Actually you are now adding anachronism, to your previous problems. Here is the accurate chronology…
Me:
1)"I saw your mis-characterization of our interactions and simply attributed a valid reason for it."
You: Making a mistake by accusing me of something I didn’t do.
2)Your idea of a "valid reason" is falsely attributing motives to others.
Me:
3)Motives, what motives have I attributed to you in the context of this allegation of yours?
You:
4)Trying to cover up your mistake by pretending you were referring to another context.
4)I was simply conflating your numerous posts where you do both of those things.
Me:
5)Ahh figures. You changed the context of my post (in your own mind), failed to mention it, then attempted to make something out of that but failed there too. Perfectly Gregian of you
You: Trying to reinforce the context you had intended, suggesting I was not following correctly, then bashing me for a few sentences.
6)Look up the word conflation.
Me: Accurately reviewing the sequence of events for you
7) I made a valid attribution which had nothing to do with a motive. Your mischaracterization followed by self agrandizing description was/is deluded. No motive is mentioned, and it's not name calling when it accurately describes the circumstance.
You responded, claiming my term "valid reason" was used to label motives falsely.
I asked "What motives?", and specifically with regard to the quoted text and context I had used. Rather than correct your mistake, you've predictably been squirming and spinning ever since and now you're moving on to the gregian projections. Yawn. You need to expand your horizons son, everyone is now hip to your lamo tricks.
You: Now claiming you had recognized your mistake (which you hadn’t) followed again by suggesting my conduct was in error and unethical. (More attempts to cover up for your self).
8) No spinning. I told you that I had mistakenly conflated your post with others that were also made by you.
Me:
9) You're still squirming and spinning dude, it's not necessary.
You:
<<<I had mistakenly conflated your post with others that were also made by you.>>>
Not sure what else you are looking for.
----------------------
That would have been the proper response if it had been the case, but it wasn’t. You made a mistake wrt the ‘motives’ comment. Then you tried to cover it up by claiming you were referring to my posts as a whole (conflating). I pointed out, again, that I had asked about the context of a specific post, not the whole of my posts at large, and pointed out that you were failing at your task to cover up a simple mistake. You dropped that effort, but now you are claiming you told me your comment about conflation was a mistake. You did not admit to any legitimate mistake, and the order of events you imply is not accurate, and you tried to change the context to make your first post look justified. You failed and now you are claiming to have stood up and been accountable early on, which simply isn't true. In the midst of all that, you made several lame attempts to bash me, project your foibles onto me, and suggest my ethical position in all this was unclean. You are either very confused or incapable of simple honesty and common decency.
And ... you know what more I require, so shape up son. |
