3 ms·

> Could it be that he applied his own experience, and experience of other languages and came up with the list as the result? It is almost certain. I said that

> Could it be that he applied his own experience, and experience of other languages and came up with the list as the result? It is almost certain. I said that in the first comment and every single one that followed. > I mean, you've now spent several comments and the last comment exclusively talking about Objective J. I repeated the same thing several times because what I said was not understood by the recipient. Communication can be difficult and a different phrasing helps people here in good faith to understand what wasn't clear on an earlier attempt. As Objective-J was present the first time, it was necessary to include every time, else the message would have changed. While you got the benefit of the doubt, with you now admitting that you are here in bad faith, what did you hope to gain from that?

troupo 3y ago
> with you now admitting that you are here in bad faith I never admitted any bad faith because I never argued in bad faith. However, this claim of yours perfectly describes how you approached the thread in the first place: you immediately assumed the worst of the person, assumed that person is arguing in bad faith, and presented your own negative bias and dislike as fact. Since you are actually arguing in bad faith, I will not engage in this discussion any further. Adieu.
- randomdata 3y ago
  > I never admitted any bad faith because I never argued in bad faith. Not so. You clearly stated that you were focused on my supposed "mania". That is an admission of bad faith. You know full well that even if it were true, it has no relevance to anything in this thread and is a fallacious diversion. > you immediately assumed the worst of the person I assumed nothing about the person until the person stated that he wanted to change the subject to talk about me. A random topic change is in bad faith, ad hominem is in bad faith, and bringing feelings to a discussion is in bad faith. > I will not engage in this discussion any further. Are you under the impression that this is a train station? You do not need to announce your departure. Logically, we understand you have stopped participating in the discussion when you stop participation in the discussion. This is another bad faith device. Do better.

troupo 3y ago

> with you now admitting that you are here in bad faith I never admitted any bad faith because I never argued in bad faith. However, this claim of yours perfectly describes how you approached the thread in the first place: you immediately assumed the worst of the person, assumed that person is arguing in bad faith, and presented your own negative bias and dislike as fact. Since you are actually arguing in bad faith, I will not engage in this discussion any further. Adieu.

randomdata 3y ago
> I never admitted any bad faith because I never argued in bad faith. Not so. You clearly stated that you were focused on my supposed "mania". That is an admission of bad faith. You know full well that even if it were true, it has no relevance to anything in this thread and is a fallacious diversion. > you immediately assumed the worst of the person I assumed nothing about the person until the person stated that he wanted to change the subject to talk about me. A random topic change is in bad faith, ad hominem is in bad faith, and bringing feelings to a discussion is in bad faith. > I will not engage in this discussion any further. Are you under the impression that this is a train station? You do not need to announce your departure. Logically, we understand you have stopped participating in the discussion when you stop participation in the discussion. This is another bad faith device. Do better.