Time to fisk this comment; this was originally a reply, but it merits its own post.
I thought about summarizing, but it would be just as long
you have no idea what point he was trying to make.
In his POST, yes, I do; in the original comment thread, nope.
Which is exactly what he wanted – to have his vicious smears tacitly accepted as people assumed he was talking about actual behaviors and focused on the alleged problem in the abstract.
You know, I figured out he was referencing you after reading the comments, but again, the comments are not what I was referencing as a meta-meta. I was dealing with the abstract sense of the discussion. That’s kind of what a “tangent” involves, is it not?
And since his alleged “point” alluded to the behavior of certain people at certain blogs without demonstrating it, you need to address that
But I wasn’t interested in that, I was only interested in the ABSTRACTION and an idea it brought up, perhaps you don’t understand that. Additionally, I don’t NEED to address anything I don’t feel like addressing.
– not simply proceed as though this has been established
Yet again, I wasn’t, I was discussing a tangential and separate idea. That of self-correction and how we should proceed with it as a very loose-knit group. Both on the side of the correctee and the correcter.
Otherwise, you are complicit with his dishonest, baseless accusations
No, I didn’t care about the validity of the accusation, I was interested in an idea it brought up. Do you not get that?
Clearly. And what kind of person does that make you? I hope you don’t expect anyone to speak up for you if you’re accused of something like that, to demand some support for the allegation
No, I really don’t, I generally accept criticisms, evaluate them, and move on, generally trying to find out what I did that they think is wrong. If you’d like an example, the instance where DuWayne thought I was arguing for accommodationism is a perfect example. Come to think of it, your accusation that I was agreeing with Greg on what he said about you is also baseless. HELP, SOMEONE DEFEND ME! (No, really, don’t)
If you read the other thread and believe he was right to say what he did, explain why, offering specifics. If not, you have an obligation to acknowledge that.
I still haven’t made a judgment on it, I’ve stated that already. I, even having READ it ALL, STILL don’t have a conclusion. It just made my eyes hurt, my head hurt, and I’m just as curious as to how this exploded in the first place. I repeat, yet again, that this was a meta-meta discussion concerning an idea tangentially related to a tangent post by Greg. It’s like saying discussion of PCR is the same as discussion of histone modification, so I need to provide examples of where histone modification takes place and how it works before I can discuss PCR.
You should have done so in your post. If this is a real problem that people should avoid, then it would make sense to talk about what specific kind of language you think people should avoid, using real examples.
I should have, huh? Do you even know what the post was about yet? Are you still too blinded by your initial disagreement? I’ll let you reread my post, figure out what it’s about, and discuss it. It has NOTHING to do with ANYTHING involved in your or Greg’s comments. People keep trying to make it about that, it’s not. If anything, your initial conversation and subsequent argument provides an example of “self-correction” to which I was referring. I’m still hoping it ends up being “self-correction” instead of “self-destruction.”
No one is saying there are no examples, just that if you don’t provide them in this context you are supporting a dishonest presentation of the situation.
So, I should provide examples of how histone modification applies to PCR? It doesn’t! My conversation about this is only distantly related to the initial topic. What do I need examples of? I can do that, just ask. Quit confusing me for Greg. I didn’t make ANY accusations about you, hell, that fucking post had nothing to do with ANY specific accusations, it has to do with pointing out when someone is incorrect.
You’re telling people what they need to beware of doing in the vaguest way possible without providing any substantive examples of anyone actually doing it.
No, I’m telling people they need to keep an eye on what everyone ELSE is saying, as well as listen to criticism. Self-correction, remember, it goes both ways.
Considering you think me “blindly agreeing with Greg,” I only have to laugh. I’m not even making a CLAIM about what you said, or what Greg said in that context, I am, indeed, not making any claims anywhere. I was only stating what I gathered he was saying. For my post, it doesn’t matter. The discussion should be regarding how we approach issues between one another.
And for reference, yet again, I am not agreeing with Greg, or you, I only think he was trying to make the following point:
“He is not saying she is antisemitic, he is saying her statement could seem antisemitic. He also stated that he doesn’t think she is, but it could be easily misunderstood to be.”
Based upon this quotation:
Much of your commentary together with this statement could lead some people to assume that you have some serious antisemitic issues to deal with. I’m not saying that, but I just want you to know that it could look this way. (I don’t happen to think it is the case.)
I shall repeat: I NEVER stated I agreed with Greg, I only stated what I gathered from his statements on the post here. Please do not confuse one for the other.