By phrasing generically it as you did, you insult EVERYONE who participates in the meme. ANYONE who did it is engaging in "nauseating, revolting behaviour", "puerile behaviour", and "mind-rot".
Sure, if you look at it that way. And when *I* look at it that way, I see it as very insulting. It's just that I *didn't* see it that way when I posted my original mini-rant. Why are people so up in arms over it? Realize that I meant no offence and either move on or ask for an apology. Seems easy enough. *confused*
How can you not see that? Is this some sort of semantic game for you?
No, I see it, as I've said elsewhere. I just don't see it without being prompted. This is another case of what I've previously described as my being "socially retarded": I quite literally don't perceive these injurious/insulting interpretations until they're brought to my attention. Of course, once that's done, I can remove/reword the post, but the damage has already been done, no? It's not a fault on the reader's end, it's *my* fault, gladly admitted, and one I've discussed before in several places.
Just to be perfectly clear, I'm not (intentionally, at least) playing semantic games.
If so, I can only imagine what kind of problems this causes you in daily life.
Piles and piles. Though I think the impact of this flaw of mine is mitigated in real-life situations because there are "side-channels" for information flow: I'll say something terrifically insulting but the listener can tell that I didn't intend it as such, perhaps through facial expression or body language. Contrary to nearly everyone whom I know both online and in-person, I exhibit the same personality, mannerisms, actions, and flaws in both venues. At least, as far as I know I do, and those I've asked fail to see a difference, beyond the obvious: everyone has more time to craft their words/thoughts in a textual medium. I actually consider each post/comment I make (of non-trivial length/subject matter) to be, essentially, a mini-lecture, and apply the same interpretation to the posts/comments I read.
"...'if I was a sensitive person/someone who takes things personally/[whatever term works best here]' filter".
I think it's wrong (morally and factually) for you to imply that anyone who found your post offensive is somehow hypersensitive.
I tried to avoid precisely that interpretation with the use of "someone who takes things personally" and the even-more-generic-and-less-judgemental "[whatever term works best here]". I know I'm terrible at choosing the right words not to offend, so offered up what I felt to be three choices: one closer to my interpretation (biased towards valuing "rationality"), one neutral, and one generic entry meant to reflect the desire that the term be taken in the abstract. Moreover, I didn't say "hypersensititive", that's your term, and is rather more negative than what I intended. I do claim, though, that people who get offended at what I wrote are, obviously, sensitized to such things! Finally, how can you state that I am morally wrong without getting into a comparison of our respective moral systems, unless you're applying your own in a display of the very bias you accuse me of? As for being factually incorrect, I'll reiterate: the term "hypersentitive" was not mine.
no subject
Sure, if you look at it that way. And when *I* look at it that way, I see it as very insulting. It's just that I *didn't* see it that way when I posted my original mini-rant. Why are people so up in arms over it? Realize that I meant no offence and either move on or ask for an apology. Seems easy enough. *confused*
How can you not see that? Is this some sort of semantic game for you?
No, I see it, as I've said elsewhere. I just don't see it without being prompted. This is another case of what I've previously described as my being "socially retarded": I quite literally don't perceive these injurious/insulting interpretations until they're brought to my attention. Of course, once that's done, I can remove/reword the post, but the damage has already been done, no? It's not a fault on the reader's end, it's *my* fault, gladly admitted, and one I've discussed before in several places.
Just to be perfectly clear, I'm not (intentionally, at least) playing semantic games.
If so, I can only imagine what kind of problems this causes you in daily life.
Piles and piles. Though I think the impact of this flaw of mine is mitigated in real-life situations because there are "side-channels" for information flow: I'll say something terrifically insulting but the listener can tell that I didn't intend it as such, perhaps through facial expression or body language. Contrary to nearly everyone whom I know both online and in-person, I exhibit the same personality, mannerisms, actions, and flaws in both venues. At least, as far as I know I do, and those I've asked fail to see a difference, beyond the obvious: everyone has more time to craft their words/thoughts in a textual medium. I actually consider each post/comment I make (of non-trivial length/subject matter) to be, essentially, a mini-lecture, and apply the same interpretation to the posts/comments I read.
"...'if I was a sensitive person/someone who takes things personally/[whatever term works best here]' filter".
I think it's wrong (morally and factually) for you to imply that anyone who found your post offensive is somehow hypersensitive.
I tried to avoid precisely that interpretation with the use of "someone who takes things personally" and the even-more-generic-and-less-judgemental "[whatever term works best here]". I know I'm terrible at choosing the right words not to offend, so offered up what I felt to be three choices: one closer to my interpretation (biased towards valuing "rationality"), one neutral, and one generic entry meant to reflect the desire that the term be taken in the abstract. Moreover, I didn't say "hypersensititive", that's your term, and is rather more negative than what I intended. I do claim, though, that people who get offended at what I wrote are, obviously, sensitized to such things! Finally, how can you state that I am morally wrong without getting into a comparison of our respective moral systems, unless you're applying your own in a display of the very bias you accuse me of? As for being factually incorrect, I'll reiterate: the term "hypersentitive" was not mine.