Posted: Apr 24, 2017 12:16 pm
by Thomas Eshuis
PensivePenny wrote:
Thomas Eshuis wrote:
PensivePenny wrote:
Thomas Eshuis wrote:
I'm not worried, only disappointed that you refuse to engage with what I actually post and have now chosen to dismiss me out of hand, based on several characteristics you've projected onto me that have no basis in reality.


If I were "disappointed" because some anonymous person on a forum wouldn't talk to me

Once again you fail to respond to what I actually post.
I did not say I was disappointed that you don't respond, I said that I was disappointed that you did, but only with repeated straw-manning, personalised comments and by attributing various things to me I have not expressed.

PensivePenny wrote:I would evaluate that with my therapist, not share it in a public forum.

Q.E.D.

PensivePenny wrote: That's just me. If "baiting" me is your goal, you'll have to do better.

I've clearly explained what my goal is, that you keep trying project different goals onto me suggest that it is you, not me who's out to goad someone. Especially in light of your other personalised comments and accusations of nefarious motives on my part.
I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt but with every response you post, it seems more and more that you're just out to troll.


And again, Thomas you ramble on and on

I'm not.
I am pointing out falsehoods as well as FUA violations in your responses to my posts.

PensivePenny wrote: when it should be obvious that we both feel the other has nothing of value to offer.

Q.E.D. more personalised flaming.
And kindly speak for yourself. Unlike you I don't dismiss a person out of hand because they won't accept my position.
Nor do I question their sanity or motives, like you've done in these past couple of posts.
I do think we could have a productive discussion.
All we need to do is get of this personalised derail and start adressing what the other actually posts.


PensivePenny wrote: I'm content to just leave it at that.

That's demonstrably false.
Not just by the fact that you keep coming back, but also by the repeated personalised nature of your responses.

PensivePenny wrote: You continue with the item by item responses.

That's my usual MO as it is for many other members on this site: to adress each claims or statement, rather than one big response.


PensivePenny wrote: Rhetorically, why?

You keep on demonstrating my point: I've made it perfectly clear. That you keep asking/wondering why demonstrates you are either not reading the posts you're responding to, or dishonestly pretending this question hasn't already been answered.

PensivePenny wrote: I've already indicated I am no longer responding to your comments.

Which is a lie, as you've done so several times since then, including with this very post.

PensivePenny wrote: Take a deep breath,

You can stuff the passive-agressive nonsense.

PensivePenny wrote: recognize the other party has nothing of importance to say and walk away. That's what I do. ;)

Again, speak only for yourself, unlike you, I haven't dismissed you out of hand based on several things I made up about you and your motives.