People leave the church because of a "trust gap"

[ttribe]

[SmileyMcGee]

Removed

 

Edited April 25, 2017 by SmileyMcGee

[bluebell]

21 hours ago, Gray said:

Came here to see what people were saying about the trust gap. Pages and pages of arguing about fire fighters.

😂

[Calm]

 

4 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

I think it is time for love and unity -- the hostility between posters over a story about a firefighter is truly disheartening.  The appearance is that people are wanting to fight for the sake of fighting and not for what the actual subject is.  Perhaps the arguing is over something deeper and the firefighter story is just the "proxy war," so to speak?

"Holy Father, keep them in thy name whom thou has given me; that they may be one, as we also are." John 17:11

+PAX+

I can't speak for others, but my emotional investment was in protecting the professional reputation and character of a man I see as a likely compassionate bystander to the discussion of the possible fraudulent nature of the conference talk (a different topic in my posts) and someone who isn't here to defend himself and likely will never be aware of it, but the effect of tarnishing reputations can have ripples we could never expect to happen.  This is a public forum, not a private conversation.  We don't know what may get repeated elsewhere, what will be taken as accurate or leave inaccurate impressions that will colour people's attitudes.  I think sometimes this is forgotten due to the limited number of the people who post here.

Given what I have heard in news reports, it appears that employers do internet searches on employees and potential employees.  If an employer ended up reading the story in a negative way in terms of risking men, if there wasn't a clear record of timing and status of the building and orders given, perhaps it could create doubt in the commander's decision.  What if his men were to read accusations and a wedge of distrust was placed?

 It wasn't a proxy war for me, though prior behaviour i saw as similar certainly affected my perspective.

If people want to chide me on being overly harsh, please do so.  I like feedback that deals with details, though vague feedback without examples kind of drives me up the wall.  PM me if you think it will break board rules.  If I push other people to change their behaviour to be less defamatory of others, I see it as appropriate that people do the same for me and I welcome on target criticism.

I also feel a need to speak up when it appears people are attaching meanings to my actions that I do not see reflected in what I have done.  I suspect everyone feels that way.

Edited April 24, 2017 by Calm

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

 

I can't speak for others, but my emotional investment was in protecting the professional reputation and character of a man I see as a likely compassionate bystander to the discussion of the possible fraudulent nature of the conference talk (a different topic in my posts) and someone who isn't here to defend himself and likely will never be aware of it, but the effect of tarnishing reputations can have ripples we could never expect to happen.  This is a public forum, not a private conversation.  We don't know what may get repeated elsewhere, what will be taken as accurate or leave inaccurate impressions that will colour people's attitudes.  I think sometimes this is forgotten due to the limited number of the people who post here.

Given what I have heard in news reports, it appears that employers do internet searches on employees and potential employees.  If an employer ended up reading the story in a negative way in terms of risking men, if there wasn't a clear record of timing and status of the building and orders given, perhaps it could create doubt in the commander's decision.  What if his men were to read accusations and a wedge of distrust was placed?

 It wasn't a proxy war for me, though prior behaviour i saw as similar certainly affected my perspective.

If people want to chide me on being overly harsh, please do so.  I like feedback that deals with details, though vague feedback without examples kind of drives me up the wall.  PM me if you think it will break board rules.  If I push other people to change their behaviour to be less defamatory of others, I see it as appropriate that people do the same for me and I welcome on target criticism.

I also feel a need to speak up when it appears people are attaching meanings to my actions that I do not see reflected in what I have done.  I suspect everyone feels that way.

I feel some things said to me I deserved, but not all of it. Some things not. And just as you mention here in the bold, I relate to. 

Hopefully, nothing would ever tarnish the firemen involved because of my actions. I made a mistake, but the way I was treated for it, made me sick to my stomach. Like I really shouldn't interact with anyone on here again that dislikes me that much.

Edited April 24, 2017 by Tacenda

[bluebell]

55 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Hopefully, nothing would ever tarnish the firemen involved because of my actions. I made a mistake, but the way I was treated for it, made me sick to my stomach. Like I really shouldn't interact with anyone on here again that dislikes me that much.

I think the ignore button is a good way to handle those posters that you feel are not healthy for you to interact with.  It's nice that we each have that ability.  Sometimes we have to take responsibility for our own health and well being and not leave it in anyone else's hands.  

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I feel some things said to me I deserved, but not all of it. Some things not. And just as you mention here in the bold, I relate to. 

