Dear Esponeo:
Nice, an unorthodox approach, but that takes balls. Kudos. Who or what is that sound at the very beginning and a few seconds in?
Each subject you dealt with, at least until the very end, was something that I brought up. Yet you stuck to the general "you guys." You can refer directly to me if that's who you're talking to or about.
Non sequitur1. Hypocrisy - This is where generalizing with "you guys" doesn't work. I made the observation on your
non sequitur. You made an accusation of hypocrisy. Yet I have never once made the statement that because people are pissed off, you
must be doing a bad job. Others may have, but I have not supported that logic by itself. If you feel otherwise, provide a quote and I will clarify.
2. "Not an argument" - Despite the word
argument having a broader definition than what you seem to be applying, how is that at all relevant? You made a statement whose conclusion does not logically follow.
Perhaps it has not occurred to you that certain people getting pissed off when I moderate them is a sign that I am doing something right.
Is. That makes it a statement, not a hypothetical. Not a possibility, not a maybe, as you suggested in your video. The only "perhaps" is in reference to whether the idea has occurred to the reader or not. Even if it was a hypothetical, though, it'd still be a
non sequitur.
You do realize this is a silly thing to get hung up on, though, right? It's not the end of the world to make a
non sequitur, especially over an inconsequential offhanded comment. You're free to admit you made a mistake and amend your stance if it wasn’t what you intended. If you openly don't agree, that's cool, show me where my logic is flawed. If you're just defending because you don't want to be wrong, that's silly. I value being clear, and will admit when I'm wrong or have made a mistake, such as when I used the word "character" inappropriately.
Zell - Dead Man1. "Strange comment" - So your defense is to claim ambiguity? Referring to anyone as a dead man, when they are clearly not dead, derives from the intent, either literal or figurative, to kill them. Given Zell's stance against you, that sort of comment cannot be interpreted as friendly, in jest, or otherwise polite. Don't insult our intelligence; your intent was very clear, or you picked a very poor choice of words. And to think it was in response to something as simple as a friendly suggestion about handling negative PMs. You could have just absently nodded your head and moved on.
2. "I'm never going to explain it" - I wouldn't expect you to, because I have a sneaking suspicion that you can't without stretching the imagination. Perhaps Zell could clarify what it meant to him.
3. "I found out Zell was not dead" - I got a chuckle. As a distraction it's a bit thin, though.
4. "Quit bitching about that, you just sound dumb, like you're not paying attention. Pay attention." - What was there to pay attention
to? All you’ve ever said about it after the initial comment was that nonsense straw man equivocation.
Someone being dead is not a matter of personal opinion.
Also, I don’t respond to restrictive demands on what I bring up, or "bitch about", when I see it as relevant to the subject at hand. The administration is welcome to correct me if they feel otherwise, but until they do such commands will fall on deaf ears.
Finally, you can make the same points without insults. All they indicate is immaturity.
Joy. Not Contempt1. Referring to people as sheep shows contempt.
2. In the beginning of the video, you were adamant that there has not been anger behind anything you’ve written. Anger is not just the furrowed brow and red face some people get. More often, it sulks in the back of someone’s chest, a palpitation of the heart, motivating their actions and attitude. It is twisted into hostility, and precipitates conflicts. The needless negative comments you’ve added throughout this entire experience, knowing you were in the spotlight, demonstrate the irrationality anger lends.
You don’t necessarily have to be angry with the subject at hand to be an angry person. No, that’s where the subtler forms of anger derive from. Rudeness, snideness, disrespect, it all stems from a root source of anger. When you just want to lash out at someone with a crude insult, you pretty much indicate that you’re angry about something.
4. "Smug joy at having victory over… one small thing." – Yes, I could tell you were enjoying yourself in that post. Why would you say that is?
Stop making big posts1. "If you want to make them, I suggest you type them up, masturbate, then just delete them. Don’t post them." – Lolz. Roflmoa. Roflcopter. Lolrus. Whether or not the accusation of you being a troll has any substance, it certainly seems here like that’s who you want approval from.
You don’t like being under a microscope and dissected. I understand. Sure, you’ve "laughed a lot", but that bluff doesn’t hold when you resort to insults and defensive sarcasm. Ultimately, this is all a test of your character, and how you deal under pressure.
Here’s a question: Why do you
want to be a moderator? You don’t have to change one iota of yourself (rules notwithstanding) by being a normal member. In that capacity, you can keep the diatribe you so know and love. As a moderator, though, you will need to be prepared and capable of handling public scrutiny with grace. Ordering us not to just because it’s inconvenient for you is far from the respectable approach.
As I said at the beginning of this ordeal: "When you are given power over what I write and how I interact with others, the quality of your character is of utmost concern."
(Massive post ftw. And don't worry, I don't need to masturbate. I have a girlfriend for that.)
Post has been edited 2 time(s), last time on Jul 3 2008, 9:46 am by Hercanic.