Board Thread:Off Topic/@comment-50.169.220.77-20140311014922/@comment-70.192.192.213-20140706070437

Yes, I've been typing this for over two hours, so I may be a little behind on the current conversation.

Please let me speak for myself. Thanks for taking my side Akin, but let me fight my own battles.

Faolind wrote: What you wrote ^ First off... the tone of my response was not due to copy-paste, rather (Warning, lengthy explanation inbound), I am known to rant excessively over little things. One of my pet peeves (Is it still called a pet peeve if it makes you instantly hit your rage-cap?) is people telling me I'm wrong (and on top of that, stupid) for no other reason than that they feel I'm wrong. It's their opinion that my opinion is wrong (which is exactly what the WC said). No reason, no sense, no evidence - I'm just wrong because some random person I've never even met has told me I am. And they expect that not only to pass as a valid argument, but they expect me to roll over and take that without a fight? They expect simply saying things with no backing whatsoever will be more effective than evidence, or, at least, well reasoned thought? It's ignorant, plain and simple.

If you can't tell, this issue makes me want to explode in rage. If you'll notice in my origional response, I didn't. That's also why I Kudos'd myself - I was giving myself the kudos for not raging like a blind idiot. If you've got a problem with it, tell me how to "Un-kudos" it and I will. It's not that big of a deal to me. Hell, if it means that much to you, I'll Kudos his comment to even things out.

Anyway, my rebuttal. Bear with me here.

What I think has happened here is simple - we've interpreted the text in different ways. You've taken it at face-value (I'm not saying that you're wrong) and I've read into it. Where you see someone simply expressing their opinion, I see a thinly-veiled challenge to my right to believe what I do. And I'm not standing for that.

This is what I see:

"Saying otherwise sounds idiotic"  can be simplified to "What you said is idiotic" or, because I was stating my opinions, "Your opinions are idiotic"... and, because I am the sole creator of my opinions, "You're an idiot for believing what you do". This can also be easily seen as meaning, "I know better than you". I'll again point to the WC's support for this assertion, which, if you'll notice, is completely absent. Moreover, the inclusion of "...in ways I cannot personally describe" implies that the opposing side (myself) has a view so morbid or despicable that, in order to describe it, the WC would have to use language he's not comfortable with using. This clearly means that he would like to call me far worse things that "stupid". But that's not the point.

Back to my main issue - the assertions and complete lack of any evidence to support them. I'd like to take this time to state that, had he come to the table with anything to support his argument (As the people before him did, and if you'll notice, I had problems with none of them. Hell, you were one of them, and I never got angry with you), I wouldn't be insulted. Rather, I'd welcome the debate. But when all you say is "You're wrong and stupid because I say so", there is no logical response. It's either lash out or deal with it. I refuse to do the first (I actually deleted over half of my original response - all firey, all unnecessary) and, as I've already explained, I have problems with the second.

What am I to do? Well, maintain a level head and respond calmly. Problem is, that's kind of hard when you feel like you want to punch a brick wall.

It's not really about being called stupid - because you're right, that's not really insulting - rather, it's the assumption (By the WC) that some random person has enough authority over me to tell me when I'm right or wrong with no backing at all. Why are his opinions, said without evidence or, seemingly, even thought, superior to mine, which are backed by logic and reason that I took time thinking about? That's more insulting than words can ever be.

... it's going on 3 a.m. where I live, so I'm going to bed. If there's still a debate, I'll continue it tomorrow.