference, please don't wind that toy up anymore

 

Don't be a hypocrite, too. You're just as guilty of being "wound up" as anyone else. Trying to garner support against someone else for doing what you are doing as well is hypocrisy.

 

Man, you guys are intellectually dishonest.

 

Oh, I have openly admitted I can be confrontational at times. But at the same time, I do occasionally take a step back and realize that perhaps I'm in wrong and sometimes I even apologize.

 

You go from page after page of battles all the time and in between you try to balance it out by posting a dozen or so jokes with a few cloud-nine's mixed in. At what point are you going to realize you're the common denominator?

[RockMyAmadeus]

Did you know Abraham Lincoln was the first real person to be depicted on a US mint coin?

 

No I didn't, thank you for the info. (thumbs u

 

Did you know, that much like our beloved president, Abraham Lincoln, RMA is also a self taught attorney?

 

You insult because you have nothing to contribute.

 

Sad but true.

 

You are ignoring this user.

 

And being a huge obnoxious, delusional, confrontational, know it all, who incites anger from anyone willing to try and have a healthy debate does not equate to being a contributor.

 

I'm only obnoxious, confrontational, know-it-all, and anger inciting to people who are obnoxious, confrontational, know-it-all, and who incite anger.

 

Delusional? That's all you, baby.

 

Ah yes, the old "I'm rubber, you're glue" approach.

 

You will never, should you post for 10,000 years, contribute as much to these boards as I have. Not because you cannot, but simply because it's not your nature.

 

You can see the future? How is The Dark Knight Rises?

 

 

Oh, look, hulksmashdave inserting himself into a slapfight to take shots at RMA.

 

Really, Dave, you take totally, completely unprovoked shots at me, then whine about how big a d ick I am?

 

Really?

 

Do you just not see the irony, here?

 

I used to do the same thing to bullies in elementary school. Shoot me.

 

No, I'll just call you what you are. A hypocrite.

 

There are no "bullies" on this, or any, board. If you don't like what someone says, ignore them. You cannot be "bullied", because bullies, by definition, are unavoidable.

 

One could say, by your definition, that YOU are the bully for taking unprovoked shots at someone else. That's what bullies at my schools used to do...take unprovoked shots at people.

 

Aren't you a bully, Dave?

 

Did you just choose to ignore the point of my post? If I see someone who either is or thinks they are better than someone else making a lot of noise and belittling someone else, I feel the need to step in.

 

That's right...because you think you're right in your assessment, and feel it's appropriate to be judge, jury, and executioner.

 

To others, that just makes you a bully.

[hockey&comicsguy]

Who's desperate now Abraham Lincoln.

 

Did you know Abraham Lincoln was the first real person to be depicted on a US mint coin?

 

No I didn't, thank you for the info. (thumbs u

 

Did you know, that much like our beloved president, Abraham Lincoln, RMA is also a self taught attorney?

 

You insult because you have nothing to contribute.

 

Sad but true.

 

I find his posts insightful and often humorous.

 

The words argue and discuss have slightly different connotations. You tend to lean to the former. It seems you fail to differentiate between challenging someones intellect and attempting to demean it.

 

I don't think I need to reenacte you typical "discussion" to get my point across.

 

I don't understand why you cannot just debate in a friendly and respectful manner. Yeah, what you say can be insightful and could challenge someone to think. People don't provoke you to be a d ick, you provoke people to argue and wield bitterness. This isn't a romanticized world, people get cross and offended. Stop deflecting with the "well if people didn't react". We are all humans and we are innately instilled with emotions. Rational or irrational, they are there. Being a know-it-all and demeaning your opponents intelligence doesn't help your argument.

 

Oh God, here we go again...

 

 

Can't you guys have ANY discussion without feeling the need to have all this side commentary about the people involved in the discussion?

 

Stick to the topic.

 

Quit being so oversensitive.

 

Quit reading "anger" and "demeaning" into everything you read. I haven't been demeaning to anybody who doesn't already have a history of being demeaning themselves[/b], and even THEN, it's 92% tweak.

 

Do lighten up.

 

 

This is a perfect example. Whereas I do not doubt that you're being honest in this regard. I see no attempt at any self control on your part to watch what you say or how you say it, even when more than one person has brought to your attention that you kind of come off as an azzhole.

