Prisca said:
: I have never seen the need to insult you or cast asperations on your good character (allegedly) unless you do the same to others.
Ah, yet another self-appointed defender of the downtrodden on a mission to right the board's wrongs.
The difference between you and me, Prisca, is that you tell lies in order to "defend" your downtrodden. I tell the truth, whatever the situation.
: When you are called upon it, you call such insults "opinions". Yet what I say are "lies".
The things you said about me are demonstrably lies. Do you really want me to demonstrate why?
I suggest you drop this now.
: Very interesting revelation about your character Alan, particularly since you have chosen to keep score of all of my "opinions".
You're really in la-la-land, Prisca. It took me all of 15 minutes to reread the appropriate threads to ferret out your lies. The board itself is the record.
Teejay said:
: If it seems that I am focusing on Alan it's only because he is one of the very few (if not the only one) who continues to espouse the theory that the use of harsh language in making an argument is necessary.
You never truly learn, do you? How is it that a man who can occasionally post meaningful things is also so capable of such gross misunderstanding -- which really is quite deliberate since you've already been corrected on this point many times.
For the record, my position, as I have stated over and over again, is that not always, but SOMETIMES it is necessary or helpful to post harsh words. The above dialog with "Frank" proves it.
Your reply to Rem's challenge on this was simply incoherent.
: Am I saying that harsh words are never appropriate in any circumstance? No, of course not. It is simply my strong opinion that IN THE CONTEXT OF POSTING ON THIS FORUM, if something good can be accomplished with a harsh and cutting word, something better can be accomplished with the use of some alternative expression.
Sometimes yes, and sometimes no. Tell us, please. How much actual experience do you have in convincing online JWs or their defenders that they're wrong?
None, really. You're another armchair quarterback.
Your response to my "Frank" post is little more than an exercise in sour grapes and so requires no response. But I already knew it would be this way, which is why I wrote those few words at the end.
DannyBear, it's sadly obvious that you've voluntarily donned the shoes that I set forth for any who would wear them. You demonstrate a sad ability to miss the point in too many situations, as here. I suggest that you better yourself by picking up crumbs fallen from Refiner's Fire's table.
You demonstrate an amazing aptitude for hypocrisy:
: Then end up by rubbing your sterling record of cult fighting, by casting doubts on 'others' methods, asking for proof?????
You have the gall to castigate me for doing exactly what a gaggle of others earlier demanded of me? And which I came through on? Lord you're an ignoramus! And I cast no doubts on anyone else's methods. You simply do not have the reading comprehension to deal with simple English.
AlanF
