OK Kit come on down and be prepared to back your words and every insinuation

[Eclair]

And you never apologized for taking my post out of context and turning it all into this. At least I already apologized for what I said earlier in this thread.

Kit, I don't know if you are directing this remark to me, but if you are, I do not recall taking any of your posts out of contexts.

[Al Swearegen]

"Unless the reason you aren't married anymore is because you were an oblivious cunt to your ex wife"

Shock statement, perhaps he was as shocked, as I was, that someone who should know better, in fact, didn't.

If Hyke supports your 'mission' and feels obliged to inform Kit how to word her responses, then so be it.

For me, it smacks of hypocrisy. , but yet, have no qualms yourself in targetting a member who you for 1. Know will be engaged in the drama 2. Have been informed it might be a good thing to back off and not bring more internet crap into their life.

Personally Les, I thought you were a grown up and above this sort of shit.

"YOU accuse Kit of driving off a member from a site" Pretty big assertion there Eclair. Show us this reading by all means. Never said or will say it..
Like all of this you have completely misread it and want to go off on very silly tangential argument and conjecture not actually based on the facts at hand.

Now looking at this premise and you building a case of hypocrisy on the supposition of something I never said or did, how do you figure? I want a rational answer please Eclair without you looking like you have either misread, not read or completely misunderstood or misconstrued what has been discussed here. Would hate to think that you are getting the wrong end of the stick and running with am ill thought out position. It would make you look stupid.

As I have said many times REGARDLESS of your support to Saint Phlexor here or the way you are wanting to down play what he said. A personal Attack IS a personal attack. I WILL give back to ANY personal attack. I actually think it is no problem and sits very well with me.

Again you have not explained how I was to know better, with the facts I had at my disposal not to call out or argue with Kit. Make a case for this based on what I knew, and why personal attack like this is to not be defended against and perhaps too explain what the right response is for anyone having a personal attack against them. (I am from here on in watching you close to see how you live up to the right not to defend against anyone personally attacking you. JSYK)

You can think I ought to be "above all this" as much as you like but you have yet to say exactly why there is a problem and I have given you every opportunity to explain your position.
With what I knew at the time, why were my actions low? Ought Kit or Phlex or anyone else here be barred from argument or discussion? If so why haven't you or anyone put it to Odeon that these people be in a privileged usergroup with defined I2 exclusions. If it is just something we should all magically know then assume perhaps because it is in your mind it is not instantly projected by osmosis through every other member.
Name them. I have asked that you do and you steer away from this.

It is simple. Either Kit ought to be protected and censored from any action (for whatever reason) OR she ought not. If she is then well and could set the wheels in motion to make this obvious and set up a special user group and make it so. IF NOT then don't try to defend the action as low if there was no reason not to do otherwise. It can not be both.

I really should not have to break it down for you like this. Again we are in Intensity and I would have thought walking through the door so to speak means that this is what you take on the moment you are here. So don't avoid what is put to you . Back your claims Eclair and answer what is put to you or just accept that you have no real commitment to explaining your bullshit.

[P7PSP]

It is simple. Either Kit ought to be protected and censored from any action (for whatever reason) OR she ought not. If she is then well and could set the wheels in motion to make this obvious and set up a special user group and make it so. IF NOT then don't try to defend the action as low if there was no reason not to do otherwise. It can not be both.

This idea of a specially protected group here that does not have to answer for anything they say is why I put up this poll. http://www.intensitysquared.com/index.php/topic,14881.0.html so that the members of this site can let odeon know if they desire to create an Endangered Species List if you will.

[Eclair]

"you should not have to break it down for me like this"... thanks.

Please spare me.

I believe the crux of this thread from your point of view, was to call Kit out on something, I think Phlexor was right in saying you picked on the wrong person.

End of story. I'm not coming into your endless tirades and dramas Les. I'm sorry. I just think you are low right now, as Phlexor did. Your essays to try to bring me into your mind games also show me that. Apologies, but I can't be bothered.

As for your 'be prepared to back your words', I did. I back that you had nothing better to do with your time than bring a drama from another site here, for your pure entertainment, and fuck the fact that Kit probably deserved some slack at this time in her life.