Hopefully, nothing would ever tarnish the firemen involved because of my actions. I made a mistake, but the way I was treated for it, made me sick to my stomach. Like I really shouldn't interact with anyone on here again that dislikes me that much.

Tacenda, I have found that the best way to avoid feeling sick about something if I realize I have made a mistake is to simply say I am sorry that I made a mistake and not try to explain or justify why I made that mistake even if there is a good reason.  At the very least it means those pointing out my mistake don't have a new mistake or perceived mistake to focus on.  

[Vanguard]

3 minutes ago, Calm said:

Tacenda, I have found that the best way to avoid feeling sick about something if I realize I have made a mistake is to simply say I am sorry that I made a mistake and not try to explain or justify why I made that mistake even if there is a good reason.  At the very least it means those pointing out my mistake don't have a new mistake or perceived mistake to focus on.  

Though generally I agree with you, Calm, it's also hard to admit a mistake when there are others who express outright disdain toward Tacenda such that the very reaction to the initial mistake becomes more inappropriate than the mistake itself. Though you cannot be held to account for another poster's incivility, you must recognize that both yours and the other poster's commentary took on the appearance of a tag team against Tacenda all without any evidenced concern. If we want others to own up to their mistakes we must make sure we are not inappropriate in our censure. IMO, not acknowledging this creates the perception of a significant blind spot in your own censuring of Tacenda.

[Kenngo1969]

Tacenda:

Yesssssss!!!!!!!!!!!! You got me! I confess! I am a thoroughly reprobate, thoroughly reprehensible, utterly irredeemable excuse for a human being! How dare I pick on you as I have done in this thread! How dare I?!! By doing so, I have utterly forfeited my right to continue to live in civilized society! Have I no shame??? Have I no shame??? I confess: I have none! I have no friends! (I once had a pet maggot, but even he found my company so distasteful that he chose death over continuing to live with me!) Mere weeds refuse to grow within a five mile radius of my home!  

If you find yourself utterly perplexed, utterly baffled, by my reaction to what you have written in this thread, perhaps you could revisit Johnnie Cake's “I'm Back. Did You Miss Me?” thread for a refresher about why I have reacted the way I have. At the risk of oversimplifying, I think the issues under discussion, as well as the positions of the two camps involved in the discussion, are similar.

If you think my response to your “The plot thickens” comment was unwarranted, I suppose I will have to ask, “What plot?” The only way a plot could thicken would be is if a plot existed in the first place. If you think that anyone involved in the response to the Glassell Park fire had some sort of an ulterior motive for reacting as s/he did, I have to ask, “Why?” Beyond bare speculation, exactly zero evidence of any kind of ulterior motive had been presented, yet we have more than a few posters proceeding as though such a motive is simply a given (including, with all due respect, you, if your “the plot thickens” comment is to be taken at face value). All you had to say to avoid this whole conversation is, “Oh. OK. I didn't know they were different agencies.” End of story.

Beyond that, I have a few pieces of advice for you about how to deal with irredeemable, reprobate meanies like me (It does seem as though we've had this conversation before, but, as many times as it takes, I suppose):

1. If the glass slipper fits, wear it. If not, feel free to decline, to pass it on, or to discard it.

2. If you believe someone is engaging in nothing but a naked attempt to offend you, you don't have to take the bait: You can simply refuse delivery. (You've heard that old saying about the only person who's a bigger fool than someone who takes offense when it is intended, haven't you?)

3. No one can hurt you, offend you, [fill-in-the-blank-here] you, without your consent.

4. The cloak of victimhood might be warm, stylish, and comfy, but since there's only one per person, as much as you might want to wear it 24/7/365, best case scenario, you have to take it off at least once in a while in order to wash it.

For what this is worth coming from an irredeemable, reprehensible, reprobate such as me, I bear you no ill will. I do, however, continue to reserve the right to call them as I see them, no matter who is too thin-skinned, likely to take offense, thinks I'm simply being mean, et cetera. It's not about you, but it is about what you say and about how you say it.

P.S.: Please feel absolutely free to print this out and put it up in a place where it is clearly visible from where you post most often.  

