[Jack Simth]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
I was not ducking responsibility, I was clarifying my statement. Am I not allowed to do that? I was not picking on Eddie, I was picking on MOO3 and QS. My statement should probably have stated that explicitly, but I was in a rush, so... sh*t happens.

Boy... I sure am starting to sound like a broken record.

So ... are you saying it was actually an attempt at an apology? You may not have meant to, but you were picking on him.

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
That only happens when certain people refuse to accept my clarifications of less than optimally worded statements. When it is a situation in which I was wrong and not that I just worded something poorly, I always admit that I was wrong.

You rarely say you are clarifying something you said earlier; you just contradict the person, saying you never said that (or similar, especially in instances when referring to a piece of information that was clearly implied (clearly as used in this instance: more than one person sees the implication of the statement)). For instance, in this thread, when Mephisto told you to stop picking on Eddie you just said:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
I wasn't picking on him, just MOO3 and QS.

You don't say you are clairifying a post; you don't say you didn't mean to come off the way you sounded; you just outright contradicted him, as though his observations aren't valid. However, it now appears that you assume everyone knows that you are clairifying an earlier post, when there isn't much in the your post to indicate that.

Sometimes you simply stop responding to portions of things; neither arguing against nor conceeding the point, moving on to other things which were mentioned instead. For example, something I have mentioned that you seem to have dropped:

Originally posted by Jack Simth:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
The presence or lack of direct quotes in a post is irrelevant. It is quite common to post implied opinions after a quote.

Whie I suppose my wording when I said

Originally posted by Jack Simth:
In your case, you were quoting him and directly contradicting, which is a different scenerio from stating your opinion on the subject at hand, as Baron Munchausen was doing.

may have been a bit poor, a direct quote is irrelevant; the relevancy comes from referring to another's post and contradicting that outright.

---

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:

quote:

---

Besides, there is more than just the one option of one of us being a clone of the other; there's also the possibility that two different people just happen to find some enjoyment from similar things; twins separated before memory can form; and possibly a few others I can't think of at the moment.

But those options are no fun!

---

Says you!

[ June 23, 2003, 05:44: Message edited by: Jack Simth ]