Suspending people who don't play nice with others

#31
(Nov 2, 2018 12:55 AM)Secular Sanity Wrote: He’s a walking fallacy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_question
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-barreled_question

Etc.—etc.

He’s not interested in a two-way conversation. He uses his bag of tricks and that’s that. He rarely brings anything new and exciting to the table. He’s more trouble than he’s worth. I'm over it.

Again, not a single actual example. Just poisoning the well. Hmm, who was recently whining about poisoning the well? Oh right, you, hypocrite.
And I think I've already told you what you can do with yourself.
Reply
#32
I was 90% correct. Your questions seem rhetorical. You ask a question like ''why no tears?" (regarding Dr Ford) How should I know the answer to this. She did shed a few tears, and cried a bit at the hearing, as I recall.

Many of your questions aren't really questions to me, are they? You're asking me in all seriousness how would I react if I was being accused of murder? And then I answered you...that K wasn't being accused of murder. And then you reply by basically stating that you realized that. So, not even sure why you asked such a question.

I looked through the Kavanaugh thread, and it seems like most of your questions, you answer...with sarcasm, so it seems like you're not really asking me anything, you're just posting questions, to bait me.

I'm not into that. If you want to genuinely ask me questions, and genuinely hear the answers, awesome. Not for reasons of baiting. If not, then, we've hit an impasse.
Reply
#33
(Nov 2, 2018 03:02 AM)Leigha Wrote: I was 90% correct. Your questions seem rhetorical. You ask a question like ''why no tears?" (regarding Dr Ford) How should I know the answer to this. She did shed a few tears, and cried a bit at the hearing, as I recall.
It's not rhetorical at all. She testified that she did cry during the polygraph, which if recorded (she doesn't even remember that from a month earlier) she has not handed over for anyone else, except maybe a news outlet, to verify.

If she did cry during her testimony, I would appreciate a link and time code, as I didn't see any. Your recall is likely influenced by the editorializing you've seen and even quoted (like that quote you claimed was from Kavanaugh but haven't provided a source for). This is the closest I could find (from about 1 min):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QldLeRuz5e8
And while she pulled a crying face, she doesn't actually tear up or need to dab her eyes or nose. If I was that close to crying, my eyes would certainly tear up. For her, it stops just as quickly as it started.

Quote:Many of your questions aren't really questions to me, are they? You're asking me in all seriousness how would I react if I was being accused of murder? And then I answered you...that K wasn't being accused of murder. And then you reply by basically stating that you realized that. So, not even sure why you asked such a question.
If you answered about what Kavanaugh wasn't accused of, you didn't actually answer the question asked, did you? How you would react to being accused of murder has nothing to do with what Kavanaugh was or wasn't accused of. At least I hope your reaction to a personal crisis wouldn't depend on the details of some political drama. You just tried to second guess the question and answer what you thought would address the motive of the question...while not answering the actual question asked at all. Can you see the difference?

Yes, I agreed that your answer to a question I didn't even ask was true. But that makes it a non sequitur, not an answer to my actual question. I hope I'm correct to assume that you can comprehend what you read. If so, then it appears that you made an assumption about my motive and addressed that assumption instead of what I had actually written.
Quote:I looked through the Kavanaugh thread, and it seems like most of your questions, you answer...with sarcasm, so it seems like you're not really asking me anything, you're just posting questions, to bait me.

I'm not into that. If you want to genuinely ask me questions, and genuinely hear the answers, awesome. Not for reasons of baiting. If not, then, we've hit an impasse.

Again, you're making unfounded assumptions about the motive of questions...seemingly to justify continuing to avoid them.  Dodgy
No one is baiting you but your own insecurities.


Like SS, you seem to be intent on making excuses and accusations about motive in order to continue avoiding any inconvenient questions. I guess a skosh of self-awareness may be asking a bit too much.

C'est la vie.
Reply
#34
(Nov 2, 2018 03:02 AM)Leigha Wrote: I was 90% correct. Your questions seem rhetorical. You ask a question like ''why no tears?" (regarding Dr Ford) How should I know the answer to this. She did shed a few tears, and cried a bit at the hearing, as I recall.

Many of your questions aren't really questions to me, are they? You're asking me in all seriousness how would I react if I was being accused of murder? And then I answered you...that K wasn't being accused of murder. And then you reply by basically stating that you realized that. So, not even sure why you asked such a question.

I looked through the Kavanaugh thread, and it seems like most of your questions, you answer...with sarcasm, so it seems like you're not really asking me anything, you're just posting questions, to bait me.

I'm not into that. If you want to genuinely ask me questions, and genuinely hear the answers, awesome. Not for reasons of baiting. If not, then, we've hit an impasse.

Quote: you're just posting questions, to bait me.
Reply
#35
(Nov 1, 2018 11:41 PM)Syne Wrote:
(Nov 1, 2018 07:40 PM)Leigha Wrote: Like when I didn't answer your questions right away, and you interpreted that as sociopathic? lol

You have no idea what a sociopath is, if you think it's defined as someone who ignores someone else, or doesn't answer someone's questions immediately.
Again, that's not what I said:
(Oct 30, 2018 11:05 PM)Syne Wrote: I asked you how you would react to being so unfairly accused of a crime? That you keep dodging the simple questions says a lot about your intellectual honesty, if not your propensity to sociopathy. Either you would react emotionally, self-righteously knowing you're innocent, or you lack the capacity to express/feel that depth of emotion.