 

Edited April 25, 2017 by Kenngo1969

[california boy]

1 hour ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Tacenda:

Yesssssss!!!!!!!!!!!! You got me! I confess! I am a thoroughly reprobate, thoroughly reprehensible, utterly irredeemable excuse for a human being! How dare I pick on you as I have done in this thread! How dare I?!! By doing so, I have utterly forfeited my right to continue to live in civilized society! Have I no shame??? Have I no shame??? I confess: I have none! I have no friends! (I once had a pet maggot, but even he found my company so distasteful that he chose death over continuing to live with me!) Mere weeds refuse to grow within a five mile radius of my home!  

If you find yourself utterly perplexed, utterly baffled, by my reaction to what you have written in this thread, perhaps you could revisit Johnnie Cake's “I'm Back. Did You Miss Me?” thread for a refresher about why I have reacted the way I have. At the risk of oversimplifying, I think the issues under discussion, as well as the positions of the two camps involved in the discussion, are similar.

If you think my response to your “The plot thickens” comment was unwarranted, I suppose I will have to ask, “What plot?” The only way a plot could thicken would be is if a plot existed in the first place. If you think that anyone involved in the response to the Glassell Park fire had some sort of an ulterior motive for reacting as s/he did, I have to ask, “Why?” Beyond bare speculation, exactly zero evidence of any kind of ulterior motive had been presented, yet we have more than a few posters proceeding as though such a motive is simply a given (including, with all due respect, you, if your “the plot thickens” comment is to be taken at face value). All you had to say to avoid this whole conversation is, “Oh. OK. I didn't know they were different agencies.” End of story.

Beyond that, I have a few pieces of advice for you about how to deal with irredeemable, reprobate meanies like me (It does seem as though we've had this conversation before, but, as many times as it takes, I suppose):

1. If the glass slipper fits, wear it. If not, feel free to decline, to pass it on, or to discard it.

2. If you believe someone is engaging in nothing but a naked attempt to offend you, you don't have to take the bait: You can simply refuse delivery. (You've heard that old saying about the only person who's a bigger fool than someone who takes offense when it is intended, haven't you?)

3. No one can hurt you, offend you, [fill-in-the-blank-here] you, without your consent.

4. The cloak of victimhood might be warm, stylish, and comfy, but since there's only one per person, as much as you might want to wear it 24/7/365, best case scenario, you have to take it off at least once in a while in order to wash it.

For what this is worth coming from an irredeemable, reprehensible, reprobate such as me, I bear you no ill will. I do, however, continue to reserve the right to call them as I see them, no matter who is too thin-skinned, likely to take offense, thinks I'm simply being mean, et cetera. It's not about you, but it is about what you say and about how you say it.

P.S.: Please feel absolutely free to print this out and put it up in a place where it is clearly visible from where you post most often.  

 

Was that really necessary?  She already has apologized several times.  

[Kenngo1969]

6 hours ago, california boy said:

Was that really necessary?  She already has apologized several times.  

Was what really necessary?  You want to think I'm mean and eeeee-vuhl and reprobate and irredeemable, et cetera, ad infinitum?  Fine.  Go ahead. You won't be the first.   

You're absolutely free to think that this post is wholly inadequate for this purpose, but whatever you might think, this was my attempt to extend an olive branch to Tacenda.  You think it probably won't work, that there's nothing I can do to redeem myself?  Oh, well!   That's life.  I'm sorry I didn't follow the script that says, "Once a poster claims victimhood because of what you say and/or because of how you say it, your only remaining option is to don The Mask of Shame and to slink off into the dark corners of Stage Left."

Edited April 25, 2017 by Kenngo1969

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Was what really necessary?  You want to think I'm mean and eeeee-vuhl and reprobate and irredeemable, et cetera, ad infinitum?  Fine.  Go ahead. You won't be the first.   

You're absolutely free to think that this post is wholly inadequate for this purpose, but whatever you might think, this was my attempt to extend an olive branch to Tacenda.  You think it probably won't work, that there's nothing I can do to redeem myself?  Oh, well!   That's life.  I'm sorry I didn't follow the script that says, "Once a poster claims victimhood because of what you say and/or because of how you say it, your only remaining option is to don The Mask of Shame and to slink off into the dark corners of Stage Left."

I dislike how you and others seem to put words in my mouth. Now I'm claiming victimhood? Far from it, I'm my worst enemy, so pounce away. 

You're not extending an olive branch to me. Maybe a noose?  

You want me to print what you said to me? Why would I want to do that? To see that someone I thought was a online friend is angry with me?

