Psycho-Babble Administration | about the operation of this site | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Re: The Hsiung-Pilder discussion

Posted by Dr. Bob on September 8, 2013, at 23:30:02

In reply to Lou's reply-gauxehyhed Dr. Bob, posted by Lou Pilder on September 7, 2013, at 11:22:38

> If you say that when you use that the statement in question is {OK}, that the statement is {supportive}, that is one thing and then I will answer you to that. If you say that {OK} in the context does not mean that it is supportive, then I will answer you to that.

I probably meant "OK" to mean "acceptable" and "supportive" to mean "helpful". So OK wouldn't necessarily mean supportive.

> the question becomes as to why you think it will be good for you or the community as a whole, if you are following your own TOS that states that you do what will be good for the community as a whole, to leave my request outstanding.

My thinking was, if posters see me not respond to you, then they themselves may not respond to you -- instead of responding to you in uncivil ways. They might accept someone they cannot change.

Can you accept someone you cannot change? I don't feel you're uncivil to me often, but I wouldn't exactly say I feel accepted by you, either.


a brilliant and reticent Web mastermind -- The New York Times
backpedals well -- PartlyCloudy




Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post

Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.


Start a new thread

Google www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Administration | Framed

poster:Dr. Bob thread:1050116