 

I give you credit though, you practice what you preach.

[comix4fun]

 

Sigh. This isn't about trying to control what others say.

 

That's b/c you've entrenched yourself into your position and cannot see anything beyond it. Incapable of doing so? Or simply too stubborn to do so?

You're trying to solve the equation by using the way you think it should be done. It's like you've decided the only way to get a sum of 4 is to add 2+2. The issue at hand is control. You're asking for self control. So am I. Only i'm asking it of one person, you're asking it of another. Why is the only acceptable solution (in your mind) to ask people not to react? Do you see no benefit in addressing the person uttering the words? If your child comes to you and says "dad, she called me an idjit", do you tell your child that they ought not let that person's words affect them? I hope so. That's what I do. Now flip the coin. Your child comes home, you get a call from school that they're bullying and saying hateful things to another student. What are you going to do, call up the other kid and tell him to suck it up and ignore it? Or are you going to address the issue with your child and there inappropriate behavior?

 

It's about not letting other people say affect YOU.

 

I KNOW. I KNOW. I KNOW. That's what you've decided are the parameters for this discussion.

YOU have no control over what other people say.

 

You DO have complete control over how you react to it.

 

If you can control the latter, the former becomes a NON-ISSUE.

 

Amazing!

 

Case in point of your penchant for dooshery. Have I argued this point of yours to the contrary? NOPE. So why are you being so redundant? It's unnecessary.

 

 

It is utterly idealistic to imagine that you can control what other people say.

 

It is not only NOT idealistic, it is preferable, to gain control over one's emotions and not let what other people say affect you.

Preferable, yes. NOT idealistic? If it weren't idealistic to at least some measurable degree, we'd not be having this discussion now would we?

 

It is no less idealistic for me to point my finger at the perpetrators and ask them to refrain than it is for you to point your finger at the "victims" (and that's what they are if they feel as such you don't get to decide for them)

 

Never said I did. You're doing the typical message board dance.

 

Pay attention, because this is important: there is no "finger pointing."

 

My choice of word usage has more to do with the approach you take to most things. Perhaps I'll elaborate at a later time.

 

Do you think encouraging people to not let what others say bother them is "finger pointing"...?

 

Not what I said. What I'm saying is you've decided to target one variable of the equation. I've decided to target the other. It's really quite simple. I know you want people to debate the issue under your rules but shet happens, right?

 

 

Silly overemotionalism, as usual.

 

and ask them to turn the other cheek or simply not feel a certain way. As if we're all robots or capable of incredible feats of self control.

 

So Jackie Robinson was a robot?

 

Ah yes, pluck out one of many famous names that have conquered hate and pawn them off as if it's oh so easy. Ok, you've got Jackie Robinson. I'd say I can safely estimate there's probably 4 billion people on the planet who've been offended at some point by something someone has said to them. So is Jackie the norm and billions of others the exception? Who's being idealistic now?

 

If we are capable of such control, then so are those who would use such hateful words.

 

I'm not missing any point. I'm just open minded enough to see multiple angles on this.

 

 

Sorry, but the examples of people like Jackie Robinson, and COUNTLESS others, proves you wrong.

 

Careful with your usage of the word wrong. You're perilously close to abusing it, and incorrectly so. Jackie Robinson proves i'm wrong? I'd say billions of other human beings would say i'm more right than you are.

 

Totally unrelated question: do you ever knowingly post things you know are wrong? And if not, don't you think YOU are always right, to?

No. I try to not post incorrect things. I try to refrain from posting incorrect statements about factual things. Although I am getting better and better at claiming my rightness or another person's wrongness about matters of opinion. Anyone hanging around you and Thing long enough tends to pick that up.

 

You cannot control what other people say.

 

You cannot, and the more you try, the more people will resist you.

 

You CAN control how you react to it.

 

Nothing more.

 

Nothing less.

 

 

These aren't the droids you are looking for.....

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

Who's desperate now Abraham Lincoln.

 

Did you know Abraham Lincoln was the first real person to be depicted on a US mint coin?

 

No I didn't, thank you for the info. (thumbs u

 

Did you know, that much like our beloved president, Abraham Lincoln, RMA is also a self taught attorney?

