Neurosis stated: source post
Edvard stated: source post
Those 5 posts were trying to make you man up and admit that those quotes were a jab at my character.
You've actually successfully summed up your irrational way of thinking for us with this one sentence alone. Drop the pretenses that you are inherently this equitable and all-knowing force for just one moment and really try to take a look at what you're saying.
Let's take a look at what I am saying together.
Your posts were (in your words) designed to make people understand your intentions.
And you drop the ball right away.
If you are talking about these 5 posts (which I was, in the sentence you quoted me), I was trying to make Systematic admit to HIS intentions. I wasn't hammering it down his throat, but simply asking him the direct question. What I was saying:
What was your intention with quoting this?
I see you still not giving an honest answer but alright
Why did you? TO be more clear: Why are you this desperate for proving how wrong and unfair I am, why still the need to hammer down your points? Because of good intentions towards me? XD
If you are trying to talk about my posts in the conflict the other day, most of my energy was spent demanding examples and evidence for the accusations brought to me, not "explaining my intentions", that doesn't make any fucking sense. I wanted to have something concrete to work with instead of vacuous statements (You are double standarded/ it's a defying feature/ it is/ it is/ it is). The main argument of your accusations was that more people are saying it. Which is a crap argument when by itself. Also, the power in numbers suddenly didn't count when I was accused I was saying things Xena, Tony and Luna have said before about the clique dynamics of this place.
Instead of shoving it down our throats with incredibly narrow-minded reasoning that seemingly stems directly from your ego, (i.e., you and your own views based on your feelings) take a good hard look at what others are saying and try not to immediately dismiss their opinions simply because you might not happen to like what they say.
Good advice. I have done that. I came to the conclusion that what I have been saying was misinterpreted and twisted, the same way you just did earlier in this post. Examples because I have them: My reaction to blanc being triggered was misinterpreted as targetting people from vengeance, while it was genuine feel-bad for blanc. Quotes about blanc admitting to trolling were falsely out out of context. Turncoat made the mistake of believing I even believed Blanc was trolling, which proved to be crap afterwards. Turncoat and a few others were completely wrong that I made the Attention KF Members thread because I wanted to direct the SC hoards towards Tony and take the heat off of me, that was complete fucking nonsense. There have been mistakes and mireadings on your side too and you don't want to see them either but ignore and dismiss them. I had the right to correct them.
When you choose to look at the world from your perspective, and your perspective alone, you are willingly choosing to ignore what could be a much more clear and larger picture in the grand scheme of things. Of course, you could still decide at the end of the day that - "I'm right and you're simply wrong for disagreeing with me," even if you actually could take a moment to look at the world through another lens for once.
Again, good advice. I have done all that. I have reached the conclusion that your attacks were unfair and unjustified. I tried getting more examples from you to maybe see something I have missed. This is the bulk of my messages during the conflict, while admittedly growing progressively frustrated and angry with getting back only abstract shit that said nothing new.
Ultimately, your way of reasoning and understanding is dimmed by your refusal to look at and understand people from an angle not that of your own.
In this case I was the one being discussed though. The others were giving their understanding on me. It's errors in judgement/perspective like this that remind me of Crow's way of arguing while getting out of touch with the issue at hand.
As far as reading other people goes and understanding them, I do very well in real life, and better than average here.
But to dismiss anything and everything because you disagree with it or it happens to hurt your feelings reads as incredibly arrogant. If you fail to see where another person is coming from just because you might not like what they have to say; you are not only being unfair to the person giving the opinion, you are also allowing a great injustice to yourself.
Fully agree with this. We can disagree on the fact that I was doing this though. Trying to paint me in the light that I "dismiss anything and everything because I disagree with it" is "being unfair". One random example is that I disagree with atheists. I agreed to many of my flaws here in the past, many of which have been pointed out by others as well. I do NOT agree that having double standards is my "defining feature" according to Turncoat, that I have betrayed trusts here to any extent that is worth discussion and the crap given to me, I don't agree that I was having a "meltdown".
If I fail to see where another person is coming from I will ask them to explain themselves, as I have over and over again, being met with only the argument: "we all see it Ed"/"You're blind and delusional Ed".
