fiddletown said:
[redacted, upon advice of Lh's counsel]
[To be clear: the above is not a quote by fiddletown; Loosedhorse was going to quote fiddletown, but has been advised against it. He has also been advised against part of the response he was going to make to that quote, so:]
[redacted, on advice of Lh's counsel]
If you want to force everyone to conform to your standards, fiddle, start your own forum. Otherwise, live by this one's rules. You want someone to follow special rules that you yourself have decided upon? Ask for it, nicely. Don't try to order people around with your imperious "Don't do it"s. Please?
You are a lawyer. You know the effects of words, and use them to help or injure. You know about threats. Your "you are not authorized, don't do it" bullying has hurt this discussion, and any credibility you had with me.
I've been disputing for a living for more than thirty years.
So, what? That makes you special enough to tell others what they must do on a forum? And allowed to bully others? Get over yourself, dude. Here, you're just another poster--just like any of us.
I won't also say, as you have to me, "Surely you can find a better way in which to express yourself." Because you use words for a living, so I expect you chose yours carefully, and meant the threat you implied. Politeness was possible, but you chose the low road.
Justin said:
I don't cover people with the muzzle of a weapon in a gun store.
Never meant to imply that you do. I just have my hands full usually getting gun store clerks to avoid covering me with anything
except the muzzles of action-open guns.
Justin said:
Loosedhorse said:
And when is the last time you referred to a DA revolver with the cylinder swung open as having an open action?
Hey, Justin, I understand that you're just tripping over yourself trying to insult me. But if you'd taken the time to be a little more careful, you would have discovered that the guy who was confused by the term actions-open as it applies to revolvers was
fiddletown. You took his quote, and attributed it TO ME in error. Let me save fiddletown the trouble: "YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO DO THAT!"
Justin said:
If you're the sort of person who would be confused by such a simple command, perhaps you ought not be handling guns
Hey, fiddle, this is Justin's insult, directed at me. He meant to direct it at you. Just trying to clear things up!
Justin said:
Loosedhorse said:
Lots of bits of semantic nitpicking about the four rules with no suggestions for actually improving them.
Oh, look, an attempt to look clever by nit-picking the semantics of the four rules!
Again, Justin. Attributing a quotation to me that
I never said, and as far as I can tell, no one in this thread has said. And then insulting me for it, even though I never said it.
Your'e a moderator, right? Great example to set.
Shame on you. No wonder fiddletown is allowed to bully here.
I seriously doubt you've got the experience to have valid insights into the situations where the four rules may not necessarily apply.
Ah. Please specify what meets your criteria for "the experience" necessary to have "valid insights;" and explain how you arrived at your criteria. Then I can tell you if I meet them.
It's nice to know that there are criteria for vaild opinions--perhaps you should post them at the top of the forum, to keep the ignorant away? Or just to inform them they may listen to their betters, but not interrupt?
Oh, just to correct
another inaccuracy of yours: as far as I'm concerned, the Four Rules ALWAYS apply. (If we differ as to our opinion of what the Four Rules mean--isn't that a problem of the rules' lack of clarity? Or perhaps my teachers were not of the right stripe? Perhaps we need also a list of acceptable teachers?)
Old krow said:
I'd be interested in seeing a study done on it, but I haven't.
May I just say, sincerely, Old krow, THANK YOU for responding nicely to something I said? Quite a relief!
Besides that, I have read your comment, and I appreciate your sharing your experience. And I take it to heart.