Coalition of the Confused

Hosted by Jenifer (Zarknorph)

Confused malcontents swilling Chardonnay while awaiting the Zombie Apocalypse.

  • 1205
    MEMBERS
  • 62541
    MESSAGES
  • 0
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

UK News - General   The U.K and Europe

Started 7/16/19 by Jenifer (Zarknorph); 124218 views.
Di (amina046)

From: Di (amina046)

8/13/19

anybody who confuses garbage with graffiti is obviously more than G=G+1

BerrySteph

From: BerrySteph

8/13/19

RGoss99 said:

why post to me at all if all you are going to get as a response is the usual "G". 

Some of us decided this was unnecessarily hard work a long time ago.

CzoeMC

From: CzoeMC

8/13/19

Oh BerrySteph, as Marid would say in an Effinger novel, "You so right".

I didn't even know that he was one to ignore, and not argue with. Thought that there was something there that had a sense of meaning and compassion, but I was deluded, again.

RGoss99

From: RGoss99

8/13/19

So why are you still posting unrequested posts still -- slow learning curve I guess.

G=G+1

RGoss99

From: RGoss99

8/13/19

G=G+1 not confused, in this case both apply. call it whatever you like junk mail either way.

Jenifer (Zarknorph)
Host

From: Jenifer (Zarknorph)

8/17/19

That was a very, very long explanation.

No ad hominem responses.  That's pretty much all I could take from it, sorry.

That's on my start page as a rule, anyway.

On that we agree.

But I once got a G=G+1 for teasing you about a post that contained atrocious spelling.  I mean REALLY bad, not just the odd word, but almost every one. 

So, sometimes your macro can be a tad sensitive to what it perceives as an "ad hom" (i.e.: attack the argument, not the person), and the G=G+1 response ends up turning light banter into insult, where none was intended.

Jenifer (Zarknorph)
Host

From: Jenifer (Zarknorph)

8/17/19

RGoss99 said:

If you object to the criteria I use, why be a passive-aggressive coward

G=G+1

Attack the argument, not the person.  No ad homs, please.

RGoss99

From: RGoss99

8/17/19

I get the bad spelling comment often. No, excuse, but several reasons. First I don´t care, type stream of conscious, and don´t bother to edit. Secondly as a very fast touch typist, who neither looks at the keys, nor the CRT (poor eye sight and focus result of a stroke), Third point is because I often work in several languages, my typing often reflects a different language (constitució) or phonetic (two, too, to). I have no problema with legit complaints when my errors interfere with the message of my post. However do object when my message is obvious, and the spelling-grammar complaint are merely a way for the respondent to negate the message, or avoid responding.

RGoss99

From: RGoss99

8/17/19

Not valid, my ad hom was a response to and ad hom, e.g. valid.

Di (amina046)

From: Di (amina046)

8/17/19

What a lot of crock!

TOP