I tried to figure out where your anger is coming from. Do you have any policeman in your family, I thought maybe you had, and maybe that was where that stemmed from. Not making excuses for myself. I have a friend that lost her son in a car accident recently who was a firefighter/paramedic and I thought maybe if she'd read that I thought it "careless" then she would be disappointed in me also, but I don't know that she'd be disgusted and irate. 

And then when I saw what I thought might be a negligent action on the part of the Compton department I reported that, and maybe that was a way to redeem myself? 

I thought it was a dangerous situation when the firefighters were sent in to save pictures. When I posted that I thought it was careless, I was half awake. And now regret it. I'm human, I'm not perfect, and I will make plenty more mistakes. But when I got pounced on, it was kind of hard to stomach. Just reprimand me like I'm use to. Not in a way that says you want me to leave the board, or if you do than fine. I'll let you feel that way, it just shocked me that it was over this mistake. 

 

[Johnnie Cake]

26 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I dislike how you and others seem to put words in my mouth. Now I'm claiming victimhood? Far from it, I'm my worst enemy, so pounce away. 

You're not extending an olive branch to me. Maybe a noose?  

You want me to print what you said to me? Why would I want to do that? To see that someone I thought was a online friend is angry with me?

I tried to figure out where your anger is coming from. Do you have any policeman in your family, I thought maybe you had, and maybe that was where that stemmed from. Not making excuses for myself. I have a friend that lost her son in a car accident recently who was a firefighter/paramedic and I thought maybe if she'd read that I thought it "careless" then she would be disappointed in me also, but I don't know that she'd be disgusted and irate. 

And then when I saw what I thought might be a negligent action on the part of the Compton department I reported that, and maybe that was a way to redeem myself? 

I thought it was a dangerous situation when the firefighters were sent in to save pictures. When I posted that I thought it was careless, I was half awake. And now regret it. I'm human, I'm not perfect, and I will make plenty more mistakes. But when I got pounced on, it was kind of hard to stomach. Just reprimand me like I'm use to. Not in a way that says you want me to leave the board, or if you do than fine. I'll let you feel that way, it just shocked me that it was over this mistake. 

 

Ignore him...He's not worth it in the grand scheme of things...The best way to beat a bully is to just ignore them, Bully's feed off of how you react to what they do and say. Bully's want to provoke a response from you, don't give them that pleasure...it's what they feed off.

[MiserereNobis]

10 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Tacenda:

Yesssssss!!!!!!!!!!!! You got me! I confess! I am a thoroughly reprobate, thoroughly reprehensible, utterly irredeemable excuse for a human being! How dare I pick on you as I have done in this thread! How dare I?!! By doing so, I have utterly forfeited my right to continue to live in civilized society! Have I no shame??? Have I no shame??? I confess: I have none! I have no friends! (I once had a pet maggot, but even he found my company so distasteful that he chose death over continuing to live with me!) Mere weeds refuse to grow within a five mile radius of my home!  

If you find yourself utterly perplexed, utterly baffled, by my reaction to what you have written in this thread, perhaps you could revisit Johnnie Cake's “I'm Back. Did You Miss Me?” thread for a refresher about why I have reacted the way I have. At the risk of oversimplifying, I think the issues under discussion, as well as the positions of the two camps involved in the discussion, are similar.

If you think my response to your “The plot thickens” comment was unwarranted, I suppose I will have to ask, “What plot?” The only way a plot could thicken would be is if a plot existed in the first place. If you think that anyone involved in the response to the Glassell Park fire had some sort of an ulterior motive for reacting as s/he did, I have to ask, “Why?” Beyond bare speculation, exactly zero evidence of any kind of ulterior motive had been presented, yet we have more than a few posters proceeding as though such a motive is simply a given (including, with all due respect, you, if your “the plot thickens” comment is to be taken at face value). All you had to say to avoid this whole conversation is, “Oh. OK. I didn't know they were different agencies.” End of story.

Beyond that, I have a few pieces of advice for you about how to deal with irredeemable, reprobate meanies like me (It does seem as though we've had this conversation before, but, as many times as it takes, I suppose):

1. If the glass slipper fits, wear it. If not, feel free to decline, to pass it on, or to discard it.

2. If you believe someone is engaging in nothing but a naked attempt to offend you, you don't have to take the bait: You can simply refuse delivery. (You've heard that old saying about the only person who's a bigger fool than someone who takes offense when it is intended, haven't you?)

3. No one can hurt you, offend you, [fill-in-the-blank-here] you, without your consent.

4. The cloak of victimhood might be warm, stylish, and comfy, but since there's only one per person, as much as you might want to wear it 24/7/365, best case scenario, you have to take it off at least once in a while in order to wash it.

