3 ms·

You only questioned the poster's qualifications, never the subject's. Only now are you even acknowledging that it could be in error as well. And without an ac

by bena 1y ago

You only questioned the poster's qualifications, never the subject's. Only now are you even acknowledging that it could be in error as well. And without an actual medical diagnosis, we shouldn't treat him as autistic.

awesome_dude 1y ago
Oh, how terrible, I called out the posted directly on their behaviour instead of addressing the "friend" who it is *claimed" had done X, Y Z. There, you have your out for your poor responses.
- bena 1y ago
  Why are you being so aggressive?
  - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1y ago
    Not to justify it but 1) your responses have been misunderstanding their point, even after a good explanation of it and 2) they had some of their comments down voted (IMO, probably because of how they expressed their perspective rather than because of what it is). So it is (or rather, seems like to me) a double whammy psychology of having their point be demonstrably misunderstood while it is also (seemingly) being rejected by down votes. (Again, just explaining, not justifying.) (Also, I cannot help but notice the irony(?) of this misunderstanding and the necessity of this explanation in a thread on a post about autism. No shade to anyone, just making the observation.)
    - bena 1y ago
      First of all, I firmly believe you're a sock puppet. Where is the "good explanation"? The first thing he did was demand qualifications of the poster. Exclaiming he's diagnosing something. He started aggressive. I then pointed out that his friend also made his self-diagnosis with the same qualifications. He then got all huffy and basically said "So you agree his story is rubbish", which is also rather aggressive. And all through this, he's been dismissive and condescending to people. And everyone else has been rather polite to him even with his attitude. And I don't think anyone is misunderstanding him. Everyone acknowledges his point that the poster is likely not a qualified professional. However, they are pointing out that neither is his friend. And I also pointed out, diagnosis or not, there's no excuse for being an asshole. Being autistic does not give you carte blanche to treat people like shit. So it's more like his refusal to understand everyone else's point. And likely why he's getting downvoted. But that shouldn't matter. So, you know, stay awesome, dude.
      - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1y ago
        > Where is the "good explanation"? It was in the comment four up from my first one in this thread. > No, he made a diagnosis - neither party appear to be in a position to do so. (They also gave other explanations elsewhere in the thread but that is what I was referring to because it is enough for a reader to understand the point and you actually replied to it.) Their point is that the other commenter should not have written "The dude isn't autistic" because that is a negative diagnosis rather than an agnostic statement. > So it's more like his refusal to understand everyone else's point. Others were failing to make substantive points against the commenter in question because their point was going misunderstood. It took a few back-and-forths to get to the actual point (in fairness, that's because of the vagueness in their initial comment) but that point is consistent with what they've written in this thread. > I firmly believe you're a sock puppet. Genuinely, I read this as feedback that I empathized well given that I'm not. But especially because I disagree with their point. (The presumption that the first commenter meant "The dude's not diagnosed" is very reasonable and obviates the other commenter's point, except as a general reminder to be more careful with phrasing, which their question wasn't.)
        awesome_dude 1y ago
        >> I firmly believe you're a sock puppet. > Genuinely, I read this as feedback that I empathized well given that I'm not. But especially because I disagree with their point. (The presumption that the first commenter meant "The dude's not diagnosed" is very reasonable and obviates the other commenter's point, except as a general reminder to be more careful with phrasing, which their question wasn't.) FTR I read your initial comment as being critical (but fair) of my posts. How the person you are talking to missed that and jumped to you being me is quite the jump.
        lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1y ago
        > critical (but fair) Honestly, re-reading everything, I think that paragraph is too harsh. In particular, that presumption of their intended meaning is not reasonable. They clearly meant "the dude's not autistic", which you correctly called out as a diagnosis. I appreciate your thoughtfulness.

by bena 1y ago

awesome_dude 1y ago

Oh, how terrible, I called out the posted directly on their behaviour instead of addressing the "friend" who it is *claimed" had done X, Y Z. There, you have your out for your poor responses.

bena 1y ago
Why are you being so aggressive?
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1y ago
  Not to justify it but 1) your responses have been misunderstanding their point, even after a good explanation of it and 2) they had some of their comments down voted (IMO, probably because of how they expressed their perspective rather than because of what it is). So it is (or rather, seems like to me) a double whammy psychology of having their point be demonstrably misunderstood while it is also (seemingly) being rejected by down votes. (Again, just explaining, not justifying.) (Also, I cannot help but notice the irony(?) of this misunderstanding and the necessity of this explanation in a thread on a post about autism. No shade to anyone, just making the observation.)
  - bena 1y ago
    First of all, I firmly believe you're a sock puppet. Where is the "good explanation"? The first thing he did was demand qualifications of the poster. Exclaiming he's diagnosing something. He started aggressive. I then pointed out that his friend also made his self-diagnosis with the same qualifications. He then got all huffy and basically said "So you agree his story is rubbish", which is also rather aggressive. And all through this, he's been dismissive and condescending to people. And everyone else has been rather polite to him even with his attitude. And I don't think anyone is misunderstanding him. Everyone acknowledges his point that the poster is likely not a qualified professional. However, they are pointing out that neither is his friend. And I also pointed out, diagnosis or not, there's no excuse for being an asshole. Being autistic does not give you carte blanche to treat people like shit. So it's more like his refusal to understand everyone else's point. And likely why he's getting downvoted. But that shouldn't matter. So, you know, stay awesome, dude.
    - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1y ago
      > Where is the "good explanation"? It was in the comment four up from my first one in this thread. > No, he made a diagnosis - neither party appear to be in a position to do so. (They also gave other explanations elsewhere in the thread but that is what I was referring to because it is enough for a reader to understand the point and you actually replied to it.) Their point is that the other commenter should not have written "The dude isn't autistic" because that is a negative diagnosis rather than an agnostic statement. > So it's more like his refusal to understand everyone else's point. Others were failing to make substantive points against the commenter in question because their point was going misunderstood. It took a few back-and-forths to get to the actual point (in fairness, that's because of the vagueness in their initial comment) but that point is consistent with what they've written in this thread. > I firmly believe you're a sock puppet. Genuinely, I read this as feedback that I empathized well given that I'm not. But especially because I disagree with their point. (The presumption that the first commenter meant "The dude's not diagnosed" is very reasonable and obviates the other commenter's point, except as a general reminder to be more careful with phrasing, which their question wasn't.)
      - awesome_dude 1y ago
        >> I firmly believe you're a sock puppet. > Genuinely, I read this as feedback that I empathized well given that I'm not. But especially because I disagree with their point. (The presumption that the first commenter meant "The dude's not diagnosed" is very reasonable and obviates the other commenter's point, except as a general reminder to be more careful with phrasing, which their question wasn't.) FTR I read your initial comment as being critical (but fair) of my posts. How the person you are talking to missed that and jumped to you being me is quite the jump.
        lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1y ago
        > critical (but fair) Honestly, re-reading everything, I think that paragraph is too harsh. In particular, that presumption of their intended meaning is not reasonable. They clearly meant "the dude's not autistic", which you correctly called out as a diagnosis. I appreciate your thoughtfulness.