I know you never get angry, but you’re grammar, spelling and clarity get worse when people disagree with you.
Regarding the whole post: I know you never get angry, but you’re grammar, spelling and clarity get worse when people disagree with you.
Wow. Really poor writing.
But I specifically contrasted what is said - content - with the interaction/procedure/dynamic - how you relate to the people you are using. So, it has nothing to do with what you are saying or meaning with your words.
I appreciate the mildness of this insult. You’re quite right. They like Maria more than me - I’m still teaching. But my evaluations are quite fine, thank you.
Great. So, now it is admitting that both of them could be completely and utterly Wrong about all both of them have said and claimed ‘about me’.
Have you ever considered just stopping talking ‘about others’, especially because we are in a philosophy forum of all places?
What you two are doing is talking ‘about me’. This is an irrefutable fact, literally written on the screen in front of us. There is no assumption on my part. This is what is happening. The proof is here for all to look at and see. No one could refute this fact. No one even has to make an assumption here.
LOL If you two cannot find agreement, then, again, you two are proving the very points I have been making and showing here. Again, you two are living examples, and thus proof, of the claims that I have been making.
So, I claimed that these two cannot even come to the most basic agreement in their continual talking ‘of me’, but, again, I am incorrect on this as well.
So, to prove you correct, and prove me incorrect, inform us readers what ‘it’ is exactly that you two have come to the most basic agreement, ‘of me’.
If you do not, then once again you failed absolutely to back up and support another claim ‘of yours’.
Again, what you laughably call “problematic interpersonal patterns” ‘of mine’ means that you, still, have absolutely no idea nor clue as to why I speak and write in the way I do here. If you have better interpersonal skills you would already know, for sure, why I speak and write in the way that I do here.
Again, the point I was making went straight past you.
With each other. Did I really need to inform you?
Yet you two obviously prove otherwise.
Again, you make a statement and claim, but put a question mark at the end of it. Do you realise how often you do this?
Also, when you do it, what you are conveying are your inner beliefs and assumptions, which you do not want to just express openly and honestly.
Thus, reaffirming your beliefs and assumptions.
Again, thus proving what I have been pointing out and saying.
Again, what you call the “problematic communication patterns”, ‘of mine’, which you keep communicating, ‘with me’, about, just maybe something I do purposely, for a very specific reason, which, if you had better communication patterns, you would, once again, have already become aware of.
Every time you and “atla” end up just talking ‘about me’ turns into what you are saying here.
By the way, I had already expressed in my first post the reason how and why ‘the debate’, which was being sort will never actually really eventuate.
As has already been proved, anyone with any real reading comprehension skill knows already that there is not a single word from me that would be read as condescending nor judgmental.
Once again, we have another example of what happens when one will just not let go of their current beliefs and assumptions, and will only see ‘the world’ through those perceptions.
LOL, LOL, LOL “disrespect”.
Again, projection from one’s own current beliefs and presumptions.
Again, a statement and claim, from one’s own belief, with a question mark at the end.
See, people like this one do not realise that they are showing and revealing their truest inner beliefs and presumptions, under the disguise of a question mark, as though they are asking a question.
So what?
If I CHOOSE to communicate in a way that turns you people off, then so be it. It is a CHOICE I have made, and I have a very good reason for doing it.
LOL Both you and “atla” have made this TRULY bizarre claim.
LOL You both completely and utterly MISSED THE POINT that I was making. And, again, you have both done this for the exact same reasons I keep pointing out and making here.
Which, LOL, both of you keep missing, even after all of these years.
This is an assumption. People have to believe they are God if they think they know what someone wants to say but did not dare to? Nah. Mentalists and psychics, as a couple of examples, all think they are God? Nah. Psychologists who reach similar conclusions: they must think they are also God. Nah.
I wonder if Age will justify his claim here that he is making for future generations.
