Wez vs Eddo - Thread Split

And that's why I started the Are you a liberal thread. To show everybody that there's a little liberal in everybody. Well Almost everybody. Brotherman aced it without any liberalism in him.

 

Re: New Rule On Conduct

Nothings changed...

The point is, why ask me? I've been called a liberal for 6 months.. what happened this time? Me agreeing with TJ on one of the, if not the major defining political point?

What was so bad about.. "welcome to the liberal party" that you think TJ needs your validation? Or do you need his?

Thanks for telling the truth, you know I always appreciate it.

If you pretend something doesn't exist, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I thought you went to church and like to save people? I noticed some comments at TJ concerning JW's? Why do you want to try to claim this post has degenerated into something it's not? So you can bail and save face?

 

In TJ's behalf I did say people acepting abortion as an altrenitive was a murder in my eyes so nobody really pointed any fingers. I think a lot of people drew the same conclusion.

 

I never called myself a killer.. You didn't need to call yourself a hypocrite to be one..

 

Re: New Rule On Conduct

because that was after you used it as a slam, showing that it obviously bothered you. I was curious, so I asked.

Huh??

What does a post about missionaries and/or Jehovah Witnesses at another site have to do with any of this?

 

I'm still trying to wrap my head around how calling someone a liberal is a personal attack at all.

A while back in a thread, wez called me a pinky commie and said that I should move to China.

I didn't take it personal and stated my view on things that refuted the comment. I know my position, who cares what someone else thinks.

 

Didn't really raise much fuss about it either snaf.. didn't bother me. Didn't bother me when TJ thought he'd slip it in on the rules thread either..


What is ok for you to do to another human being is ok for every other human being to do to you ~ wez

 

Hahahahaha... I got called France for running at the sound of a firecracker and used it for my signature.. I thought it was a riot.

As I recall.. so did TJ.

exactly..




And for the last time, (prolly not).. I didn't even call TJ a liberal. I agreed with him.

 

Perhaps you could apologize to him for the confusion, as he did regarding the confusion of the killer comment...

 

Yeah lol pinkie commie. It's all bull****. I don't think wez can say it enough. He AGREED with TJ and made a cute comment. If we have to bicker over **** like that it won't be no fun at all around here. WE NEED SARCASM!

 

Re: New Rule On Conduct

How is that a slam? Why do you validate his right to be angry and fly off the handle at me every time we exchange words? Whats so bad about "welcome to the liberal party"? Not rocket science.. please don't play dumb, you know it doesn't fool me.

Don't hypocrites need saving?

 

Does that mean a member should appologize to me for confusing my statement as a threat of banning?

If not that's fine. I never expected it.

Why should we appologize if someone misinterprets a comment. If you clarify your meaning it should be enough and it should be taken as such, dropped, and not accusing them of trying to cover it up and backpeddal.

I know everyone can make a misinterpretation. I might have done it with wez's liberal comment, he says I didn't. I feel that if the person is man/woman enough to give the proper intent of the comment, unless it's obvious BS, they should be taken at their word.

extreme example. Bender is a jackass. What I meant was that I thought that Bender was an actual donkey. How as I to know.

 

Hahahaha.. now I owe him an apology? No validation from me eddo.. none. I only validate truth, you know that.

 

What's bad about it is that you know he isn't a liberal. Thus welcoming him to the liberal party is a slam. I will agree that he went overboard with it, but I do not doubt that you meant it as a slam.

Relevance?

Actually no. it would be you who should apologize to him (which I thought you did.) You made the comment, he misunderstood, but since it wasn't what you meant- it would be then, in my opinion, your responsibility to apologize for it.

I dunno that we should, as we are all adults here, but I thought it was pretty cool of TJ to apologize for the misunderstanding, and wez just blew it off. I thought maybe if he returned the favor (which I knew he wouldn't do) it might help us to move past it.

I didn't say you "owed" him anything, but I thought it would be nice.

 

You know I stop more arguments with my wife by saying "I'm sorry we don't agree". Really it works.

 

Of course we're not all married so.....

 

So why should wez appologize to TJ for TJ being confused about wez' comment?

And yes I did appologize several times for both the misinterpretation of the whole threat issue and I tried several times to appologize for the misinterpretation of TJ being the one who started the personal attacks and asked him if we could move on. He refused to accept that and began insisting that I appologize again for him misinterpreting my comment as a threat, again. He just can't let it go. He keeps accusing me of always taking wez' side. You can ask wez, he's been warned many times in PM's and he has always been respectful of my requests at the time. Just because something wasn't done in public doesn't mean it wasn't happening. I believe you just said something just like this referring to another site.

Nobody, me, cloaked or bender can promise to be on a site that runs 24/7. People need to grow up and not let their little feelings be hurt by every at every little comment that might or might not offend them. I don't know about other people here but I graduated from junior high and can fend for myself and control my own responses. If you don't like someones debating style, don't respond to them or ignore them.

I was hoping to not turn this site into a micromanaged babysitting whinefest, and hoped people would do some self monitoring. That didn't seem to happen.

 

When I'm in a debate and it is obvious parties are set in their beliefs and no matter what is said, I often us the old, "I guess maybe we just need to agree to dissagree" line.

Works 98% of the time. Everyone goes away friends. The times it doesn't, I guess I don't need friends that badly.

 

because the confusion started with what wez said. (and because Tj apologized as well.)

Actually, I said it more in reference to this site. But, as has been said, this is in the past.

I agree on both counts- that it should, and because some of us cannot move forward, it isn't.

 

That doesn't answer the question on why TJ doesn't owe me an appology. We both agreed that I had appologized. He is the one who hasn't and you keep defending his position.

I asked this in response to your statement...

I asked...

Then you say this...

What is the difference?

You say that since TJ was confused with what wez said, and appologized for it, wez owes him an appology, but TJ was confused with what I said, and I already tried to appologize but TJ wouldn't let it go, I owe him another appology, but he doesn't owe me anything.

I must be missing something.