You freely chose the "sociopathy" option when you could have chosen the "intellectually dishonest" option. And you could have made arguments against either or both, which you also freely chose not to.

You presented her with three options. She's had the choice to admit to being intellectually dishonest, a sociopath, or to defend herself against both.

She's neither. She doesn't need to defend herself against your erroneous assumptions.

You’re filling in the blanks and connecting dots that aren’t there. It’s clear that you are not interested in other perspectives when you’re lashing out and reinforcing your biases with questions that have presuppositions built into them.
Reply
#36
(Nov 2, 2018 05:12 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote:
(Nov 1, 2018 11:41 PM)Syne Wrote:
(Nov 1, 2018 07:40 PM)Leigha Wrote: Like when I didn't answer your questions right away, and you interpreted that as sociopathic? lol

You have no idea what a sociopath is, if you think it's defined as someone who ignores someone else, or doesn't answer someone's questions immediately.
Again, that's not what I said:
(Oct 30, 2018 11:05 PM)Syne Wrote: I asked you how you would react to being so unfairly accused of a crime? That you keep dodging the simple questions says a lot about your intellectual honesty, if not your propensity to sociopathy. Either you would react emotionally, self-righteously knowing you're innocent, or you lack the capacity to express/feel that depth of emotion.

You freely chose the "sociopathy" option when you could have chosen the "intellectually dishonest" option. And you could have made arguments against either or both, which you also freely chose not to.

You presented her with three options. She's had the choice to admit to being intellectually dishonest, a sociopath, or to defend herself against both.

She's neither. She doesn't need to defend herself against your erroneous assumptions.

You’re filling in the blanks and connecting dots that aren’t there. It’s clear that you are not interested in other perspectives when you’re lashing out and reinforcing your biases with questions that have presuppositions built into them.

And why would anyone assume those are exclusionary options? Why would that preclude clarifying your reasoning or correcting assumptions? It wouldn't unless your reasoning is nebulous or you're insecure. If people refuse to provide the dots, they have to be guessed at. Don't like? Learn how to express yourself better.

Notice that she even went so far as to conflate the mention of sociopathy with not answering. It had zero to do with not answering, but it's telling that she would make such a connection. I am interested in other perspectives, especially if they can detail their reasoning process...which sadly, you seem as incapable of as she. Then you just get defensive and accusatory.

Ho hum.
Reply
#37
(Nov 2, 2018 08:31 PM)Syne Wrote: And why would anyone assume those are exclusionary options? Why would that preclude clarifying your reasoning or correcting assumptions? It wouldn't unless your reasoning is nebulous or you're insecure. If people refuse to provide the dots, they have to be guessed at. Don't like? Learn how to express yourself better.

Notice that she even went so far as to conflate the mention of sociopathy with not answering. It had zero to do with not answering, but it's telling that she would make such a connection. I am interested in other perspectives, especially if they can detail their reasoning process...which sadly, you seem as incapable of as she. Then you just get defensive and accusatory.

Ho hum.

Leigha Wrote:Kavanaugh sat at that hearing crying, and carrying on...like a petulent child who couldn't believe that anyone would ever doubt his integrity.


Syne Wrote:So if you were accused of murder, in full view of your young children, you wouldn't cry and feel self-righteous? You'd be calm and just accept it, right?

Syne Wrote:Again, for the third time, how would you react to being accused of murder in front of your loved ones?

Leigha Wrote:He didn't murder anyone. lol That's the thing, he couldn't be honest over his drinking habits from high school and college.

She thought he was overreacting. IMHO, I think both parties had a right to be upset.

But nevertheless, all of this started with the body language videos that you posted. Kavanaugh’s stress is understandable and presumably Ford’s is not.

How would you react if you thought people weren’t going to believe you? I think that’s one of the reasons that many women don’t come forward. They think that no one will believe them.

I don’t care either way. I wasn’t there. It’s a classic he said/she said, but I don’t think that you had to take it as far as you did. There was no need to imply that Leigha was being intellectually dishonest or a sociopath.

Like I said, your erroneous assumptions say more about you than they do her.

Grow up, Syne.
Reply
#38
(Nov 2, 2018 09:20 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote:
(Nov 2, 2018 08:31 PM)Syne Wrote: And why would anyone assume those are exclusionary options? Why would that preclude clarifying your reasoning or correcting assumptions? It wouldn't unless your reasoning is nebulous or you're insecure. If people refuse to provide the dots, they have to be guessed at. Don't like? Learn how to express yourself better.

Notice that she even went so far as to conflate the mention of sociopathy with not answering. It had zero to do with not answering, but it's telling that she would make such a connection. I am interested in other perspectives, especially if they can detail their reasoning process...which sadly, you seem as incapable of as she. Then you just get defensive and accusatory.

Ho hum.