If Phlexor or I are cunts for thinking that Kit might need to be left alone at this time, then I can personally live with that.

[Al Swearegen]

The Granatelli BS? I hope you still aren't saying I am making it up and you just mean what he said about AS that was BS.

And you never apologized for taking my post out of context and turning it all into this. At least I already apologized for what I said earlier in this thread.

Well at least Hykes came to the rescue.

Eclair, where did sir les accuse me of driving off another member? And do you realize that was Phlexor's post you quoted?

Yes, I DO realise it was Phexor's post, because that's the one that Les thinks Phlexor is out of line having a go at Les's insensitivity.

I believe Hyke was on Sir Les's side, and was insensitive to you as she is Les's friend, and it is clear at the beginning of the thread (at least to me) that she is supporting him.

I don't think her telling you how to compose your posts in The Peanut Gallery was helpful, but rather, if she was Les's friend, she should have contacted him and said hey, this girl has mentioned this is making her meltdown.

Either way, I've seen some pretty bad form from members who should have known better, and in the future, I will keep that in mind.

Actually Les doesn't think " Phlexor is out of line having a go at Les's insensitivity" does he? What does Les actual;ly think. It has been explained to you enough time for you to understand it so perhaps post what Les actually thinks of Phlexor's post to him.

I believe you misread (or didn't - it is really hard to tell because you clearly have a weird understanding of shit) what Hyke said. Whilst I have been saying to Kit "You saying this in this context means this" and backing that I did not do or say what the inisinuation was, and Kit has been "I never insinuated anything you are being mean and are bent out of shape", in comes Hyke saying "Hey Kit just letting Les probably read you putting this phrase in here as meaning this or that", Kit in turn says "Huh? Nah they are just words and I throw them in anywhere they don't mean anything when I do", "Hyke says well actually when you place a few in a certain context this is what it can look like or insinuate"

Now read that through a few times. It is quite neutral and depending on what Kit answers to with her convo (which I am not a party to but instead an interested bystander to), It may that Kit has used words that she believes are neutral that aren't in a setting that she thinks is neutral which isn't and in a way she thought was of no consequences which again wasn't. I was not at all likely to believe she would or could get it wrong on so many levels through just not being aware. But her conversation with Hyke is certainly opening up that possibility. If that happens to be the case I will likely apologise to Kit how I got it wrong and why and all good.

So I think you can shove the on Les's side bit fair up your arse Eclair along with the she is being insensitive to Kit. In fact it is because of her sensitivity that she is exploring why Kit runs into this with other's including her own family. Hell of a thing to actually help someone understand such a problem huh? Insensitive? Yeah, jam it Eclair. She does not fight my battles and I would not expect her to so don't even go there.

I still don't think you have said about Kit melting down over this and I can't see why Hyke would tell me this. Is this common knowledge or is this another thing I ought to know through Osmosis?

[Eclair]

I still don't think you have said about Kit melting down over this and I can't see why Hyke would tell me this. Is this common knowledge or is this another thing I ought to know through Osmosis?

Yes...well, I sent you the link earlier in this thread where Kit says she had a meltdown. You said you didn't read it or didn't need to after the fact. So no, not osmosis, but you were alerted to the link and chose not to read about her reactions to your callout.

[Al Swearegen]

"you should not have to break it down for me like this"... thanks.

Please spare me.

I believe the crux of this thread from your point of view, was to call Kit out on something, I think Phlexor was right in saying you picked on the wrong person.

End of story. I'm not coming into your endless tirades and dramas Les. I'm sorry. I just think you are low right now, as Phlexor did. Your essays to try to bring me into your mind games also show me that. Apologies, but I can't be bothered.

As for your 'be prepared to back your words', I did. I back that you had nothing better to do with your time than bring a drama from another site here, for your pure entertainment, and fuck the fact that Kit probably deserved some slack at this time in her life.

If Phlexor or I are cunts for thinking that Kit might need to be left alone at this time, then I can personally live with that.

