Brief corrective interjection here.
Almost commented yesterday on how Bingo can't stay out of Off Topic in spite of himself, but thought better of it. He comes here all the time. He just doesn't post. A timely interjection like this proves it.
I stopped posting on off topic (I still post occasionally on the obituary section and like now to make a specific point about my absence) because it became tiresome and frustrating for me to be frequently called to book over controversial ideas I have come to by use of reason and the application of evidence and open to correction by people who write reams advertising and explaining the "faith of their parents".
Bingo was not obliged to read my thread, and if he did, he was always welcome to honest discussion and not ignorant criticism. Here is the difference:
Honest critique: I read once that Joseph Smith preached A, yet did B. This seems quite contradictory, and for this I think Mormonism is false.
Ignorant flatulence: You believe numerous crazy things so don't you dare try to debate my conspiracy theories.
The latter was Bingo's style. He did not specify what the crazy things were that I believed, only that I had to be a little nuts for believing them. He did not bring up such topics in the appropriate places (i.e. my discussion of Mormonism thread), but rather used his criticism of my beliefs as a defense to his beliefs. He did not ever defend the actual reasons why I challenged his ideas. He had two or three supporting bits of evidence for his conspiracies, I had quite a bit more to counter it, yet I was the idiot because I'm Mormon. Can anyone please explain how being Mormon disqualifies me from pointing holes in someone's logic on a completely different topic.
If you ever return, Mr. Wings, apply your criticism to the correct topics and I will be much more open to the discussion of the "faith of my fathers" than you apparently are with your faulty logic.
You know the drill...
Warb is correct I chose to not write here. He isn't the contributor who brought me to this conclusive act. Maybe when the new forum goes online the fun sections of off topic can be separated from the political (and religion is wholly political in this context) silly sections so I can go back to what I enjoyed doing most here.
I lack the strength of character to keep my fingers from typing when I see something utterly daft or mean spirited on the internet and this leads me into conversations which poke at rather tender inflamed near the bone parts of my personality.
If anyone can point out how I was mean spirited with Bingowings, I'd appreciate it. Such was never my intent. Have I ever lost my temper with him? Yes, but those occasions were when he would seemingly deliberately ignore any clarifications or statements I'd repeatedly make, accusing me of saying other (usually mean) things. When I've been mean to anyone, I've apologized. But even then, the meanest things I can recall saying to him were calling him dense for not getting what I had repeatedly restated. Never did I criticize his sexual orientation, spirituality, or even his conspiracy theories. I merely debated him forcefully. And yet, in spite of this post, I know with a great assurance that he will read it, go back to the other forums and fume about how he was right all along, ignoring my declarations now as he has before.
I have the same problem with DerTubez and Faceboot. I've been chased around the web by someone trying to get me to sign an inaccurate petition. I've had people ask me to 'friend' them only to make bitey presuming comments at me. You need a real masochist streak to volunteer to shove your face into that.
As for Warb I think personal comments about him are counter productive. I have come to suspect medical conditions play a part in some of what he says while the bulk of what he says comes from a person trying to do what he thinks is the right thing. Which is admirable and what I try and frequently fail to do.
It would not be a good idea for me to come back to off topic in it's current form and I think it's handy for Warb to have a virtual space to meet up with people and talk about the stuff he talks about.
Fun blethering and all but I'm currently having a Michael Caine moment, stuck in an angry sewer full of shouty pepper pots... again!
Funny thing about this is that whenever we did have a problem, I was the one who'd apologize and try to straighten things out. I was the the one who would admit my shortcomings in a discussion. I was the one who would praise him for the qualities I'd like.
Times Bingowings praised darth_ender for something in spite of disagreeing: 0
Times Bingowings EVER admitted he was wrong to darth_ender: 0
Times Bingowings EVER apologized to darth_ender: 0
Times Bingowings EVER reached out to improved his relationship with darth_ender: 0
Of course I haven't kept exact score, but I assure you that on all these things, I have a score much higher than Bingowings. I feel I've been the bigger man in every way, and he will still never acknowledge it. Unless he can grow up a bit, I don't really want to talk to him. If I ever had a friend this self-absorbed and self-righteous in real life, you can bet I wouldn't keep him long. A real friendship involves give and take, not just take.
Don't worry, Wabler. He will read it. No one needs to quote it. He simply won't comment on it, just as he won't on mine.
I remember in high school, my dad would tell me, "Son, you need to work harder. We can't tell you to do your homework and chores 40 times a day."
I would reply, feeling clever, "Well, I see Mom making your lunch every day. Why don't you at least make your lunch?"
At the time I felt that pointing out my dad's faults would justify my own. He pointed out the fallacy in such thinking, but it wasn't till I was older that I realized that such techniques do not make a case. Someone else's wrongs don't make me right.
And yet, such is the exact style of the much beloved Bingowings.