Apologies for misreading your previous post.
But in your original post, you said "The email went straight to my junk folder" So isn't that due to a "technical reason" (the term I used originally, I used technical problem in my sloppy follow up post).
When I said technical reasons, I had meant not knowing there was a PM due to a issue with their e-mail or a lack of access to their e-mail, as opposed to having received it and choosing not to respond. Some inference skills are needed to read that post.
"Some inference skills are needed to read that post."
Unlike your original post, right?
This is my last post today on this, it has evolved into more than I had in mind when I started. If you wish to continue the discussion, please PM me.
But to @Noodle King, one the one end of the spectrum, a brief comment, a soundbite that most posters are quite masterful with, cannot possibly contain enough information to intelligently discuss the issue. On the other end, things will get out of hand if one has to explicitly explain every minutia of every idea and point (think legal documents). Hence there is a happy medium where most intellectual debates occur. However, in order to engage, one has to be able to infer the meaning of the argument in order to gain the context in which things are said as to fully understand it.
In my original post, I'm sure there were many ideas in there that were not explicitly said. If you believe that it was straight forward and no thought needs to be put into it, then that's your prerogative.
And to @Noodley, sent you a PM if you wish to further discuss the question and supposition in your last post.
Again, notice how the arguments are focused on arguing what a "technical Problem" is, and lost in the shuffle was the other point, "Notice now no one really discussed the issues I raised nor offered any insightful perspective or substantive counter-point, it's just the same old silly remarks and personal attacks."
So instead of focusing on the real contention of my argument, people focused on the trivial.
If you want people to focus on a specific point, then make a specific point. Just like another poster here, you make 65 points and complain when people respond to certain points and not others. Why are you posting things if only to later admit your post was at least in part, trivial?
I can understand why people do not respond to some attempts to start discussions.
As much as I hate breaking my word, I feel this is more important than my word.
redjon sent me a PM saying that the "failed philosophy essay" was simply sarcasm, one which I failed to appreciate at the time. So I will publicly apologize to redjon for mistaking it as an attack.
Sorry red!
In my opinion, redjon's comment was perhaps a bit on the snarky side. But not vicious. I think it's within reasonable limits and people are well within their rights to make such comments.
The fact that you reacted to strongly to it suggests that there is something wrong with YOU.
It's not reasonable to expect people to always be polite when they don't agree with what you're saying.
Tonyaod and HFCAMPO, please get off the internet since you're not able to engage in normal conversation where people are challenging your comments.
Not the other way around expecting everyone to tiptoe around your excessively ridiculously fragile unhealthy egos.
