[sillysaurusx]

What on earth are you on about? You seem to have unilaterally declared that I was being sassy, when in fact this exists nowhere other than your own head. Then you run around like a sheriff on a power trip ranting about protecting the community from us sassy brats.

Brass tacks: you need to stop what you’re doing, or you’re going to get yourself penalized by the mods. They have a duty to protect the intellectual curiosity of the site. Trust me when I say it’s no fun to be in the penalty box.

You can start by re-reading the guidelines and paying particular attention to "don’t cross examine," along with realizing that it’s not okay to be calling people a dick multiple times when they’re engaging in good faith.

Your call. Either way, I wash my hands of you and this conversation.

[uoaei]

"a large number of humans can’t extrapolate either" demonstrates that you're operating under the belief that there are people whom you consider as less-than. What's good faith about that? You don't really have the high horse you think you do here.

You know, you're not the first one to invent and deploy the plausible-deniability-/just-being-civil-style sass. Maybe I'm the first one to call you out on it as transparent, though.

It's ironic that your accusations are followed immediately by your playing mods' deputy. Don't worry they already know me, and I know the limits past which they choose to intervene.

Again, I hope you can understand that self-awareness and good faith are pillars of fruitful conversation here. It helps no one to avoid acknowledging the kinds of rhetoric and tactics you engage in. Good faith entails understanding the fundaments of the belief systems you portray and propagate, or at least being humble when you don't.

[sillysaurusx]

At no point have you made a coherent reply to anything that I’ve said. You haven’t explained your position. You haven’t explained what you’re arguing against. And I have not one clue what you could possibly mean by “people whom you consider as less-than." And I don’t care to know, because you’re off in la la land fighting the good fight against demons that exist only in your dreams. I’m trying to snap you out of it. Far from being on a high horse or playing mods’ deputy, I was trying to look out for you as one community member to another.

You are speaking to someone who has been active in this community since day two of its public launch, back when it was called startup news. Normally I don’t appeal to authority, but I’m hoping that whatever delusion you’re under will be dispelled by the realization. When you say I’m not operating in good faith, not only is that mistaken, but it’s plainly mistaken. You can ask any of the hundreds of people I’ve engaged with over the years whether I have ever once done what you seem convinced I’m doing here.

Since self preservation doesn’t seem to rank highly on your priority list, I urge you to chill out before you get to know the mods a lot better than you currently do. Because my instincts are screaming “this person is on a collision course with the mods, and they’ll be busting out the paddle sooner or later." Just because they don’t notice you breaking the rules doesn’t mean diddly-squat. It just means they’re not omniscient, and if you keep rolling the dice like this you’re going to hit snake eyes sooner or later.

I’m going to sleep. I have a newborn to care for. I’ve tried to help you as much as I can. I genuinely wish you the best of luck, and I hope you’ll stop going around poisoning otherwise interesting conversations with baseless accusations. It’s a huge distraction, an emotional drain, and does a lot more harm than whatever you think I was doing above.

It’s fine to disagree with someone. Running around calling them a sassy dick three times in a row isn’t disagreeing. One tip to avoid such comments is to wait until you feel curious about something rather than fulminating. It works for me at least.

Thanks for inspiring me to use Sassy Dick as my porn name if I ever get into the industry though.

[uoaei]

Something you appear to be confused about is I'm not disagreeing with your opinion. I am calling your opinion morally abhorrent by disagreeing with the very premise.

You don't have to worry yourself about my preservation.

A more productive use of your time would be to focus more on actually understanding the details of the topic at hand, then maybe you'll comprehend a little better the anti-humanistic nature of your (evidently so implicit as to be invisible to you) bias. To repeat myself: self-awareness is mandated in good-faith discussions.