Leigha Wrote:Kavanaugh sat at that hearing crying, and carrying on...like a petulent child who couldn't believe that anyone would ever doubt his integrity.


Syne Wrote:So if you were accused of murder, in full view of your young children, you wouldn't cry and feel self-righteous? You'd be calm and just accept it, right?

Syne Wrote:Again, for the third time, how would you react to being accused of murder in front of your loved ones?

Leigha Wrote:He didn't murder anyone. lol That's the thing, he couldn't be honest over his drinking habits from high school and college.
And I already showed where he didn't lie about his drinking...even admitting to "drinking too much".
Quote:She thought he was overreacting. IMHO, I think both parties had a right to be upset.

But nevertheless, all of this started with the body language videos that you posted. Kavanaugh’s stress is understandable and presumably Ford’s is not.
If she thought he overreacted then it should have been easy for her to contrast her own reaction to a similar situation. She couldn't or wouldn't and wouldn't even try to explain why. She just conflated a description of someone who lacks appropriate emotional affect with her avoidance of the question. Classic deflection.

Those body language videos gave understandable reasons for the stress of both. So you're going to need to supply so time codes to compare if you really want to make some point there.
Quote:How would you react if you thought people weren’t going to believe you? I think that’s one of the reasons that many women don’t come forward. They think that no one will believe them.
If I had cried during the polygraph, I'd certainly want to cry for the sake of public opinion. OTHO, Kavanaugh did react to being disbelieved, as there was wall to wall media coverage calling his denials into doubt.
Quote:I don’t care either way. I wasn’t there. It’s a classic he said/she said, but I don’t think that you had to take it as far as you did. There was no need to imply that Leigha was being intellectually dishonest or a sociopath.

Like I said, your erroneous assumptions say more about you than they do her.

Grow up, Syne.

It is unquestionably intellectually dishonest to know you would react similarly in a similar situation but refuse to admit it because it undermines your argument. That's the definition of intellectual dishonesty.
It is a sociopathic trait to lack the capacity of an appropriate emotional response to high stress situations.
No one has actually managed to refute either of those, nor even show a third option. If there is another reaction to being accused of murder, please, do tell already. I can't think of anything else but respond like most humans or significantly lack emotional affect.
She could have simply said, "yes, I would be angry, upset, and self-righteous". That would have easily avoided either conclusion. But instead, she just kept on dodging the question. It was not an assumption; it was a genuine question. And all this whining about ad hominems is only the part of the described possibilities she free chose to identify with.

But then, I'm talking to two women. What can I really expect? Rolleyes
Reply
#39
(Nov 2, 2018 10:43 PM)Syne Wrote: But then, I'm talking to two women. What can I really expect?  Rolleyes

And there's another one. That's all you're capable of, isn't it? Pity!

From what I can tell, Leigha was implying that he was acting to gain sympathy. You know, crocodile tears. I mean, men always make that same claim against women, don’t they?

And you know as well as I do that your sentence reads as nothing more than ad hominems.

(Oct 30, 2018 11:05 PM)Syne Wrote: I asked you how you would react to being so unfairly accused of a crime? That you keep dodging the simple questions says a lot about your intellectual honesty, if not your propensity to sociopathy. Either you would react emotionally, self-righteously knowing you're innocent, or you lack the capacity to express/feel that depth of emotion.

I think it’s you that needs to learn how to express yourself better.
Reply
#40
(Nov 2, 2018 11:20 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote:
(Nov 2, 2018 10:43 PM)Syne Wrote: But then, I'm talking to two women. What can I really expect?  Rolleyes

And there's another one. That's all you're capable of, isn't it? Pity!
Another what? Ad hom? Is being a woman inherently insulting? O_o
There do exist women more capable of rational thought that the two of you, deary.
But generally, women are more emotional and men more rational. Simple fact of life.
Don't like it? Demonstrate otherwise for once.
Quote:From what I can tell, Leigha was implying that he was acting to gain sympathy. You know, crocodile tears. I mean, men always make that same claim against women, don’t they?
And she also failed to answer where Ford actually cried during her testimony, where if her accusations were true, she should have had much more reason to. So between a male lawyer and judge, who did break down and lose composure, and a female psychologist, who didn't, she thinks the women is more credible, and the guy had the acting chops to pull that off? No rational argument has been made in that vein, only unrelated personal experience, emotional empathy solely because it's another woman, and leftist lies and myths of male privilege.
Quote:And you know as well as I do that you’re sentence reads as nothing more than ad hominem.
Only to emotionally biased people who try to assume motives rather than just read what is written.
Quote:
(Oct 30, 2018 11:05 PM)Syne Wrote: I asked you how you would react to being so unfairly accused of a crime? That you keep dodging the simple questions says a lot about your intellectual honesty, if not your propensity to sociopathy. Either you would react emotionally, self-righteously knowing you're innocent, or you lack the capacity to express/feel that depth of emotion.

I think it’s you that needs to learn how to express yourself better.

Yet you have no specific argument to make that point. You just whine about assumed motives. Rolleyes

Again, ho hum.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Nice look! Magical Realist 3 330 Oct 14, 2016 10:43 PM
Last Post: C C



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)