 

You insult because you have nothing to contribute.

 

Sad but true.

 

I find his posts insightful and often humorous.

 

The words argue and discuss have slightly different connotations. You tend to lean to the former. It seems you fail to differentiate between challenging someones intellect and attempting to demean it.

 

I don't think I need to reenacte you typical "discussion" to get my point across.

 

I don't understand why you cannot just debate in a friendly and respectful manner. Yeah, what you say can be insightful and could challenge someone to think. People don't provoke you to be a d ick, you provoke people to argue and wield bitterness. This isn't a romanticized world, people get cross and offended. Stop deflecting with the "well if people didn't react". We are all humans and we are innately instilled with emotions. Rational or irrational, they are there. Being a know-it-all and demeaning your opponents intelligence doesn't help your argument.

 

Oh God, here we go again...

 

 

Can't you guys have ANY discussion without feeling the need to have all this side commentary about the people involved in the discussion?

 

Stick to the topic.

 

Quit being so oversensitive.

 

Quit reading "anger" and "demeaning" into everything you read. I haven't been demeaning to anybody who doesn't already have a history of being demeaning themselves[/b], and even THEN, it's 92% tweak.

 

Do lighten up.

 

 

This is a perfect example. Whereas I do not doubt that you're being honest in this regard. I see no attempt at any self control on your part to watch what you say or how you say it, even when more than one person has brought to your attention that you kind of come off as an azzhole.

 

READ. MY. SIG.

 

For crying out loud, it ain't rocket science!

 

As usual, you have missed the point of the bigger discussion.

 

The discussion was about comments that are GENERAL in nature, not SPECIFIC to an individual. Comments that have to do with someone's race, ethnicity, gender, body characteristics, etc. NOT personal comments about someone's personality or behavior. Larry's comments weren't directed at an individual.

 

BIG difference.

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

Guys, for future reference, please don't wind that toy up anymore

 

Don't be a hypocrite, too. You're just as guilty of being "wound up" as anyone else. Trying to garner support against someone else for doing what you are doing as well is hypocrisy.

 

Man, you guys are intellectually dishonest.

 

Not to join in on the circus at all, but RMA, IMO, you are perfectly illustrating the fact that you as well as anyone else is capable of getting their buttons pushed by hurtful remarks. So when you make the assertion that it's simple to ignore and walk away from incendiary rhetoric (Larry), in reality, it's much harder to practice then preach, No? Just takes the right buttons for each machine, that's all I'm saying.

 

The discussion was about comments that are GENERAL in nature, not SPECIFIC to an individual. Comment sthat have to do with someone's race, ethnicity, gender, body characteristics, etc. NOT personal comments about someone's personality or behavior. Larry's comments weren't directed at an individual.

 

BIG difference.

 

There's a massive difference between people taking shots at me because I'm German, English, Portuguese, male, 39, etc. and people taking shots at ME, RMA, for being ME.

 

Please understand the difference. And let's stop talking about ME, for God's sake.

 

 

 

[hockey&comicsguy]

 

Sigh. This isn't about trying to control what others say.

 

That's b/c you've entrenched yourself into your position and cannot see anything beyond it. Incapable of doing so? Or simply too stubborn to do so?

You're trying to solve the equation by using the way you think it should be done. It's like you've decided the only way to get a sum of 4 is to add 2+2. The issue at hand is control. You're asking for self control. So am I. Only i'm asking it of one person, you're asking it of another. Why is the only acceptable solution (in your mind) to ask people not to react? Do you see no benefit in addressing the person uttering the words? If your child comes to you and says "dad, she called me an idjit", do you tell your child that they ought not let that person's words affect them? I hope so. That's what I do. Now flip the coin. Your child comes home, you get a call from school that they're bullying and saying hateful things to another student. What are you going to do, call up the other kid and tell him to suck it up and ignore it? Or are you going to address the issue with your child and there inappropriate behavior?

 

It's about not letting other people say affect YOU.

 

I KNOW. I KNOW. I KNOW. That's what you've decided are the parameters for this discussion.

YOU have no control over what other people say.

 

You DO have complete control over how you react to it.

 

If you can control the latter, the former becomes a NON-ISSUE.

