(urth) Wind god

[António Pedro Marques]

James Wynn wrote (05-11-2010 20:31):
> António Pedro Marques-
>> Everyone's entitled to their opinions. Not to their facts. If the word
>> 'green' isn't there, it isn't there, and repeatedly discussing why it
>> *is* there is inconsiderate.
>
> Only a aspergers-debilitated geek would be interested in policing what
> is a "fact" from what is an alternate reading from what is an error
> based on another posters erroneous reading popularly bandied about. It's
> fine to correct someone on the facts when you think you have noted an
> error. But if you go the step further and ascribe malicious motives or
> categorize the person's perceived error as "this is what you always do",
> I'm going to read you as a jerk.

But that's a social shortcoming on your part, blaming the messenger for the 
message.

If the behaviour is repetitive, it's repetitive. We have now a fresh example 
of 'Affirming P was an isolated tiny thing I don't think anyone should be 
offended by it'. In a few days we'll have 'Since P, then Q'.

Ignoring that and making the protest sound like thought police seems (seems) 
disingenuous.