I don’t have mental problems, this advice was only for you.
Moreover, you jumped into discussion to do nothing else than spread your delusions about posters. If you still can’t understand why it is bad, well, I have nothing more to say to you.
Mental illness is an adventure.
5 Likes
This discussion left the rails from the moment the OP posted it. Hijinks ensued, of which most were not hilarious. Some people made some good points, but they’re lost in the noise now.
4 Likes
If you have spotted a mistake in anything I have posted, please specify it. I am just a human and prone to errors.
But if you can’t do that, I demand you to cease trolling at once (and maybe bring apologies too if you’d like to position yourself as a worthy person to deal with), since it’s responses like yours generate the noise and because responses like yours it’s hard to find comments of respectable posters with whom a discussion can be made.
My ability, or lack thereof, to bring specific examples of any errors on your part do not diminish the travesty that this thread has become almost from its inception. However, if this request is sincere then I would happily point out whichever errors I believe relevant.
I do however note the employment of the troll gambit. Immediately announcing someone critical, even of the discussion in a general sense, a troll is merely an attempt to thwart meaningful dialog. This is not something that you would do, right Diana?
5 Likes
Affirmative.
As for “troll gambit”, there’s really nothing special in here, I just speak about what I see, and would you agree, your post wasn’t really a healthy comment for the discussion topic presented, wouldn’t you?
But, despite what enemies of the State love to claim about me, I am actually quite reasonable and I can easily be approached. So, if that was a honest mistake, here I am, at your service.
I am always eager to offer people second chance, just keep in mind, it doesn’t guarantee I offer third: I have short temper and low tolerance.
So, here you go, I am open to listen what you have to say or object me with on the subject and discuss your ideas.
My corporation and alliance are currently in the middle of preparing to move out of our current location. While I’ll gladly look for the errors you wish for me to find, it may be some time before I can do so in a proper and thoughtful fashion. So I ask for patience.
Before I do so I would like to ask the same question I asked in another thread to you, so that we are operating from the same page and using the same terms. In fact, I may have several just so that we can establish a common grounds for meaningful conversation. My first question is, what would it take to convince you that someone’s claims are true?
2 Likes
That is not a question on the topic, but fine, I will grant you an answer.
Well, because it is really simple question, and the answer is: verifiable facts.
I am Caldari, and we tend to percieve things as they are, trying to see past any subjective interpretations.
However, I would like here to put one more point: not all claims can be even theoretically verified. For example, whatever you will do, you will never be able to convince me in absence of God or convince me that it is your religion is right, simply because neither absence nor existence of God can be verified. Thus such sort of convincing me will be futile. On the other hand, I am open to listening about your religion and worldview, provided you won’t be trying to “convince me in your claims”.
This is provably false.
Consider that in a past discussion of Tibus Heth, I mentioned a variety of his activities that were provably a part of the historical record. You then roundly rejected that these activities occurred, even when confronted with numerous citations.
Here, my original comments; here, your refusal; here, my citations; here, your refusal to consider even the historical record.
Diana Kim, if you are indeed able to be convinced by verifiable facts, then you know that Tibus Heth nearly bankrupted Kaalakiota, that his forces downed a freighter of Kaalakiota employees protesting Heth’s failure to fully institute his reforms, and that he ordered the destruction of Caldari Prime and then coerced Yanala-haani to drink the tea.
4 Likes
That most certainly is not.
The problem is, that:
- I do not wish to discuss heroes with cowards.
- I do not wish to discuss honorable people with dishonorable people.
- I do not wish to discuss Caldari people with a liar, who on multiple occasions was slandering Caldari officers.
- This discussion is neither about me
- Nor about Tibus Heth.
- And I do not wish to discuss ANYTHING with trolls, who were bringing against me some 4-year old meaningless kill reports in an unrelated discussion.
That means six times “Go Away, Makoto Priano”, and don’t bother us anymore with your blind hatred.
Case in point.
6 Likes
It is relevant though as you asked me to provide examples of where you erred. Before I do so, I need to know if you’ll accept any verifiable examples I can find.
Let the record show that Ms. Kim says that she will stand by any verifiable facts found even if they go against her claims
I find this an extraordinary claim, to be honest. Can you think of no time when any Caldari have made decisions based on personal bias rather than verifiable facts?
I’m not asking you to prove a negative, particularly one that would involve such a large search space to find something so ill defined as a god. I’m talking about claims that should have verifiable evidence from reliable sources if they’re at all true. If I can, and I’m not saying I can, find this evidence that you’ve erred will you accept it?
3 Likes
Which you never did.
And for whether I will accept verifiable facts, for Maker’s sake, don’t let me repeat for you. I am a Caldari Officer, not a kindergarten teacher. And I have already said that I have short temper.
Don’t try my patience, I am already running out of it.
I have clearly said tend, tendency does NOT imply 100% guarantee. We are humans, not machines. Well, we as a group that includes myself, I won’t extend this generalization on you just in case to not claim something wrong by mistake, considering you ask such questions.
GUESS. (Shouldn’t be so hard since I have answered that before).
Though considering you are walking around instead of actually bringing anything of value and ask weird questions, I am growing a suspicion that you’ll try to shoot some sort of your own (or someone’s else) interpretation of a fact, trying to represent it as universal truth. Am I right?
We’re establishing the ground rules and define terms for the discussion. Do you wish to have the discussion?
I found your post a touch confusing but upon reading it over I admit I erred. You had indeed committed to accepting evidence even if it contradicted you. Allow me to apologize.
I still find your claim extraordinary. Do you have any good evidence to support your conclusion that Caldari are more perceptive than most?
I’m not sure what you’re trying to imply here.
As I said before, I’m attempting to establish ground rules and define terms for our conversation. It’s taken us this many posts to establish that you’ll accept verifiable evidence if it contradicts your claims. I’ve been very careful to avoid misrepresenting you and your claims and have asked for clarification numerous times to achieve that.
So no, you’re not right.
3 Likes
I had this idea, but I am already starting to feel it was a mistake.
Don’t misinterpret my words, I never claimed that. If you are not sure what I’ve meant - ask, instead of making a nuisance out of yourself and demanding evidence for your own assumption.
If such behavior is you “ground rule” for discussion, I have no further interest in continuing this farce.
That your demand was alogical and absurd.
Not us. You. Since I’ve given definitive and unequivocal reply right after you’ve asked.
Wrong. Proof:
Your proof only bolsters my claim that I’ve worked hard not to misrepresent you. You made a claim that Caldari tend to see things as they actually are and I asked for evidence that Caldari are especially perceptive. I fail to see the problem here.
2 Likes
That’s too bad.
It seemed like a straight forward claim from you. You explained it earlier which only convinced me that my interpretation was correct. Perhaps you could explain it better this time and avoiding any side comments about my character that might color my interpretation
2 Likes
My behavior is to get us to agree on certain things, such as rules and terms. I’m not trying to fool or trick you in any way.
1 Like
The problem was that it was your conclusion, not mine, and you dared to ask me to bring evidence for your own conclusion.
Correct questions would be:
a) asking for evidences that Caldari tend to percieve things as they are [etc];
b) asking if I think that Caldari are more perceptive than most or no.
You did neither. You made your own interpretation of my words and asked me to prove YOUR interpretation, not my words.
I have no time for crap like that.
I asked
Which is very much the same as a). Is it because I said it’s your conclusion? I didn’t say it, nobody else in the thread said it. I’m sorry, but I don’t see why this is an issue or could be construed as a misinterpretation when you say I should be asking that question.
Yes, I’m finding this tiresome and frustrating as well.
2 Likes