For what this is worth coming from an irredeemable, reprehensible, reprobate such as me, I bear you no ill will. I do, however, continue to reserve the right to call them as I see them, no matter who is too thin-skinned, likely to take offense, thinks I'm simply being mean, et cetera. It's not about you, but it is about what you say and about how you say it.

P.S.: Please feel absolutely free to print this out and put it up in a place where it is clearly visible from where you post most often.  

 

You're being a jack-***.

Edited April 25, 2017 by MiserereNobis

[BlueDreams]

Obviously this is completely unsolicited and I hope it doesn't come off as board nanny-esque. But maybe it would just be a good time for all to stop. If everybody is just chronically offending the other it seems to be a bit of a waste to just keep engaging. At this point, Gray's comment seems the best: 

On 4/23/2017 at 4:14 PM, Gray said:

Came here to see what people were saying about the trust gap. Pages and pages of arguing about fire fighters.

 

With luv,

BD

[Tacenda]

Just now, BlueDreams said:

Obviously this is completely unsolicited and I hope it doesn't come off as board nanny-esque. But maybe it would just be a good time for all to stop. If everybody is just chronically offending the other it seems to be a bit of a waste to just keep engaging. At this point, Gray's comment seems the best: 

 

With luv,

BD

I so agree! I hope that we can get it back on track. I'm sorry for all the derail to bsjkki's topic. 

 

[Kenngo1969]

38 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I dislike how you and others seem to put words in my mouth. Now I'm claiming victimhood? Far from it, I'm my worst enemy, so pounce away. 

OK.  I can see your mind, along with those of several others in this thread, already is made up about my motivations for saying what I've said (and saying it how I've said it) on this thread, and I can see I'm not going to change it.  I disagree with your assessment of my motivations, with your assessment of my tone, and about whether I have been fair to you (or not).  We'll simply have to agree to disagree.

Quote

You're not extending an olive branch to me. Maybe a noose?  

Sigh.  Accepting solely for the sake of this discussion that I somehow put words in your mouth, now who's putting words in whose mouth?  And, melodramatic, much?  I want to kill people who disagree with me, want them to commit suicide, or want them to die?!  (Even in jest ... ?) Please!   Talk about well-poisoning.  

Although I said it in jest in my previous post, apparently I didn't realize how right I really am about what a reprehensible, reprobate, utterly irredeemable excuse for a human being some people on this thread think I am.  OK.  So be it.  If that's what they think, there's nothing I can say which will change their minds. They're entitled to their respective opinions.  Those who know me best (and in case you're wondering, that list doesn't include anyone here, even though I've bared my soul in this place more than a few times) are the ones who think highest of me. But you've garnered a lot of sympathy making me out to be the Bad Guy, so I guess if it works ...  

Quote

You want me to print what you said to me? Why would I want to do that? To see that someone I thought was a online friend is angry with me?

That is what, apparently, you will never get, no matter how many times I've tried to explain it to you:

IT'S

NOT

PERSONAL!

It never has been, never will be.  Other than your on-line, anonymous persona, I don't know you, and probably never will.  Do I think you (and others in this thread, perhaps) are a bit thin-skinned?  Yes.  At times, so am I.  I might disagree with you; I might, at times, be absolutely befuddled by your world-view; but none of that means that I have anything against you, personally.

My previous post was constructive criticism.  It was an (apparently unsuccessful) attempt to get you to see something that you apparently thought was nothing more than a substance-free, vicious attack in a different light.  He's a bully?  Fine.  Ignore him.  Laugh it off.  Refuse to wear the glass slipper if it doesn't fit.  Refuse to take offense upon attempted delivery (accepting, solely for the sake of discussion, that people are trying to offend).  

But I guess you don't think any of those things are viable options.  If not, I suppose I'll simply have to limit my interactions with you.  Some people I deal with on a frequent basis, I don't even so much as call them by their first names or say more than "Hello" or "Have a good day" to because, in ways large and small, they've put me on notice that to do anything else, I'm going to have to do the equivalent of trying to walk on eggshells around those people without breaking the eggshells, and, frankly, it's not worth it ... for either one of us.

