Plan B Forum

I have been told over and over that I have been dishonest.

But when I ask for the basis of that claim, I get nothing.

Wouldn't anyone else feel as I do?

Wouldn't anyone else, being accused of something, want to know the specifics of the accusation?

What should I do?

Turn and run in the face of an accuser who will not state the accusation?

Deny the accusation without knowing what it actually is?

What would you do?

Andrew D wrote:
What would you do?

If it were me, I would drop the subject and try to get involved in some discussions of more interesting topics.

I don't judge anyone here based on what other people say about them or accuse them of doing or being. My opinion of people here is based on how they respond to my and others and whether what they say is interesting or informative.

You seem to be a bit too much focused and bothered by what Lord Jim has said to you or about you. You've put way too much energy into criticizing him and calling him a liar.

If I were accused of being dishonest and I knew that I had not been dishonest, I would ask for clarification once or twice and then move on - or depending on who the accuser was, I might not care enough to even ask.

You are a lot more interesting to read when you voice your opinions on subjects and don't not include how you feel about those who are disagreeing with you.

Lighten up and try to have some fun once in a while.

Joe Guy wrote:If it were me, I would drop the subject and try to get involved in some discussions of more interesting topics.

I don't judge anyone here based on what other people say about them or accuse them of doing or being. My opinion of people here is based on how they respond to my and others and whether what they say is interesting or informative.

You seem to be a bit too much focused and bothered by what Lord Jim has said to you or about you. You've put way too much energy into criticizing him and calling him a liar.

If I were accused of being dishonest and I knew that I had not been dishonest, I would ask for clarification once or twice and then move on - or depending on who the accuser was, I might not care enough to even ask.

You are a lot more interesting to read when you voice your opinions on subjects and don't not include how you feel about those who are disagreeing with you.

Lighten up and try to have some fun once in a while.

What he said.

Andrew, you're a serious guy with serious opinions on serious subjects. And I appreciate that, I really do; I look forward to the scholarship and sophisticiated reasoning you generally bring to a discussion, even (especially?) when your perspective is, shall we say, out of the mainstream. But for heaven's sake, this is just a small, ridiculous BBS on the stupid interwebz, populated largely by chuckleheads such as myself. If you need that much aggravation in your life, listen to some Elliott Carter. (I still hold out hope that some day you'll come around.)

You stated your case in another thread. Why not leave it at that.

Andrew, we all read those threads, and we have read the subsequent claims. I think very few of us believe you are a liar, and having made your case, I would rely on the ability of the membership to discern between truth and fiction.

You're right. I shouldn't let the supposed opinions of someone too cowardly to state the basis of those opinions to bother me.

On the other hand, as someone once observed, whoever tells you not to let little things bother you has evidently never attempted to sleep in a room with a mosquito.

Or if they do tell you that they shouldn't be acting hypocritically all butt-hurt themselves.

Andrew, we all read those threads, and we have read the subsequent claims. I think very few of us believe you are a liar,

If he is now, fantastically attempting to claim that he has no idea why I have observed the fact of his repeated, systematic intellectual dishonesty, then he is a bald faced liar of the most brazen and shameless sort...

Either that, or he's been the victim of an elctro shock therapy that went horribly wrong and wiped out a huge portion of his memory....

In those useless "discussions" last May and June, I repeatedly and with great patience and specificity, in real time, pointed out the breath taking array of intellectually dishonest tactics he employed, individually, in the dozens of posts in which he employed them, each time as he used them.

Anyone who "read those threads" should easily recall that, and if anyone doesn't, including The Great One, (one of his main dishonest tactics is to keep misrepresenting exchanges over and over again so that he can drown out what actually happened and replace it with his truncated, out of context, deliberately misleading bullshit version, in the hopes that eventually that is all anyone will remember...of the multitude of sleazy tactics he has shown himself willing to resort to, I saw that as the absolute worst.) I suggest they go back and review them.

Give it a freakin' rest, both of you. It's boring as hell.

Or go right ahead with it; who am I to tell you how to get your jollies?

Lord Jim wrote:I suggest they go back and review them.

I agree.

Sue U wrote:... who am I to tell you how to get your jollies?

If I were young and single ....

Quote my words which you claim are dishonest.

Point us to them, so that we can all see their context and judge them for ourselves.

State the grounds on which you base your claim that those words are dishonest.

Simple enough, don't you think?