No you really did not back anything you said.
You formed an opinion and said it ought to be so. When pushed as to why you avoided. I tried many times to say are you saying or meaning this or that and again you deflected or run from explanation.
You say that I accused Kit of chasing away a member? Nope.
You accuse Hyke of being insensitive to Kit? You don't explain that either, especially in light of what she was actually doing.
You down play that Saint Phlexor was making an attack. You don't explain why there should be one rule for him and another for me or what exactly ought I do if faced with a personal attack.

You explain little that reflects badly on you not me. I explain and take a lot of time writing said essays to back myself. You simply don't you give weird POV's and run from any in depth discussions and when faced with anything to expose some question of inconsistency you avoid or run from it or make some blanket generalised statement.

You do not back your claims.

[Al Swearegen]

I still don't think you have said about Kit melting down over this and I can't see why Hyke would tell me this. Is this common knowledge or is this another thing I ought to know through Osmosis?

Yes...well, I sent you the link earlier in this thread where Kit says she had a meltdown. You said you didn't read it or didn't need to after the fact. So no, not osmosis, but you were alerted to the link and chose not to read about her reactions to your callout.

That link which I was not aware of prior to the callout that you based my decision to call her out not taking it into account? That one? The one that ought not be factored into the judgment on me being low or acting in any way unbecoming on the basis of not having this link to read and base my decision around? Was that the link that you mentioned? Just so I have the right link in mind here Eclair

['andersom']

Oh LOL Eclair,

Guess I should not be writing in the peanut gallery any more. You brought me in.

First, I'm a woman who is treated more than right by Sir_Les.

Second, he can and will do his own battles, and doesn't need me for that. And he will not see this post before it is posted here.

Third, I have no issues with Kit.

So, why did I answer Kit in the peanut gallery? Because of her melting down? TBH, I read that post so quickly, that I missed the word meltdown. But, browsing AFF I saw she had a fresh thread mentioning her having problems with how people read her too. And I remembered her posting similar things before.
I do not often post on AFF. Sometimes I say hi to Pika there, or something like that, but that's it. And here on I2 I had an example of text I could use in my answer. I hope that for her it is a helpful answer. If not, so be it.
In reading her closely, I noticed that she was probably answering Skyblue with her post, though, to me, the tone would more suggest her answering Richard. So, I asked her about it. And, her answer was clear enough.

Why was I before in this thread? Clarifying something to Kit, stemming from before the call-out in that the Zach thread, and venting, because I did get very reactive in a feminist way about Phlex bringing in Kit's pregnancy. And would have been just as reactive if it was someone else calling out Kit.


There have been 6 replies while I wrote this. I am not going to read them before I hit the post button.

[Eclair]

"you should not have to break it down for me like this"... thanks.

Please spare me.

I believe the crux of this thread from your point of view, was to call Kit out on something, I think Phlexor was right in saying you picked on the wrong person.

End of story. I'm not coming into your endless tirades and dramas Les. I'm sorry. I just think you are low right now, as Phlexor did. Your essays to try to bring me into your mind games also show me that. Apologies, but I can't be bothered.

As for your 'be prepared to back your words', I did. I back that you had nothing better to do with your time than bring a drama from another site here, for your pure entertainment, and fuck the fact that Kit probably deserved some slack at this time in her life.

If Phlexor or I are cunts for thinking that Kit might need to be left alone at this time, then I can personally live with that.

No you really did not back anything you said.
You formed an opinion and said it ought to be so. When pushed as to why you avoided. I tried many times to say are you saying or meaning this or that and again you deflected or run from explanation.
You say that I accused Kit of chasing away a member? Nope.
You accuse Hyke of being insensitive to Kit? You don't explain that either, especially in light of what she was actually doing.
You down play that Saint Phlexor was making an attack. You don't explain why there should be one rule for him and another for me or what exactly ought I do if faced with a personal attack.

You explain little that reflects badly on you not me. I explain and take a lot of time writing said essays to back myself. You simply don't you give weird POV's and run from any in depth discussions and when faced with anything to expose some question of inconsistency you avoid or run from it or make some blanket generalised statement.

You do not back your claims.

You are right. Phlexor was wrong. Your wife did not leave you because you may have been an insensitive cunt.

She most likely left you because you talk in fucking mind game playing circles and can't take criticism, or at the very least take on board when someone says you may have made a mistake.

