On 5-5-2010 14:28, Warp wrote:
> andrel <byt### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>> - You fail to indicate what exactly is condescending in your opinion so 
>> that leaves me guessing.
> 
>   Talking with someone else about me and apparently my typical negative
> behavior as if I were some kind of child who must be understood. 
Oh, but you are ;)
> It sounds patronizing.

I know. It wasn't meant that way, but other than starting an e-mail 
discussion behind your back (which you would also not have liked if you 
knew about it) there is no other way to communicate. That is the curse 
of a public discussion.

>   When you write "IME a thread with Warp dies when there is nothing left
> for him than to apologize" it gives the strong impression that you are
> saying "he always writes controversially, he is usually wrong, but always
> too stubborn to admit it even though we show him how wrong he is, so he
> is either forced to apologize, or the thread dies because nobody else
> wants to continue". It sounds like you are implying some negative personality
> traits. The worst thing is that you aren't telling me about it, but someone
> else, making it sound like "you just have to understand him", which sounds
> extremely patronizing and condescending. (Maybe it was not how you intended
> it, but it *does* sound like that.)

Darren noticed that some threads suddenly drop dead without any feedback 
that somebody has changed his mind or ended with 'I see your point, but 
I still disagree'. I can only confirm that and that is what I did. It 
has annoyed me again and again over the years.
I don't think this is new to you, I vaguely remember having said this 
before.
Also not that there is another sentence behind what you quoted. This was 
  meant as a point for you to drop in into the discussion with your own 
points of view if you would have wanted to. In stead you chose to go 
into meta immediately, now I still don't know what your motivation was. 
More importantly, there is no indication from your part if you are 
prepared to end discussions in a more grown up way (sorry for the 
patronizing term). Remember: people are not going to apologize to 
someone who never apologized when an apology was badly needed.

>   "We have made progress", in this context, also gives an impression of
> being patronizing. And since you are not telling that to me but to someone
> else, it makes it sound like you were ganged up with others (or at least
> want to be, like with a mentality of "we are right, he's wrong").

I don't know about ganging up, but anyway it is not about being right or 
wrong in the discussion. It was about the use of invalid discussion 
tricks to not apologize for insulting people.

>   That's the impression your post gave me, which is why I replied in the
> way I did.

And this was my motivation.

Post a reply to this message