Since you seem to have completely lost track of what actually happened, I will remind you:
Zack made this post and was met with a barrage of abuse
Some of the abusers were blaming Zack for making a post that random passersby might not care about
I pointed out that the people making this critique had in fact interacted much more with the post than somebody who genuinely wouldn’t care
You pointed out that these people had interacted with the post in ways beside the one I just mentioned
I pointed out that this obviously corroborates my point rather than detracting from it
Instead of addressing this obvious point, you just called it incoherent and started delivering a barrage of insults instead of making any actual arguments
Ie. you are the one just asserting opinions, whereas I made arguments, and then pointed out the arguments when you denied their existence, and now you seem to be asserting that your opinion is just as valid as mine, a thinly veiled “that’s just your opinion, man”, while still ignoring the actual arguments rather than actually addressing them. That is insane.
Ie. you are the one just asserting opinions, whereas I made arguments, …
This is in itself another opinion… Did you genuinely not read my previous comment to the end?
Whether or not they satisfy your own criteria is irrelevant to this point, and just saying it’s the truth won’t convince the counter-party.
i.e. You need to convince me, not yourself. And the previous opinions are just not convincing, to me, as coherent ‘arguments’. Period.
No amount of futile replies can alter the past, unless you edit the comments, which would create its own credibility problems. We can agree to disagree and move on.
I can’t possibly hope to convince you when you are engaging in abysmally bad faith. My purpose is to call you out, because you should not be getting away with this shit.
On another note, I did in fact “list out actual arguments”, exactly as you said. I can only surmise that they didn’t satisfy the “criteria of the counter-party”, and for some unguessable (/s) reason, you once again will not give even the slightest indication of what you deem to be insufficient about them.
How exactly am I supposed to convince an interlocutor who will not even explain why he is unmoved by the arguments provided? Again, this is insane.
Do you realize I can see when you’ve posted replies and then ‘deleted them without a trace’ immediately afterwards? The mods can too.
It’s a feature of the LW notifications system, with the right timing. So there’s no use in pretending.
I didn’t want to call this out before, but it’s important to set the record straight. And the mods will back me up here.
I can’t possibly hope to convince you when you are engaging in abysmally bad faith. My purpose is to call you out, because you should not be getting away with this shit.
Anyways, just going by the writing that is considered not too embarrassing to delete, it’s clear who has the better manners in comment writing.
Do you realize I can see when you’ve posted replies and then ‘deleted them without trace’ immediately afterwards? The mods can too.
For any others wondering, the deleted comment simply said ”… That’s what I get for engaging with a blatant troll”, or something to that effect. It was because M. Y. Zuo’s manipulative bs had made me forget my actual reasons for engaging, and I deleted the comment when I remembered what they were.
But it seems superfluous at this point, since any reasonable person can tell that M. Y. Zuo’s behaviour is absolutely reprehensible. But I also have to admit that any such person can also tell that I’ve “bitten the bait” and engaged with him too long, to the point where my behaviour has become ridiculous and embarrassing.
There is a lot of wisdom to Mark Twain’s admonition to never argue with a fool, lest they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience — wisdom which, I am sorry to report, I seem to have not yet learned.
Thanks for confirming my suspicions, since the precise wording must have been very embarrassing to intentionally delete without a trace, I won’t pry, and I’ll let bygones be bygones.
It wasn’t my intention to drive you into a hopeless corner, since it seems there was substantial agitation from close to the beginning, but it’s hard to ignore deception and false pretences when the LW forum software is literally notifying me of it.
I understand it can be a bit scary and frustrating when someone much more experienced and well established takes a counter-argument line, so I won’t provoke whatever root issue(s) is lying beneath all this but I do hope there’s some value in what’s been written.
Thanks for confirming my suspicions, since the precise wording must have been very embarrassing to intentionally delete without a trace, I won’t pry, and I’ll let bygones be bygones.
I already told you what the comment said. I deleted it not because I thought it was embarrassing, but because I thought it was irrelevant.
Is there some way for moderators or admins to identify the content of a deleted comment? If so, I give my permission for them to do so and state publicly what it contained.
I understand it can be a bit scary and frustrating when someone much more experienced and well established takes a counter-argument line
I have been in this community for over ten years.