You can't take straight talking. You went low, Plexor called you out, told you you were an insensitive cunt and now you want to attack me for supporting that his orignal intent was to protect Kit.

I have not backed my claims? I claimed that Phlexor was perhaps well meaning with his intentions and you played schoolboy about it and then went on to attack me for daring to question that you may have been wrong also. You've proven my claims with your own behaviour.

[Eclair]

And here Les, just to refresh your memory is how you reacted to someone bringing your attention to the fact that you might want to think about a members situation before going on a tirade;

Picking on a pregnant woman? A new low even for your Les.

http://www.intensitysquared.com/index.php/topic,9579.495.html

Get up to speed Phlexor.

Explain "even for you" and then explain "picking on". 
As for her pregnancy. I chose not her pregnancy nor her words. Nor did I choose her to use them here.

So have a read. Have a think and try again mate. I am sure you have good cause to say what you did and I would like to hear it.

You at this point can't even get the gist of a simple few sentences from Phlexor alerting you to picking on Kit without;

Explain "even for you" and then explain "picking on". 

You were hell bent on a rant. Why should he have to explain SIMPLE ENGLISH?

It's no wonder he tried shock tactics about your failed marriage to snap you out of cuntsville....but no....you were too addicted to the debate and dehumanising things.

[Phlexor]

And here Les, just to refresh your memory is how you reacted to someone bringing your attention to the fact that you might want to think about a members situation before going on a tirade;

Picking on a pregnant woman? A new low even for your Les.

http://www.intensitysquared.com/index.php/topic,9579.495.html

Get up to speed Phlexor.

Explain "even for you" and then explain "picking on". 
As for her pregnancy. I chose not her pregnancy nor her words. Nor did I choose her to use them here.

So have a read. Have a think and try again mate. I am sure you have good cause to say what you did and I would like to hear it.

You at this point can't even get the gist of a simple few sentences from Phlexor alerting you to picking on Kit without;

Explain "even for you" and then explain "picking on". 

You were hell bent on a rant. Why should he have to explain SIMPLE ENGLISH?

It's no wonder he tried shock tactics about your failed marriage to snap you out of cuntsville....but no....you were too addicted to the debate and dehumanising things.

I was just trying to bring to Les's attention that he may not want to look like a doucebag. I guess I was wrong. Also, I guess we all found out that Les is the sensitive type.

Oh and apparently I think certain classes of members need protecting and that I want the almost non-existent rules of Intensity to be changed to reflect this. I'm glad people told me this and I wasn't even aware of how I felt.

[Al Swearegen]

And here Les, just to refresh your memory is how you reacted to someone bringing your attention to the fact that you might want to think about a members situation before going on a tirade;

Picking on a pregnant woman? A new low even for your Les.

http://www.intensitysquared.com/index.php/topic,9579.495.html

Get up to speed Phlexor.

Explain "even for you" and then explain "picking on". 
As for her pregnancy. I chose not her pregnancy nor her words. Nor did I choose her to use them here.

So have a read. Have a think and try again mate. I am sure you have good cause to say what you did and I would like to hear it.

You at this point can't even get the gist of a simple few sentences from Phlexor alerting you to picking on Kit without;

Explain "even for you" and then explain "picking on". 

You were hell bent on a rant. Why should he have to explain SIMPLE ENGLISH?

It's no wonder he tried shock tactics about your failed marriage to snap you out of cuntsville....but no....you were too addicted to the debate and dehumanising things.

Dehumanising? Nope we are calling out things we don't agree with and asserting our position and explaining our position and trying to justify ourselves and understand the other. Welcome to I2. You know this is what Intensity is. Yet you are taking this out of proportion and saying "Well it is fine doing this except when it isn't. Kit should not be exposed to this because of a link that you did not see and the knowledge it bore."
Phlex said i was picking on Kit and she was pregnant and in doing so was low. I wasn't and her being Kit and/or her being pregnant is obvious not a bar or exclusion to this and I called that right. When put to both of you, whilst calling it low you were not about to back that it was low for either of these reason.

"Shock tactics"? No at best he was not getting the response he wanted and thought to sink the boot in a personal attack and got it straight back. That Eclair is an at best interpretation. Again I did not see the relevance.

