Google| Subject | Re: Snit Socks Coming Out Of The Wood Work |
| From | Sandman |
| Date | 12/01/2015 00:01 (12/01/2015 00:01) |
| Message-ID | <sandman-c7c2874df2619f64977dcb68f11995ea@individual.net> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.advocacy |
| Follows | Snit |
| Followups | Snit (15m) > Sandman |
In article <D281FFB9.65929%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>, Snit wrote:
Nope, he didn't say that either. Again, what he actually said is still quoted above.SnitSandmanSnitSandmanSlimer
If Muhammad Al-Snit Prescott Terrorist Guy had morals and values, he wouldn't submit to something as pathetic as anxiety and would be determined to work hard in and out of the house to feed and clothe his family. He'd be dedicated to his work rather than to Usenet.Instead, we have mush who is scared of facing the world because of "anxiety" but cures himself by making everyone else on the Internet miserable with his idiotic dedication to pointless debates.Snit
Wow! Again you attack a your fantasies of a person and not any ideas the person has. Shows your lack of confidence. But let us look at your view of anxiety: many of our service members come back with PTSD - an "anxiety issue". This has a huge impact on their lives... and your response to anxiety disorders is to say people should just get over it.
Only, he didn't actually tell you to "get over it".
He specifically said people should not "submit" to anxiety from health issues.
Actually he didn't. What he actually said is still quoted above.
He said someone with morals and values would not "submit" to anxiety...
Not to you, maybe, but to him it is. It's not like what you say has any relevancy to that, either.SnitSandmanSandmanSnit
He just said that he dislikes that your personal health issues make you post repeatedly on usenet over pointless debates.
My health issues have nothing to do with my posts and I rarely speak of them except in response to others brining them up, and even then I avoid details.
He apparently feels differently.
How he *feels* is not relevant either.
Ever notice that you're the only one that regard your behaviors as "fine"?SandmanSnit
And it's to your credit, really. He sees your behavior here on USENET as a result of something you cannot control, rather than being a deliberate choice. He just wishes you would work harder not to let other suffer from it as well.
My behavior is fine...
notice the debates almost always go to meta-debate nonsense and do not even focus on my doing any wrong.No, I have never noticed that, actually.
You did try to actually find me doing wrong recently...You mean above, when I pointed out once, no twice, that you misrepresented what someone had said? Yes, indeed.
And you with them, apparently. If them posting about you is a sign of obsession, then you posting about them must mean the exact same thing.SnitWhatever health issues I have are not relevant. This is a general discussion of anxiety disorders - not about me! Remember, I am not that interesting.Sandman
I think you're very interesting, but that's beside the point.
Well, people in COLA and CSMA are obsessed with me.
It is like they have never seen honor and honesty before... which also explains why when anyone who shows any decent character comes to these groups they are accused of being me.Haha, good one.
But what is the point? Are you responding only for your own amusement, is this your response? Your responses have no actual goal other than to fulfill your own sense of amusement, do I understand your answer correctly?SnitSandmanSandmanSnit
Something I'm sure you would agree with - when was the last time you had a "debate" on usenet that had a point? I mean, a debate that had a goal you felt was achieved successfully? Aren't you always found in threads disagreeing with pretty much everyone?
What debates? In CSMA and COLA there is just trolling and me responding.
So what is the supposed "point", then? If we suspend disbelief for a second and play with the idea that there is "trolling and you responding", why do you respond? What is the actual point and how many times have you achieved this point?
I respond because it amused me and I find psychology interesting.
I was in reference to the threads you're "in", meaning that by definition you are following them.SandmanSnit
As you are aware, you are always in threads where people disagree with you.
I do not follow all threads to see where people agree or disagree with me
so, no I do not know your claim to be true... nor is there any reason to think it is true.On what basis do you claim that it isn't true that in most (if not all) threads you participate you are doing so with a person that disagrees with what you are saying?
Where you said that your motive for participating in threads is for your own amusement, correct? Where by extension you find amusement in animosity towards you, right? And where you find amusement in being disagreed with, being called names and being generally disliked? Just trying to interpret your answer correctly here.SandmanSnit
What is it with those threads that keep you posting to them - what is the goal with your participation in them?
See above.
In what way did it have a supposed "dishonest" implication? It's a sincere question.SnitSandmanSandmanSnit
When was the last time anyone (other than a sock puppet of yours) said "Thanks" to something you said? And even if you can find such a post, how much of the actual responses are those percentage-wise?
And then you repeat the "everyone is Snit" gag. Yawn.
No answer for the question, then? Curious.
Your question has a dishonest implication in it... as such there is no way to answer.
See: this is also part of the "fun" for me... to note how people such as you troll and watch you freak out. :)Ah, am I "freaking out" now? I see. Interesting.
There is a difference between *having* a point, and *making* a point, as I'm sure you're aware. Making a point is achieved only and if you manage to convey it to the other party successfully and it is accepted.SnitSandmanSandman
I'm sure you feel that you're often trying to make a point, but the real question is, *are* you making the point? I.e. even if you feel you have a good and solid view on a given subject, do you ever find that you "win" the argument and the opposing person adopts your viewpoint?Food for thought.Snit
If you think I have failed to back a point then show it...
That's not the question though.
Of course I am making points.
I am fully aware of the fact that you think yo *have* a point in any given discussion, I am asking you when or if you ever have managed to *make* that point. Meaning, when was the last time you had a "discussion" or whatever you want to call it on USENET where you successfully made your point and the one you were talking to accepted it as valid?
And if you can find such an occurrence, how large is it percentage-wise when compared to the times you failed to make a point?
-- Sandman
11/25/2015-
