[meteorite-list] [off-list]<--NOT WHATS WITH THE ATTACKING

From: Jason Utas <meteoritekid_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 13:04:28 -0700
Message-ID: <93aaac890907231304v22bc0a4dw5b359e503f460945_at_mail.gmail.com>

Elton,

> Jason wrote: "Posting messages that were intended to be kept private to the list is wrong - unless they are necessary in proving a situation such as a deal gone wrong, or cheating having taken place,"
>
> So Jason which of your listed situations applies to what you've just done?

You're the one who supported Tom's post. How's it feel to have the
same done to you? Given your response, I don't think you liked it.
It proves my point. If I'm wrong for doing it, Tom was wrong for
doing it. Transitivity.

a = b
b = c
ergo
a = c

(!)

> Were you drunk or has that testosterone problem flared up again?

Yeah, I may be in college, but not all of us do rubbish like that.
Maybe the fact that it's Berkeley has something to do with it. There
are at least a few smart-ish people up here.
That said, given your response, I think it's a bit odd for you to be
bandying about testosterone as a cause for anything; unless your balls
have dropped off, it's as much a cause for your writing as it is for
mine.
Unless you're going senile, of course.

>You are so predictable-- You attacked Tom, for posting private emails to the list and within 6 hours you've done the same thing.

Yes, because I've done this in the past....not. It proved my point,
at any rate. If I'm wrong for doing it, then Tom was wrong for doing
it. Tom is still wrong. And if you learn that, and Tom learns that,
then this won't ever happen again.

>You've really let me down--I expected it within no more than 4 hours! Just as predictable, you didn't have the guts to mail me a copy directly.

Emailing directly means nothing when you send a copy to the list, FYI.
 You posted this message to the list as well as myself - I got only
one copy, as gmail consolidates things like that into one message.
Maybe your email works differently, but the messages should still
arrive at the same time, give or take a few minutes (at most), so it's
a moot point, regardless.

> You've proved what I said about you was right on -- you are incapable of having a man-to-man direct discussion, so you have to enlist the entire list hoping someone will help take the heat off your hypocrisy.

Yeah, just look at everyone stepping in to help. Oh, wait. No one
ever steps in. Check the archives.
I did get a number of private emails though. All supportive save two
(those two = 1/4 of the messages received).
Maybe I just want them to see what kind of a person you are.
I wonder why that would work to my advantage, eh?

>Put up or shut up.

After your last spew of psychological BS, I think you're really not in
a place to be saying anything along these lines at the moment.

>Show me you've got a pair and address me directly and off list. ?Stop bothering the list with your co-dependency crap.

Hardly. If you insist on propagating this anti-Steve/'I'm better than
you' rubbish, it's staying here. I'm not letting you get away with
bullying me in private, undoubtedly ignoring the issue in the process.

After all, we're still talking about your conduct with regards to the
Steve issue, which is...kind of a list issue, assuming, at least, that
you're not as stubborn as Steve is, and might change your ways.
After all, the only reason I say take the Steve stuff off-list is
because its being on-list doesn't serve any purpose; he doesn't care.
You say you do care. Maybe you'll shut up.

> Your discourse started me reflecting. ?I've 186 or so semester hours, postgrad Clinical psych, plus 6 months of internships with sex offenders in southern prisons, state mental hospitals, Alzheimer victims and Chronic DUI offenders so if you want to debate such content, lets form a group at yahoo and have at it but, this isn't the place for it. (NOTE: I have grounds a plenty to justify my preference for meteorites over that for humanity). Oh and you've had what...a self awareness class? Did you pass?

First- off, I guess I'm glad that you're so accomplished in the field
of psychology, but it seems that you've forgotten some of the basics.
Back to the textbook, eh? I'm assuming it's been a while since you
learned the stuff.

I've only taken Psych 1 at Berkeley and some research work on five or
so studies. Just the standard pre-major (not the other one) general
psychology class. Of course, if any of my points were incorrect, you
may by all means quote me to point out which of my statements
regarding the psychological aspect of our discussion was in fact
wrong.

By all means.

I mean, just saying "you're wrong" without saying how or why doesn't
get anyone anywhere, especially when I refuted every one of your
points - it sounds like you're copping out.

But looking at your actions from a psychological perspective, I mean,
honestly - you were just trying to use the vocabulary of a subject
about which you assumed I knew nothing in order to make me seem the
weaker person. The trouble is that I knew/know enough to throw your
BS back in your face, and now you're circumnavigating your previous
point because you know you can't win if you try to keep it above
water. Classic bullying technique.
Attack until the person is down and then kick 'em while you can.
But I fought back, and held you off, so now you're completely changing
the subject and coming at me with something else.
This is just going to be like every other thread we've had where you
make some stupid statement, I refute it, and then you just go on
arguing some new idiocy.

In other words, you're a Troll.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)

> Oh! and even though you try to bait me out with false statements here, recheck your claims next time you do post to the list...

Really? Which one(s)?

>Other than ask in a general way for us all to avoid list confrontations over personalities and keep to collecting or commerce issues (which YOU projected to be a post solely about Steve), I've posted nothing to the list about Steve since the temporary eulogy when he "left" last time.

Right, as I would expect. Steve's leaving meant no more issue with
Steve, for you. Now he's back. Why on earth would you have posted
malicious thing about him after he was gone? It wouldn't have served
your purpose of demonizing him, because then people would have thought
you the worse man - if they didn't/don't already.

>Put up or shut-- show me the specific post you ramble on about; I know you keep all mine in your scrapbook.

Which post(s)? We've had this argument several times, and you know
it. You can get to the archives just as easily as I can, if your
memory is still failing you.

> Seems clear that now it is you doing the "Steve postings" just like he likes it to happen and tying to make trouble by deliberately distorting reality.

But from a psychological perspective, your posts do the same thing.
You have your point, I have mine, and we're arguing about who's right.
 The situation we're discussing is the same, but we see it in
different ways (hence the distortion). If anything, your pointing
this out is ironic because, as a psychologist, you should know how
arguments work, and yet you're trying to use the point that I'm
distorting things to make it sound as though I'm the only one doing it
in order to profess my point of view.
Ahhh, the irony!
Or maybe it's just you being hypocritical again - I think this is a
grey area, but it depends on whether you're pointing out that I'm
distorting reality versus if you are directly making an accusation.
If you're accusing me of doing it, then you're a hypocrite because
you're doing it too. If you're just pointing it out...well, you're
just pointing out that I'm doing something that we're both doing.
Ironic when your point is that I'm being the worse person for doing
it.

>Your post speaks for itself and you've done an excellent job of illustrating the validity of what I wrote (off list) to you--about you. I rest my case.

And the fact that you consider it such a horrible thing simply proves
my point that Tom was wrong in doing it in the first place.

Ergo: Win.

Jason
Received on Thu 23 Jul 2009 04:04:28 PM PDT