I actually asked him in that post back to him to explain it. He could have volunterred this link that you did AT A MUCH later stage and I would have taken it on board and based whatever on that. He didn't or even explain it. He chose instead to call me an cunt which I don't mind and THEN fire a personal attack that you endorse.

I wasn't in cuntsville. I was in a callout. I was not ranting. I was arguing and backing my claims. At what point did you blow this out of proportion and for what purpose?
As to what I did or did not do in my marriage there are two people in the world that have any real idea about the true ins and outs of my marriage and as much as it may surprise you it is not you nor Saint Phlex. Any personal shot at that is fairly ignorant and retarded.

 Your efforts at playing the white knight or moral ambassador is pretty fake given what you just said. You and Saint Phlex are certainly not in a position to judge such things rationally. I never attacked Kit personally but rather what she said. In a callout which was not to do with either of you, you both have tried to question my morality whilst both taking personal shots at me. Don't try to take moral high ground or call my actions low as you have just sunk beneath my actions with your own.

Take a bow, Eclair.

[Al Swearegen]

And here Les, just to refresh your memory is how you reacted to someone bringing your attention to the fact that you might want to think about a members situation before going on a tirade;

Picking on a pregnant woman? A new low even for your Les.

http://www.intensitysquared.com/index.php/topic,9579.495.html

Get up to speed Phlexor.

Explain "even for you" and then explain "picking on". 
As for her pregnancy. I chose not her pregnancy nor her words. Nor did I choose her to use them here.

So have a read. Have a think and try again mate. I am sure you have good cause to say what you did and I would like to hear it.

You at this point can't even get the gist of a simple few sentences from Phlexor alerting you to picking on Kit without;

Explain "even for you" and then explain "picking on". 

You were hell bent on a rant. Why should he have to explain SIMPLE ENGLISH?

It's no wonder he tried shock tactics about your failed marriage to snap you out of cuntsville....but no....you were too addicted to the debate and dehumanising things.

I was just trying to bring to Les's attention that he may not want to look like a doucebag. I guess I was wrong. Also, I guess we all found out that Les is the sensitive type.

Oh and apparently I think certain classes of members need protecting and that I want the almost non-existent rules of Intensity to be changed to reflect this. I'm glad people told me this and I wasn't even aware of how I felt.

Not at all. Had you wished to do this you would have bought your reasoning for thinking this to my attention via Pm or on forum without trying for a personal attack. You didn't even when asked to.
You chose this approach and you are reaping the benefits of doing so.

[Phlexor]

And here Les, just to refresh your memory is how you reacted to someone bringing your attention to the fact that you might want to think about a members situation before going on a tirade;

Picking on a pregnant woman? A new low even for your Les.

http://www.intensitysquared.com/index.php/topic,9579.495.html

Get up to speed Phlexor.

Explain "even for you" and then explain "picking on". 
As for her pregnancy. I chose not her pregnancy nor her words. Nor did I choose her to use them here.

So have a read. Have a think and try again mate. I am sure you have good cause to say what you did and I would like to hear it.

You at this point can't even get the gist of a simple few sentences from Phlexor alerting you to picking on Kit without;

Explain "even for you" and then explain "picking on". 

You were hell bent on a rant. Why should he have to explain SIMPLE ENGLISH?

It's no wonder he tried shock tactics about your failed marriage to snap you out of cuntsville....but no....you were too addicted to the debate and dehumanising things.

I was just trying to bring to Les's attention that he may not want to look like a doucebag. I guess I was wrong. Also, I guess we all found out that Les is the sensitive type.

Oh and apparently I think certain classes of members need protecting and that I want the almost non-existent rules of Intensity to be changed to reflect this. I'm glad people told me this and I wasn't even aware of how I felt.

Not at all. Had you wished to do this you would have bought your reasoning for thinking this to my attention via Pm or on forum without trying for a personal attack. You didn't even when asked to.
You chose this approach and you are reaping the benefits of doing so.

It just doesn't suit your argument, does it. If that were the case, where was my PM from you telling me that you thought it was poor form for me to address it public rather than private?

You do realise that this makes you a hypocrite, either it's okay or not. Falling back on "he started it" as a defence for doing the same as me really isn't good enough.