 

Amazing!

 

Case in point of your penchant for dooshery. Have I argued this point of yours to the contrary? NOPE. So why are you being so redundant? It's unnecessary.

 

 

It is utterly idealistic to imagine that you can control what other people say.

 

It is not only NOT idealistic, it is preferable, to gain control over one's emotions and not let what other people say affect you.

Preferable, yes. NOT idealistic? If it weren't idealistic to at least some measurable degree, we'd not be having this discussion now would we?

 

It is no less idealistic for me to point my finger at the perpetrators and ask them to refrain than it is for you to point your finger at the "victims" (and that's what they are if they feel as such you don't get to decide for them)

 

Never said I did. You're doing the typical message board dance.

 

Pay attention, because this is important: there is no "finger pointing."

 

My choice of word usage has more to do with the approach you take to most things. Perhaps I'll elaborate at a later time.

 

Do you think encouraging people to not let what others say bother them is "finger pointing"...?

 

Not what I said. What I'm saying is you've decided to target one variable of the equation. I've decided to target the other. It's really quite simple. I know you want people to debate the issue under your rules but shet happens, right?

 

 

Silly overemotionalism, as usual.

 

and ask them to turn the other cheek or simply not feel a certain way. As if we're all robots or capable of incredible feats of self control.

 

So Jackie Robinson was a robot?

 

Ah yes, pluck out one of many famous names that have conquered hate and pawn them off as if it's oh so easy. Ok, you've got Jackie Robinson. I'd say I can safely estimate there's probably 4 billion people on the planet who've been offended at some point by something someone has said to them. So is Jackie the norm and billions of others the exception? Who's being idealistic now?

 

If we are capable of such control, then so are those who would use such hateful words.

 

I'm not missing any point. I'm just open minded enough to see multiple angles on this.

 

 

Sorry, but the examples of people like Jackie Robinson, and COUNTLESS others, proves you wrong.

 

Careful with your usage of the word wrong. You're perilously close to abusing it, and incorrectly so. Jackie Robinson proves i'm wrong? I'd say billions of other human beings would say i'm more right than you are.

 

Totally unrelated question: do you ever knowingly post things you know are wrong? And if not, don't you think YOU are always right, to?

No. I try to not post incorrect things. I try to refrain from posting incorrect statements about factual things. Although I am getting better and better at claiming my rightness or another person's wrongness about matters of opinion. Anyone hanging around you and Thing long enough tends to pick that up.

 

You cannot control what other people say.

 

You cannot, and the more you try, the more people will resist you.

 

You CAN control how you react to it.

 

Nothing more.

 

Nothing less.

 

 

 

 

And I am in full agreement with you.

 

That said, the discussion is not so simple no matter how much you want it to be.

 

For someone as bright as you I don't understand how you can't grasp the idea i'm floating out to you. Perhaps i've not portrayed what i'm getting at accurately enough.

 

I'll try and nutshell it here. If you can ask people to have self control over their emotions and reactions to words. Why can you not ask people to have self control over their usage of words?

 

You keep saying i'm trying to control what others say. I'm not. I'm saying why can't a person who says hateful things look at themselves and keep themselves from saying those things? It'd be incorrect for me to say RMA is trying to control how people react to hateful words. That's not what you're saying. You're saying we need self control in how we react to such words. You are just as incorrect saying that I am trying to attempt control over what people say. I'm not. I'm saying they should try and have control over what they say. Like I said, there's more than one way to address this issue. There is no right or wrong in the solution method chosen. Frankly, each is about as plausible as Tara Reid becoming an Oscar winner.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Guys, for future reference, please don't wind that toy up anymore

 

Don't be a hypocrite, too. You're just as guilty of being "wound up" as anyone else. Trying to garner support against someone else for doing what you are doing as well is hypocrisy.

 

Man, you guys are intellectually dishonest.

 

Oh, I have openly admitted I can be confrontational at times. But at the same time, I do occasionally take a step back and realize that perhaps I'm in wrong and sometimes I even apologize.

 

You go from page after page of battles all the time and in between you try to balance it out by posting a dozen or so jokes with a few cloud-nine's mixed in. At what point are you going to realize you're the common denominator?

