4 ms·
All of your responses are blatantly telling the person you're responding to what they were thinking instead of considering that perhaps there are multiple ways
by Vraxx 8y ago
All of your responses are blatantly telling the person you're responding to what they were thinking instead of considering that perhaps there are multiple ways to interpret things. You told padseeker that they were insinuating something when at best you could guess that they were insinuating something. If you're actually interested in discussing things instead of telling people what they believe or what their intent was, then I suggest not using this rhetorical device because it stifles understanding and conversation, not encourages it.
- darawk 8y agoIt's overwhelmingly clear what he was insinuating. He's made no attempt to prove otherwise in his response to me or others.
- padseeker 8y agoI'll make it clearer for you; "In spite of" NOT THE SAME AS "Because of" My comment is clearly saying "IN SPITE OF". I think most people who are reading with intellectual honesty would recognize that. The people who would interpret it as "BECAUSE OF" before this clarification might have a certain oppositional viewpoint. And the only people who would interpret it as "BECAUSE OF" after this clarification don't actually care about having a debate, but would rather call me a liar because it feels better than engaging. I literally cannot dumb it down any more than this.
- padseeker 8y agoVraxx I appreciate - Darawk it seems like you are interested in having a totally different fight. There's no point engaging with you.