3 ms·

I'm "pulling [that sentence] apart" because it's the very pivot point of the issue. The core, the crux, the interpretation of which is purely subjective, so whe

I'm "pulling [that sentence] apart" because it's the very pivot point of the issue. The core, the crux, the interpretation of which is purely subjective, so where things can go bad. I actually agreed with some of your posts and upvoted 2 of them (edit: including the original one I replied to initially!) When I was concerned about was the fine balance between helping and suddenly forcing 'for their own good', hence in my original post I said "That's ripe for abuse". I was not initially criticising you, just saying it's frightningly abusable; be cautious. Then you posted this "That's [suicide is] a mental illness". Now it seemed you opened the door to 'helping' whether they liked it or not. Maybe you didn't but that's how I read it, and it did not play well with me. I don't think you got how badly that scared me. Well, that's ok. On the whole I agree with you. /Pace/

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
laumars 7y ago
> I'm "pulling [that sentence] apart" because it's the very pivot point of the issue. The core, the crux, the interpretation of which is purely subjective, so where things can go bad. It's not the pivotal point and it's not subjective. There is an intended meaning which the author of that post, namely me, specifically wrote. That was then clarified in every subsequent post where you've repeatedly argued a contradictory meaning. Furthermore I would consider myself uniquely qualified to comment on what was meant in that post - and all other posts by me - because I specifically wrote them. So arguing with me - the author of those posts - about the meaning of those posts is just absurd beyond comprehension. Please stop it. > When I was concerned about was the fine balance between helping and suddenly forcing 'for their own good', hence in my original post I said "That's ripe for abuse". I was not initially criticising you, just saying it's frightningly abusable; be cautious. You don't need to tell me this - I wrote literally that in my very first post (and again in a subsequent post too). Hence why I keep saying that you're taking that sentence of out context when parade it around in isolation like you have. > Then you posted this "That's [suicide is] a mental illness". Now it seemed you opened the door to 'helping' whether they liked it or not. No, I did not. I specifically and repeatedly said "I'm not going to argue about mental illness" - even after you directly asked me to talk about mental illness. I did suggest maybe you could benefit by talking to someone if you were sincere about your own mental health problems but I'm not forcing you to do that either (though I would recommend it - talking does genuinely help). > Maybe you didn't but that's how I read it, and it did not play well with me. I don't think you got how badly that scared me. Well, that's ok. Again, I think I - of all people - am uniquely qualified to tell you what I meant and if I tell you that you've misunderstood me, then you have misunderstood me.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

laumars 7y ago

> I'm "pulling [that sentence] apart" because it's the very pivot point of the issue. The core, the crux, the interpretation of which is purely subjective, so where things can go bad. It's not the pivotal point and it's not subjective. There is an intended meaning which the author of that post, namely me, specifically wrote. That was then clarified in every subsequent post where you've repeatedly argued a contradictory meaning. Furthermore I would consider myself uniquely qualified to comment on what was meant in that post - and all other posts by me - because I specifically wrote them. So arguing with me - the author of those posts - about the meaning of those posts is just absurd beyond comprehension. Please stop it. > When I was concerned about was the fine balance between helping and suddenly forcing 'for their own good', hence in my original post I said "That's ripe for abuse". I was not initially criticising you, just saying it's frightningly abusable; be cautious. You don't need to tell me this - I wrote literally that in my very first post (and again in a subsequent post too). Hence why I keep saying that you're taking that sentence of out context when parade it around in isolation like you have. > Then you posted this "That's [suicide is] a mental illness". Now it seemed you opened the door to 'helping' whether they liked it or not. No, I did not. I specifically and repeatedly said "I'm not going to argue about mental illness" - even after you directly asked me to talk about mental illness. I did suggest maybe you could benefit by talking to someone if you were sincere about your own mental health problems but I'm not forcing you to do that either (though I would recommend it - talking does genuinely help). > Maybe you didn't but that's how I read it, and it did not play well with me. I don't think you got how badly that scared me. Well, that's ok. Again, I think I - of all people - am uniquely qualified to tell you what I meant and if I tell you that you've misunderstood me, then you have misunderstood me.