You could have role-modelled this if you thought this was a good idea. But no you ended up talking about people at the time this was being written and earlier and then also individual humans, while you were using us to prove your claims for future generations. All sorts of judgments.
What do you mean by “they never are”?
They already have been. I would not be here expressing them if the irrefutable facts and proof did not already exists.
Exactly. So, why do you two expect them to be here?
While you continue to not seek out and obtain clarification, you will keep misinterpreting and misunderstanding, as you clearly are here.
Here, they never are substantiated with irrefutable facts and proof, here.
We don’t. I cannot understand how you could possibly think we do expect them to be here. In fact, I asserted, just before, the opposite. You may not ever get angry 
but you seem to think more sloppily when people point out what you are doing and not doing.
That’s what you assume, but you’re expressing them almost all the time even though irrefutable facts and proof don’t exist at all. 
When have I ever bandied with another here?
You misunderstood, again.
You wrote, “they never are”, but also wrote,
So, if you ALREADY KNOW that I am not necessarily here to substantiate my claims by providing the irrefutable facts and proof, then why did you write, “they never are”.
What do you mean by, “they never are”, when you ALREADY KNOW that I am not necessarily here to ‘do that’?
It would be like me to keep saying and claiming that you do share your instructions on “how to swim” here, when you are not necessarily here to ‘do so’.
Why keep talking about me “never substantiating my claims”, especially after you even knowing that I am not necessarily here to do so?
Can you really not understand how I could possibly think that you do expect me to substantiate my claims, especially considering how many times you say and claim, “they never are”?
Are you absolutely sure?
If yes, then why can you not understand here?
LOL ‘think sloppily’.
Could you be assuming Wrongly here, as well?
Well, I never said you bandied. I responded to this
Have you ever considered just stopping talking ‘about others’, especially because we are in a philosophy forum of all places?
And this you do with people in the future or perhaps other readers. But since here at least they are silent, there doesn’t seem to be any bandying.
LOL So, this one now claims to know, absolutely, that the irrefutable facts and proof that I am talking and referring to does not exist, AT ALL.
it also did not even recognise the blatant contradiction it made here. Because if it did, it still went ahead and expressed it, out loud.
Just a point of feedback on your communication: a statement would have been much clearer here. Saying they never are has to do with your double standard or hypocrisy. That you do not do what you expect others to do. Can you really not understand that you just assumed something false there in your incredulity, incredulity tucked into that convoluted question?
You did not have to say bandied, that is what I was meaning, and you were replying to what I said and wrote.
Look, anew1, this is almost completely incoherent.
Noted.
What are you on about now?
I wrote:
You replied:
As can be clearly seen are the actual words that I wrote and used, and what you replied to.
You then went on to talk about “double standard and hypocrisy”. Now, where exactly are these things when even you know, and which even you pointed out, I am not necessarily here to substantiate my claims with irrefutable facts and proof?
Again, if you are meaning, or referring to, something else other than the words ‘of mine’ that you quote and then reply to, then it would be very helpful to communicate what you are actually talking about instead.
If someone asks me to do something, then I do what I prefer others would do. That is, if I ask another to answer a question honestly, clarify, and/or substantiate their claim with irrefutable facts or proof, then I prefer that they just do it, exactly like I would do, if, and when, I am asked to.
Once again, you have just presumed what I was meaning in my question, and then responded.
If a single consideration of “what is actually being meant” ever come into the thinking within that head, then not a single question was asked seeking clarification, before you assumed something, jumped to a conclusion, and responded.
If it is completely incoherent or partly incoherent to you, this does not mean that it is to others.
If you want to find and know the Truth of things, you have to first speak the Truth.
Look “iwannaplato”, you wrote what you did in direct reply to what I said and wrote. This is just another fact that cannot be refuted, especially considering the proof is in this very thread for all to look at, and see.
You assume there was a blatant contradiction, but of course you can’t prove it.
You assume that your irrefutable facts and proof exist but of course you can’t prove that either.
You make so many assumptions, it’s not normal.