You are especially prone to think that I am attacking you personally, that I'm simply out for blood, and that's not true.  Am I a fan of faulty logic?  No, and I reserve the right to point it out when I see it (although I guess I'm simply going to have to give you a pass, in order to avoid people questioning my methods, my motives, and so on, as they have done in this thread).  Am I prone to being blunt and forthright?  Yes.  Always have been, both in the 17-18 years I've posted on this board and its predecessors and elsewhere.  But again (although, apparently, I'll never convince you of this) it's not personal.

Quote

I tried to figure out where your anger is coming from.

Good luck with that!   I wish I could help you, but you'll probably always have a tough time figuring out where my "anger" is coming from, since 90%-plus of what I post here (including what I've posted on this thread) isn't motivated by anger!

Quote

Do you have any policeman in your family, I thought maybe you had, and maybe that was where that stemmed from.

 I've only mentioned my connection to law enforcement (I come from a law enforcement family, and my father was a cop for 43 years) an average of perhaps once a month in the time I've posted on this Board and its predecessors.

Quote

Not making excuses for myself. I have a friend that lost her son in a car accident recently who was a firefighter/paramedic and I thought maybe if she'd read that I thought it "careless" then she would be disappointed in me also, but I don't know that she'd be disgusted and irate. 

I doubt she'd be disappointed, let alone disgusted and irate.  If so, you could let that be her problem rather than making it yours, but but then, as I mention above, I guess that's simply one of the possible solutions that you, for whatever reason, will decline to implement.  And you have yet to establish that I'm "disgusted and irate": Forthright?  Yes.  Blunt?  Yes. Unwilling to suffer faulty logic silently or gladly?  Yes.  But "angry, disgusted, and irate"?  Rarely.

Quote

And then when I saw what I thought might be a negligent action on the part of the Compton department I reported that, and maybe that was a way to redeem myself?

Hmm.  That's interesting, because, at first, insofar as I know (though I certainly welcome correction) you gave every impression, at first, of thinking that possibly the same agency and the same senior/command personnel were involved in both incidents.

I could definitely be wrong (on-line interactions aren't necessarily a basis for drawing such conclusions: I'm certainly not the frothing-at-the-mouth, growing, snarling, spitting, caricature I've been made out to be by some here, but, as I say, it's useless for me to try to change their minds) but even after years of interacting with you, I'm still not sure "what [you're] used to."  You've had years to try to get used to the rough-and-tumble on this board, to the forthrightness and bluntness of certain posters, to learn to let alleged criticism roll like water off of a duck's back, and so on, and yet, with all due respect, apparently, you haven't done it.  Maybe, at this point, it's worth yourself asking why not.

 

 

[Kenngo1969]

22 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

You're being a jack-***.

You're entitled to your opinion, and you're not alone.  I'm perfectly fine with that.  I wish you well.  Have a great day!  

[ttribe]

3 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

OK.  I can see your mind, along with those of several others in this thread, already is made up about my motivations for saying what I've said (and saying it how I've said it) on this thread, and I can see I'm not going to change it.  I disagree with your assessment of my motivations, with your assessment of my tone, and about whether I have been fair to you (or not).  We'll simply have to agree to disagree.

Sigh.  Accepting solely for the sake of this discussion that I somehow put words in your mouth, now who's putting words in whose mouth?  And, melodramatic, much?  I want to kill people who disagree with me, want them to commit suicide, or want them to die?!  (Even in jest ... ?) Please!   Talk about well-poisoning.  

Although I said it in jest in my previous post, apparently I didn't realize how right I really am about what a reprehensible, reprobate, utterly irredeemable excuse for a human being some people on this thread think I am.  OK.  So be it.  If that's what they think, there's nothing I can say which will change their minds. They're entitled to their respective opinions.  Those who know me best (and in case you're wondering, that list doesn't include anyone here, even though I've bared my soul in this place more than a few times) are the ones who think highest of me. But you've garnered a lot of sympathy making me out to be the Bad Guy, so I guess if it works ...  

That is what, apparently, you will never get, no matter how many times I've tried to explain it to you:

IT'S

NOT

PERSONAL!

It never has been, never will be.  Other than your on-line, anonymous persona, I don't know you, and probably never will.  Do I think you (and others in this thread, perhaps) are a bit thin-skinned?  Yes.  At times, so am I.  I might disagree with you; I might, at times, be absolutely befuddled by your world-view; but none of that means that I have anything against you, personally.

