Engaging SciFights

Did a related website in the community go down? Come back up? Relocate to a new address? Install pop-up advertisements?

This forum is for discussion of these sorts of issues.
User avatar
2046
Starship Captain
Posts: 2040
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
Contact:

Re: Engaging SciFights

Post by 2046 » Wed Jun 17, 2015 3:29 pm

Lucky wrote:
2046 wrote:
Way to play into his "obsession" propaganda, ass. He couldn't have asked for better. How about you go tell him to stop making videos about whatever I say, either on my old site or the blog or elsewhere? The only difference is that I name names.

Indeed, you have mentioned Saxton and Wong in messages at least 75 times, and as of now a search for "Brian" under your name pulls up 9 more matches than for me (88 vs. 79). God, you're so obsessed.

In all seriousness, he's the Bush or Obama of the other side. One should expect a certain amount of attention, especially when one starts attacking directly.
1) I'm not sure if this is humor or anger.
Both, and in some parts neither. I exaggerate with the "whatever I say" bit, but the fact is that you're playing his song.

Almost by definition, no one who disagrees with another publicly by name over any period of time can possibly defend against nonsense claims of obsession.

(This is especially true in scenarios where a certain amount of anonymity is preferred. SDN folks, for instance, used to like to claim I am obsessed with the topic and have no other life. Well, given their prior abuse of information about my life, I didn't reveal anything else. Catch-22.)

Rush Limbaugh speaks of Obama frequently. Is he obsessed, or doing his job of talking about the political debates and personlities of his day? Obama would say he is obsessed. So would asshats who just want to diss Limbaugh. But the man's just doing his job.
2) It sounds like Brian's behavior is annoying you on a personal level.
Actually, *you* are annoying me on a personal level with this stupid attack vector.

The Brian stuff is professional, such as the word can be used in reference to the hobby. I don't think he is a terrible person. I just think he needs a new hobby. He's not good at this one, and is spreading his suck onto and attacking my turf, and attacking me and all of us here as fanatics for disagreeing with his ill-conceived notions.
If Brian means what he says then you should oblige his request.
What request?
If Brian is just trying to annoy you/feed his ego, then as they say with nuclear war: "The only winning move is not to play."
(headdesk)

Dude, the whole point of this is that he was attacking me and my site for years and I was unaware of it, and you clearly think I should grin and bear it. (Do you not know who I am?)

Do you really expect that Brian would make nice if I stopped using his awful arguments as blog fodder?

Good lord, man, he had even fabricated a dreamworld in his mind, a fantasy of me where I was poisoning the well against him every chance I got, when in reality I scarcely knew or cared that he was active.

When he revealed his fantasy and Mike and I replied, Brian spiralled into an insanity of attacking this site for lies because of prepositions and accusing us of being fanatic cherry-pickers, demanding we be polite in return because daddy didn't like Star Wars as much as he did, attacking Americans for naming things "National" instead of "American National", et cetera, ad absurdum, mostly in now-deleted videos. And all his attacking is done behind the insidious veil of someone who claims himself to be above personal attacks and immaturity while in reality having a Wong-emulating history of insulting behavior.

In short, you are woefully ignorant of the facts, and slinging accusations at me based on that ignorance.

Case in point, you are probably thinking the above two paragraphs are an attack on Young rather than an explanation to you, and you want to talk about them, use them as fodder for your claim. But the reality is that your ignorance required elucidation, and you have received it. Even if you do not agree with the facts, it would still behoove you to shut up and stop trying to twist things into your pre-fact opinion.
Either way, there must be a number of people who make similar claims to Brian that you could use as examples use in Brian's place.
Why should I go hunting for extremist stupidity when it posts itself on a billboard?
3) As far as I know Saxton and Wong have never asked me to stop talking about them
So? That has nothing to do with your obsession. Indeed, as obsessed as you are, they'd be less likely to even want to talk to you. They'd rather talk to the police, I would presume, than deal with you directly.

Fear is, after all, a powerful motivator. Should we also talk about your clutching fear? I am not sure why anyone would fear Wong and Saxton, but I am not you. Let's talk about what it has done to you over the years and how it fueled your obsessive behavior. I think it would be healthy for you to get this out in the open.

Indeed, I really think you should sit back and calm down. I clearly struck a nerve by mentioning their names to you. You mentioned them both a couple of times in reply, a full 200% of my mention, and, if I may say so, you seemed quite defensive about it, and them.

I'm very worried about you, Lucky. I don't want you to do anything rash.

I know you probably want to keep your obsession hidden, Lucky, by claiming not to be obsessed. You might even try to point out other activities you've engaged in, or try to note how talking about Vs. Debate personalities is kinda relevant to a forum like this one, or that you're just doing your job. But I think we both know what you're trying to hide, Lucky. I've seen it and I am convinced of it, and I am sure others have, too. (Certainly at least one outside observer, unconnected to you, have indeed actually pointed you out as an obsessed and hate-filled sissy.)

So the truth is out there, Lucky. And even if you try to defend yourself, you can't. I am just telling you what it looks like from my perspective, after all. But this isn't about me and what I believe, Lucky, it is about you. You should consider counseling.

Perhaps it would be best to just stop thinking of the subject of your obsession, Lucky, if you can. I mean, I know things cross your mind and you can't help it. But I just want you to know that when you get over your obsession, we'll be here for you, because we care.

Also, when did you stop fantasizing about livestock? I know you're thinking of livestock right now, and now you're probably trying not to. Perhaps some of the the same mental techniques one would use to quit that would be beneficial in getting over your obsession.

======

The above was a tour de force of some things I wanted to illustrate.

1. I never actually say that you are obsessed with Wong and Saxton, meaning I didn't name names. But it was clear what I was suggesting, was it not?

Moral: you don't have to name names to point at someone.

2. There is basically no way for you to defend against any of it, because it is all about my claimed perception. You cannot debate what is in my head just as I cannot debate the nonsense in yours that you've been sharing lately. And as long as I keep to nebulous, undefined things like "obsession" and "fantasizing", you're really screwed.

Moral: Ass.

3. Like the "how long ago did you stop X" attack, the whole thing is just question-begging.

Moral: F*** you.

... or do you think that's me being over-defensive, perhaps to hide something? Oh, wait, f*** you again, then.

With obsessive love for you, Lucky, that I could never disprove,

2046

Lucky
Jedi Master
Posts: 2239
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Engaging SciFights

Post by Lucky » Thu Jun 18, 2015 6:45 am

I simply don't think the course of action you are taking is the best choice.

Post Reply