Amos on Tolerance

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Amos on Tolerance

Peter Meyer
Hi Amos,

> The premise of CALNDR-L is discussion based on "if you show me yours, I'll
> show you mine".

Really?  That remark is unworthy of your usually intelligent comments.  
I was assuming that CALNDR-L is for intelligent discussion of
calendars, which up to now has been the case except for one contributor
who seems to be find his own numerous often-self-corrected posts
fascinating, and apparently assumes that the rest of will also.

> Pointing and snickering is mainly frowned upon.

In any forum false description as a basis for criticism, which is what
you're doing here, is always frowned upon.  Or better, exposed for what
it is.

"Pointing"?  As for "snickering", that's a term which describes no post
that I have seen here recently.  I suggest, Amos, that you be more
accurate in your choice of English words.

> Please be tolerant, that's what this list is about.

Rubbish! Do I have to remind you after all these years that this list
is, as I said, for intelligent discussion of calendars. Why (after a
long period of tolerance) continue to tolerate idiots?  Their vapid
'contributions' just pollute what was formerly a remarkably interesting
forum for intelligent discussion of the stated subject.  Tolerance is
admirable for awhile, but tolerance has limits.

Fortunately there is only one idiot currently 'contributing' to this
list, but that is one too many, since he is ruining the list.

Regards,
Peter
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Amos on Tolerance

k.palmen@btinternet.com
Dear Peter and Calendar People

I do find some reasonableness within Michael's narcism, so like to reply when I have a good chance of reaching this, but will no longer take part in long arguments with him as I have done in the past.

Hence, Michael must not construe my silence as agreement, likewise with other calendar people who don't state otherwise.

Karl

Saturday Beta December 2018

----Original message----
From : [hidden email]
Date : 15/12/2018 - 09:33 (GMT)
To : [hidden email]
Cc : [hidden email]
Subject : Re: Amos on Tolerance


Hi Amos,

> Please take no offense, this was a bit of jest

By now you should know that jesting in text is dangerous, especially
when replying to someone who has a legitimate grievance and is (by now)
thoroughly pissed-off.

> It seems that every list has at least one such poster at any given time.

I don't agree.  As you know, I have a fairly long (though not
continuous) history on CALNDR-L.  I consider Brij harmless.  Aristeo
eventually got the message and either went away or no longer posts.
Same for one or two others from years past. I don't recall an idiot
such as Michael, at least not since I rejoined the list   He is not
harmless.  His narcissistic idiocy is polluting what should be a forum
for intelligent discussion.  But he is such a narcissistic idiot that
he is incapable of ever realizing this, so looks like we're stuck with
this mental retard until he gets tired of talking to himself, which
probably won't be soon.

My hope is that no--one replies to him (filtering his posts to the
trash removes any temptation to do so).

> I still admire Karl for answering every post
> calmly and logically (and even taking the time to try to understand their
> logic)!

One could admire Karl for that, but I don't, since in effect Karl is
just encouraging Michael to believe that he is fit to participate in a
forum which is actually suitable only for grown-ups, not kiddies, with
toxic consequences for the list.

Regards,
Peter
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Amos on Tolerance

Michael Ossipoff

Karl says:

.

[quote]

I do find some reasonableness within Michael's narcism (sic)

[/quote]

.

I don’t know what, in particular, I’ve said that Karl regards as an indication of “narcism”  …or even of narcissism. :D

.

But I won’t ask Karl for an explanation of what he means.

.

I’ve written, to this list, some suggestions of mine, for year-start rules and for a few astronomical-terrestrial seasonal-calendars, and those proposals have been accompanied by thorough explanation of the reasons and justification for them.

.

That’s entirely in keeping with the stated purpose of CALNDR-L.

.

[quote]

, so like to reply when I have a good chance of reaching this

[/quote]

.

It isn’t entirely clear what “this” is, but that’s okay.

.

[quote]

, but will no longer take part in long arguments with him as I have done in the past.

[/quote]

.

I’ll believe that promise when it’s been kept for a while.

.

Those long arguments were all completely unnecessary.

.
[quote]
Hence, Michael must not construe my silence as agreement, likewise with other calendar people who don't state otherwise.

[/quote

.

I write to the list when there’s something that I want to say (to the list’s larger membership) about CALNDR-L’s topic.

.

Silent disagreement is fine, and is a lot less time-consuming.  .

.

Likewise--regarding Karl’s 454 month-system, whose months are named by the Roman month-names, and start their year close to Gregorian year-start--Karl isn’t under any obligation to explain what meaning or purpose those Roman-Gregorian-imitating months are supposed to have, or why something so drastically different from the Roman-Gregorian months should try to imitate them, by being named after them, and contrive to start near when the Roman-Gregorian year starts.

.

And I should add that, when I write here, I do so because I’m saying something to the larger membership, not to the few loudest frequent-posters.

.

Early South  Week 2  Saturday  (5&4 SC version 1)

South1  Week 2  Saturday (5&4 SC version 2)

2018-W50-6  (ISO WeekDate)

2018-W51-6  (South-Solstice WeekDate)

December 15th  (Roman-Gregorian)

December 16th (Hanke-Henry)

.

Michael Ossipoff