4 ms·
It's not the most positive exchange but I have yet to have one with him that didn't result in the insertion of distortions or focus on the people carrying a mes
by streetnigga 13y ago
It's not the most positive exchange but I have yet to have one with him that didn't result in the insertion of distortions or focus on the people carrying a message instead of the message. This was made clear with Hastings and Brown themselves being focused upon instead of the content of their articles.
After things like Nickelback started to be brought up.. I stopped believing responses were being made in good faith. Fast forward to now and apparently I am saying 100% of that maker's devices are backdoored by the NSA, any other interpretation "doesn't make sense."
While I acknowledge this is a public forum I would hope tptacek would also acknowledge I asked him not to engage me anymore previously, before he announces the forum's open presence as his mandate to respond.
- 1457389 13y agoHe does seem to have a habit of only engaging when he can nitpick or twist the argument, which is the definition of bad faith.
- tptacek 13y agoSo weird that I never seem to engage with the arguments I don't see issues with. What mental illness must cause that, I wonder?
- 1457389 13y agoIt's the difference in mindset between having a discussion versus an argument. In one case you are more likely to work for a mutually beneficial outcome, in the other it's a zero sum game where distorting your opponent's views becomes a common rhetorical tactic. I'm not going to make grand claims, I just saw a lot of the latter from you recently.
- tptacek 13y agoNo, that's not accurate. If you and others are having a discussion based on false premises, correcting those premises does in fact move the discussion forward.