 

You have very little history on these boards.

 

You think you know the score, but you don't. You think that you can discuss with someone who has been here for years how to "behave" here? That you can give someone some "insight" about things around here that hasn't been brought up before? Arrogance.

 

You think you know what I do and do not think. Arrogance.

 

You'll either figure it out, eventually, or you won't.

 

Either way, feel free to continue. (thumbs u

[hulksmashdave]

Did you know Abraham Lincoln was the first real person to be depicted on a US mint coin?

 

No I didn't, thank you for the info. (thumbs u

 

Did you know, that much like our beloved president, Abraham Lincoln, RMA is also a self taught attorney?

 

You insult because you have nothing to contribute.

 

Sad but true.

 

You are ignoring this user.

 

And being a huge obnoxious, delusional, confrontational, know it all, who incites anger from anyone willing to try and have a healthy debate does not equate to being a contributor.

 

I'm only obnoxious, confrontational, know-it-all, and anger inciting to people who are obnoxious, confrontational, know-it-all, and who incite anger.

 

Delusional? That's all you, baby.

 

Ah yes, the old "I'm rubber, you're glue" approach.

 

You will never, should you post for 10,000 years, contribute as much to these boards as I have. Not because you cannot, but simply because it's not your nature.

 

You can see the future? How is The Dark Knight Rises?

 

 

Oh, look, hulksmashdave inserting himself into a slapfight to take shots at RMA.

 

Really, Dave, you take totally, completely unprovoked shots at me, then whine about how big a d ick I am?

 

Really?

 

Do you just not see the irony, here?

 

I used to do the same thing to bullies in elementary school. Shoot me.

 

No, I'll just call you what you are. A hypocrite.

 

There are no "bullies" on this, or any, board. If you don't like what someone says, ignore them. You cannot be "bullied", because bullies, by definition, are unavoidable.

 

One could say, by your definition, that YOU are the bully for taking unprovoked shots at someone else. That's what bullies at my schools used to do...take unprovoked shots at people.

 

Aren't you a bully, Dave?

 

Did you just choose to ignore the point of my post? If I see someone who either is or thinks they are better than someone else making a lot of noise and belittling someone else, I feel the need to step in.

 

That's right...because you think you're right in your assessment, and feel it's appropriate to be judge, jury, and executioner.

 

To others, that just makes you a bully.

 

How many times are going to jump to the "No, I'm not a (blank), you are" retort?

 

All aside.

 

I SOMEWHAT agree with what you have said. The only thing you can control is how you react to it. However, not everyone can control how they react. They haven't been properly taught to do so. Some people are raised to be enraged, because their parents/guardians are always enraged.

 

That doesn't mean the ignorant, racist people should be given a platform to distribute their rhetoric. "Just don't worry about what they are saying" means nothing to some.

[bronze_rules]

Guys, for future reference, please don't wind that toy up anymore

 

Don't be a hypocrite, too. You're just as guilty of being "wound up" as anyone else. Trying to garner support against someone else for doing what you are doing as well is hypocrisy.

 

Man, you guys are intellectually dishonest.

 

Not to join in on the circus at all, but RMA, IMO, you are perfectly illustrating the fact that you as well as anyone else is capable of getting their buttons pushed by hurtful remarks. So when you make the assertion that it's simple to ignore and walk away from incendiary rhetoric (Larry), in reality, it's much harder to practice then preach, No? Just takes the right buttons for each machine, that's all I'm saying.

 

The discussion was about comments that are GENERAL in nature, not SPECIFIC to an individual. Comment sthat have to do with someone's race, ethnicity, gender, body characteristics, etc. NOT personal comments about someone's personality or behavior. Larry's comments weren't directed at an individual.

 

BIG difference.

 

There's a massive difference between people taking shots at me because I'm German, English, Portuguese, male, 39, etc. and people taking shots at ME, RMA, for being ME.

 

Please understand the difference. And let's stop talking about ME, for God's sake.

 

 

 

Fair enough, I personally think you're a bright guy, but thoughts aside, I understand your defense here. However, could you honestly say that if you happened to weigh 400 lbs and some supposedly professional guy bellowed an obesity joke to a few thousand, that you would not feel the slightest personal offense? Would it truly be simple to just let it go without feeling the slightest bit offended?

