Originally Posted by Gunther
Con't, Android messed me up again.
You implied his stupidity, I.e., doesn't apply more than very basic thinking, and in a particularly snarky and subtle way. Own that, you do it often, typically when you become exasperated at someone's stubbornness in sticking to a position.
@mmvac never responds this way. Hell, he once even got frustrated with something I said and let me know it but in a straightforward simple way, no attack, just a point.
My point is, as the owner of the site and it's moderator at times, you often admonish others for their intolerant posts. I find it potentially hypocritical because as I mentioned, I think you are one of the most active practioners of snark. I'd only ask to consider this when you become frustrated with someone. Not me though, fire away at me, esp on those rare occasions I am incorrect.
A couple of things here. I don't believe that you're giving Erik nearly enough credit in regards to "owning it." In your first post, you played the "go ahead, trash me" card, which is frustrating in itself, because that never happens, so why that card gets played so often, I have no idea. And on top of that, instead of trashing you, not only did he respond by admitting that he could stand to be less blunt with people, he started a new thread that is basically a green light for people to air their greivances against him. If I'm doing that, it's to learn more about myself and what others think and to see what I can do to improve off of it. Oh, and in a gesture of appeasement (no frickin idea if thats actually a saying, but it sounds good ;)) he went ahead and re-wrote the offending post.
Secondly, in trying to read it while pretending to not know any of the history of the thread, I can see how it reads pretty snarky. But it's obvious enough (to me, at least) that when somebody writes something so vague, and directs it to somebody else in particular, that it's got some backstory. (And Erik obviously recognizes this too because he editted it) And if I don't fully understand the post, then it's probably a fair assumption that I don't know that backstory and should probably stay out of it.
Originally Posted by Jeremie Boop
That's not what I think he meant, he's saying there should have been an indicator in this thread not the thread it was pulled from. That line just made it look, to me, that this whole thread was moved, not started based off that post.
Actually, that line appears in his first post in this thread as well. Although, I agree that it probably would make sense in these cases to either add a tiny note to the title or put that line in the OP above the post that prompted the move.