This latest comment of yours is utterly disgraceful and contemptible by any reasonable standard. Purely an attempt to humiliate me, and on an entirely speculative basis. So much for “letting bygones be bygones”, eh?
EDIT: I wanted to say it was an interesting discussion to be polite, but the juvenile insults and mud slinging tactics are obvious enough that probably zero passing readers would believe it.
Since you seem to have completely lost track of what actually happened, I will remind you:
Zack made this post and was met with a barrage of abuse
Some of the abusers were blaming Zack for making a post that random passersby might not care about
I pointed out that the people making this critique had in fact interacted much more with the post than somebody who genuinely wouldn’t care
You pointed out that these people had interacted with the post in ways beside the one I just mentioned
I pointed out that this obviously corroborates my point rather than detracting from it
Instead of addressing this obvious point, you just called it incoherent and started delivering a barrage of insults instead of making any actual arguments
Ie. you are the one just asserting opinions, whereas I made arguments, and then pointed out the arguments when you denied their existence, and now you seem to be asserting that your opinion is just as valid as mine, a thinly veiled “that’s just your opinion, man”, while still ignoring the actual arguments rather than actually addressing them. That is insane.
This is in itself another opinion… Did you genuinely not read my previous comment to the end?
i.e. You need to convince me, not yourself. And the previous opinions are just not convincing, to me, as coherent ‘arguments’. Period.
No amount of futile replies can alter the past, unless you edit the comments, which would create its own credibility problems. We can agree to disagree and move on.
I can’t possibly hope to convince you when you are engaging in abysmally bad faith. My purpose is to call you out, because you should not be getting away with this shit.
On another note, I did in fact “list out actual arguments”, exactly as you said. I can only surmise that they didn’t satisfy the “criteria of the counter-party”, and for some unguessable (/s) reason, you once again will not give even the slightest indication of what you deem to be insufficient about them.
How exactly am I supposed to convince an interlocutor who will not even explain why he is unmoved by the arguments provided? Again, this is insane.
Do you realize I can see when you’ve posted replies and then ‘deleted them without a trace’ immediately afterwards? The mods can too.
It’s a feature of the LW notifications system, with the right timing. So there’s no use in pretending.
I didn’t want to call this out before, but it’s important to set the record straight. And the mods will back me up here.
Anyways, just going by the writing that is considered not too embarrassing to delete, it’s clear who has the better manners in comment writing.
For any others wondering, the deleted comment simply said ”… That’s what I get for engaging with a blatant troll”, or something to that effect. It was because M. Y. Zuo’s manipulative bs had made me forget my actual reasons for engaging, and I deleted the comment when I remembered what they were.
But it seems superfluous at this point, since any reasonable person can tell that M. Y. Zuo’s behaviour is absolutely reprehensible. But I also have to admit that any such person can also tell that I’ve “bitten the bait” and engaged with him too long, to the point where my behaviour has become ridiculous and embarrassing.
There is a lot of wisdom to Mark Twain’s admonition to never argue with a fool, lest they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience — wisdom which, I am sorry to report, I seem to have not yet learned.
Thanks for confirming my suspicions, since the precise wording must have been very embarrassing to intentionally delete without a trace, I won’t pry, and I’ll let bygones be bygones.
It wasn’t my intention to drive you into a hopeless corner, since it seems there was substantial agitation from close to the beginning, but it’s hard to ignore deception and false pretences when the LW forum software is literally notifying me of it.
I understand it can be a bit scary and frustrating when someone much more experienced and well established takes a counter-argument line, so I won’t provoke whatever root issue(s) is lying beneath all this but I do hope there’s some value in what’s been written.
I already told you what the comment said. I deleted it not because I thought it was embarrassing, but because I thought it was irrelevant.
Is there some way for moderators or admins to identify the content of a deleted comment? If so, I give my permission for them to do so and state publicly what it contained.
I have been in this community for over ten years.
This latest comment of yours is utterly disgraceful and contemptible by any reasonable standard. Purely an attempt to humiliate me, and on an entirely speculative basis. So much for “letting bygones be bygones”, eh?
So we agree to disagree.
EDIT: I wanted to say it was an interesting discussion to be polite, but the juvenile insults and mud slinging tactics are obvious enough that probably zero passing readers would believe it.