And I've likewise made an endless replies to these corrections attempting to show you where you are going wrong, and these remain undressed or unanswered, because you go straight for the assumption that I'm somehow misrepresenting your point of view, and I don't.
now I am being accused of not addressing issues and questions when I tell you that you are saying the exact same thing I did but you refuse to accept it....interesting claim...so how does that work in a non rude setting? I answer every question, show you that I said the same thing you said and that we agree on, but you say, no, that isn't what you said, I again show you that I did say it and it is what I intended even if you read it wrong and I am not experiencing you being rude when you accuse me otherwise.
Since we are talking about coming from different walks of life and how that affects what we think is rude. where I come from, false accusations of another person is rude. Ignoring them when they tell you and show you you got what they said wrong is also rude. I'm curious why you don't see false accusations rude? Why do you think it is not rude to ignore someone when they tell you that you didn't get what they were saying and then just dismiss their opinions and feelings as the definition of rude tells us that is what rude is? Teach me...I'm willing...what makes your behavior that fits the definition of rude not rude but me using a word or sound to express my feelings is rude?
I understand what you methodology is, and I merely offer the criticism of the flaw that I observe:
You can't approach research with nested presuppositions without demonstrating that these are valid first.
and yet I not only said the same thing eons ago but never said anything else, nor did I ever show that I was believing otherwise and when I corrected you, you ignored me to insist that you knew my opinions and ideas better than I know them myself. You know a total disregard for my opinions and feelings that is the mark of rude behavior according to the definition. So, I still need you to show me how disregarding my ideas, opinions, etc. is not rude behavior but saying duh or stupid in relation to an argument not a poster is somehow rude. I'm missing the connection you are making to what is and is not rude somewhere along the way. If I figure out how disrespect and reinvention is not rude but duh is, maybe I will figure out how to get you to understand that this is not my claim thus not something I would be able to or should even attempt to defend as if it is.
I've actually shown you what these are specifically.
There's no need to inject emotion into these discussions, especially if these emotional expletives convey intellectual "high-horsery". All I can do is to attempt to show you where you may be wrong. All you can do is exactly the same thing.
well, after all these days and posts of explaining to you that you are claiming I believe something I do not, and then turn around and tell me that the ideas I do support and believe are true it's the ones I don't support that are wrong, I get a bit...frustrated. Not mad, not angry, not hostile, not high horsery, just frustrated enough to say, well duh...how horrible. Seriously, nothing in that duh resembles the definition for rude and yet you are accusing me of being rude for using it. All the while this entire post fits the definition of rude and you refuse to accept it as rude. this is why I need you to explain how that which fits a definition is not an example of the word or idea that it fits while something that doesn't fit the definition is.
When you inject all of the "duh" you assume the tone of a "know it all" who is pointing out something obvious and other people just don't get it. It's unnecessary. Just explain the argument, and be persistent about your points. Otherwise, you are merely inflaming the rhetoric unnecessarily.
not an know it all, just a, dude, that is what I just said, where were you? Where I come from, if you repeat a person without adding something new, challenging them, or otherwise acknowledging that you are just repeating them for effect, you deserve a "duh, I just said that" especially if you try to present the idea as somehow new and unique to the discussion as you did. Nothing rude about it around here, rather just a, "are you kidding me" moment.
For example if I've added something to the likes of "I'm half your age and I get it, geesh" to the above. That would be an example of unnecessarily inflammatory comment that doesn't really address anything relevant to the argument. It's a form of veiled ad hominess, and you seem to do that quite a bit.
Hum...so now, you are suggesting that adding something to the discussion is inflammatory if it is not pertinent to the discussion at hand but repeating what someone said as if they never said it is not inflammatory? Interesting, I am learning something new all the time. I asked my husband and son if they heard of these arguments for what is and is not inflammatory and rude and it's all new to them too. Neither of them have heard such a thing in school, work, etc. In fact, where we live, if you repeat someone as if it is a new idea you just had when it is just a repeat of what someone else has said many times over, you would get a head palm along with a duh or geesh or something similar. But you are telling me that is rude, but it is not rude to purposefully misrepresent someone and insult their ideas and opinions by ignoring them. Very interesting. We need a rewrite of the forum rules on what flaming is....can I make a formal request now that you are starting to give us your version of the rules?
. Not in a sense of offensive, but in a sense of unnecessary and "unpolished" in terms of the communication mode.