My previous post was constructive criticism.  It was an (apparently unsuccessful) attempt to get you to see something that you apparently thought was nothing more than a substance-free, vicious attack in a different light.  He's a bully?  Fine.  Ignore him.  Laugh it off.  Refuse to wear the glass slipper if it doesn't fit.  Refuse to take offense upon attempted delivery (accepting, solely for the sake of discussion, that people are trying to offend).  

But I guess you don't think any of those things are viable options.  If not, I suppose I'll simply have to limit my interactions with you.  Some people I deal with on a frequent basis, I don't even so much as call them by their first names or say more than "Hello" or "Have a good day" to because, in ways large and small, they've put me on notice that to do anything else, I'm going to have to do the equivalent of trying to walk on eggshells around those people without breaking the eggshells, and, frankly, it's not worth it ... for either one of us.

You are especially prone to think that I am attacking you personally, that I'm simply out for blood, and that's not true.  Am I a fan of faulty logic?  No, and I reserve the right to point it out when I see it (although I guess I'm simply going to have to give you a pass, in order to avoid people questioning my methods, my motives, and so on, as they have done in this thread).  Am I prone to being blunt and forthright?  Yes.  Always have been, both in the 17-18 years I've posted on this board and its predecessors and elsewhere.  But again (although, apparently, I'll never convince you of this) it's not personal.

Good luck with that!   I wish I could help you, but you'll probably always have a tough time figuring out where my "anger" is coming from, since 90%-plus of what I post here (including what I've posted on this thread) isn't motivated by anger!

 I've only mentioned my connection to law enforcement (I come from a law enforcement family, and my father was a cop for 43 years) an average of perhaps once a month in the time I've posted on this Board and its predecessors.

I doubt she'd be disappointed, let alone disgusted and irate.  If so, you could let that be her problem rather than making it yours, but but then, as I mention above, I guess that's simply one of the possible solutions that you, for whatever reason, will decline to implement.  And you have yet to establish that I'm "disgusted and irate": Forthright?  Yes.  Blunt?  Yes. Unwilling to suffer faulty logic silently or gladly?  Yes.  But "angry, disgusted, and irate"?  Rarely.

Hmm.  That's interesting, because, at first, insofar as I know (though I certainly welcome correction) you gave every impression, at first, of thinking that possibly the same agency and the same senior/command personnel were involved in both incidents.

I could definitely be wrong (on-line interactions aren't necessarily a basis for drawing such conclusions: I'm certainly not the frothing-at-the-mouth, growing, snarling, spitting, caricature I've been made out to be by some here, but, as I say, it's useless for me to try to change their minds) but even after years of interacting with you, I'm still not sure "what [you're] used to."  You've had years to try to get used to the rough-and-tumble on this board, to the forthrightness and bluntness of certain posters, to learn to let alleged criticism roll like water off of a duck's back, and so on, and yet, with all due respect, apparently, you haven't done it.  Maybe, at this point, it's worth yourself asking why not.

 

 

[Kenngo1969]

1 hour ago, Johnnie Cake said:

Ignore him...He's not worth it in the grand scheme of things...The best way to beat a bully is to just ignore them, Bully's feed off of how you react to what they do and say. Bully's want to provoke a response from you, don't give them that pleasure...it's what they feed off.

That's great advice.  I try to ignore trolls, too, but in your case, somehow, I find that ... difficult.  

[Kenngo1969]

1 minute ago, ttribe said:

I don't buy that you even had time to read my post, let alone to consider it carefully enough to ponder whether it had any merit before posting that meme, but if hittin'-and-runnin' is your MO ...  

[BlueDreams]

2 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

That's great advice.  I try to ignore trolls, too, but in your case, somehow, I find that ... difficult.  

Kenngo. Stop. It's really not the point of the thread.

 

with luv,

BD

[Kenngo1969]

2 minutes ago, BlueDreams said:

Kenngo. Stop. It's really not the point of the thread.

 

with luv,

BD

Sorry.  I'm not going to stop defending myself simply because you're perfectly fine with my being attacked.  That's not what you tell your clients, is it?

[Kenngo1969]

20 hours ago, SmileyMcGee said:

Removed

 

I didn't see what it said, but I imagine it was directed at me.  Removal was probably wise.  

[BlueDreams]

5 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Sorry.  I'm not going to stop defending myself simply because you're perfectly fine with my being attacked.  That's not what you tell your clients, is it?

Yes I do. Particularly when they're obviously escalated. At some point more words don't help. It's what I'd tell anyone when they're becoming reactive. 

With luv,

BD