"Now you have addressed it and I am satisfied. I even thanked you. What's so off-putting about that?"
I am sorry that I overlooked that since I do know that gratuitous thread decorum is something you value highly.
I often tend to overlook it. When I do respond it is because there isn’t much else to the post to look at. Otherwise I am not much affected by it. Likewise with gratuitous snipes. The extremes, like the one’s solon has been casting are a little more eye catching do to the obvious disturbance in the psyche of the poster but curiosity is about all it provokes in me. Like anything else too much of it is merely tiresome.
However, I have pointed out to you before that I try to follow the reasoning paths in these topical discussions and I value some continuity in thought.
It is frustrating to me that you would complain that there is harm via the mojo hypothetical. After several queries by me for you to clarify the harm as in “what harm” you failed on each occasion to respond. Then I see you posting an allegation:
"This whole thing started with Jewel repeatedly insisting that Mojo was doing no harm. Several people suggested potential harm but he would hear none of it, just kept insisting that there was none.”
The tone of the suggestions of harm, were that they were valid reasons to condemn the mojo scenario. However, they were either rhetorically bound in the aether or they were specifically related to cruel and barbarous acts of destruction that did not apply. So, I asked for specific harm that was relevant to the mojo scenario as in “What harm?”
So, you allege dishonor on my part for not accounting for the harm element associated with the mojo scenario. Since I have yet to see how the complaint has validity, I believe your allegation to be unfounded. It seems it is your ‘side’s’ responsibility to establish that foundation in order for me to be able to have any kind of opinion about it.
However, out of respect for your request I took some time to work through the issue and demonstrate how mojo is not committing harm, and does not even qualify for the complaints of discrimination that have been levied at him.
Since you alleged that I have not considered the harm factor even ‘remotely’ and I have taken the time to demonstrate a pretty thorough understanding of it for you personally, then; yes I consider it a matter of honor for you to address the comments that I provided and specifically point out where you see them to be invalid, not applicable, or the reverse. And based on those comments resolve between us whether the mojo scenario, as you have alleged is harmful, or not.
”You seem bound and determined to dig up some dishonorable gotcha about me. I must be stuck firmly in your craw. Try not to choke. “
Well, you are wrong. I don’t want to getcha on dishonor. I would like to getcha taking an honorable stand.
Chis delclared that he could prosecute mojo (I presume on harm) and that no defense (of mine) would have a chance. I called his bluff as in "put up or shut up." That was the end of Chris's contribution so I concluded he really hadn't thought the issue through, until challenged. Then he must have realized, "prosecute, what harm?" and found himself without a foundation of relevance.
Solon, has claimed to have proven the evilness of the mojo scenario and portrayed himself as a some sort of victorious conqueror in the process. He has declared himself to be standing on a platform of honor as a result and portrayed you as standing beneath the banner along side him. You have on more than one occasion given him reason to gloat on stage.
My view, and Neocon’s view of what he has been doing over the last couple of days is there for you to see also. It does stick in my craw that anyone would see his behavior as honorable and even more so that anyone would bath in the light of that declaration.
Yes. I think it is dishonorable if only as a matter of neglect to let the record stand, unless you approve of his behavior and his efforts to include you as a collegial affiliate who is defined by his self-reported bond of honored fellowship. |
