I rarely ridicule, and when I do it's in response to claims which I genuinely believe to be ridiculous.[Shuz] wrote:You can never justify continuing an argument with someone whose very tactic in argument is to ridicule, attack and negatively critique absolutely every single bloody thing. He never has a compliment, or a positive word to say, not even so much a neutral opinion. With Aidan, it's just constant negativity. If he can just pull his head in, and stop resorting to the 'no' defense, and that ridiculous post-breakdown of his, then I'll have a discussion with him. Otherwise for the time being, I'll do whatever the fuck I please and reply how I want.
Last time I posted a neutral opinion in response to one of your posts you ignored it. Fair enough, you're under no obligation to answer, but don't then pretend it never happens.
What's ridiculous about Usenet style breakdowns? They have the advantage of making it clear what I'm responding to, which could be quite useful when the posts are long.
You are AFAIC free to reply how you want (the mods may disagree, but never on my account). So if you want to go ahead, but keep in mind it's not my head that's in the sand.
Serious question: does everyone else think I'm too negative? Most people dislike AOL style postings (Me too) so where I agree I tend to keep quiet. But if there's one person I really don't want to resemble, it's Tony Abbott - so if what's left really does look like relentless negativity, I apologise.