[RockMyAmadeus]

And I am in full agreement with you.

 

That said, the discussion is not so simple no matter how much you want it to be.

 

For someone as bright as you I don't understand how you can't grasp the idea i'm floating out to you. Perhaps i've not portrayed what i'm getting at accurately enough.

 

I'll try and nutshell it here. If you can ask people to have self control over their emotions and reactions to words. Why can you not ask people to have self control over their usage of words?

 

Because that is not what THIS discussion has been about.

 

Start a thread about THAT, and I'll agree with you.

 

But what you still don't get...just as much as you keep saying I don't get it...is that it's EASIER and more FRUITFUL to teach people to not react to GENERICALLY offensive comments than it is to get people to stop making them.

 

Should people watch what they say? Of course they should! No one is saying :"say whatever the hell you want, to whomever you want!'

 

NO ONE is saying that.

 

But if you do the ONE (ignore offensive comments), then the OTHER will fall into place (people will stop making them.) It's not an either/or situation.

 

Simple.

 

(Note, dave, mike, USArmyPartypooper, et al...this is how you have an intense discussion without being taking potshots at your opponent.)

[RockMyAmadeus]

Who's desperate now Abraham Lincoln.

 

Did you know Abraham Lincoln was the first real person to be depicted on a US mint coin?

 

No I didn't, thank you for the info. (thumbs u

 

Did you know, that much like our beloved president, Abraham Lincoln, RMA is also a self taught attorney?

 

You insult because you have nothing to contribute.

 

Sad but true.

 

I find his posts insightful and often humorous.

 

The words argue and discuss have slightly different connotations. You tend to lean to the former. It seems you fail to differentiate between challenging someones intellect and attempting to demean it.

 

I don't think I need to reenacte you typical "discussion" to get my point across.

 

I don't understand why you cannot just debate in a friendly and respectful manner. Yeah, what you say can be insightful and could challenge someone to think. People don't provoke you to be a d ick, you provoke people to argue and wield bitterness. This isn't a romanticized world, people get cross and offended. Stop deflecting with the "well if people didn't react". We are all humans and we are innately instilled with emotions. Rational or irrational, they are there. Being a know-it-all and demeaning your opponents intelligence doesn't help your argument.

 

Oh God, here we go again...

 

 

Can't you guys have ANY discussion without feeling the need to have all this side commentary about the people involved in the discussion?

 

Stick to the topic.

 

Quit being so oversensitive.

 

Quit reading "anger" and "demeaning" into everything you read. I haven't been demeaning to anybody who doesn't already have a history of being demeaning themselves, and even THEN, it's 92% tweak.

 

Do lighten up.

 

I could say the same thing to everything you post.

 

And nice deflection. (thumbs u

 

? Expand.

 

 

 

Uh, no, you can't. Nice try, though.

[hulksmashdave]

And I am in full agreement with you.

 

That said, the discussion is not so simple no matter how much you want it to be.

 

For someone as bright as you I don't understand how you can't grasp the idea i'm floating out to you. Perhaps i've not portrayed what i'm getting at accurately enough.

 

I'll try and nutshell it here. If you can ask people to have self control over their emotions and reactions to words. Why can you not ask people to have self control over their usage of words?

 

(Note, dave, mike, USAmryPartypooper, et al...this is how you have an intense discussion without being taking potshots at your opponent.)

 

Read my latest post, person_who_is_obnoxiously_self-impressed.

[RockMyAmadeus]

, person_who_is_obnoxiously_self-impressed.

 

You can't control yourself, can you?

 

No wonder you guys are arguing against self-control.

 

You don't have it, so you think everyone else doesn't, either.

[User 01001010]

Fair enough, I personally think you're a bright guy, but thoughts aside, I understand your defense here. However, could you honestly say that if you happened to weigh 400 lbs and some supposedly professional guy bellowed an obesity joke to a few thousand, that you would not feel the slightest personal offense? Would it truly be simple to just let it go without feeling the slightest bit offended?

 

if you were 400 lbs, that would be a choice to be that weight, unless you had a medical condition.

 

overweight people have a choice to change their situation, people of color don't.

 

can't really use that as an example