Erin Conley Fogelberg: but this is not my first rodeo with him
The last one was when I commented on your photo involving Ms. Piggy and Kermit the Frog. In the photo, they were engaged in BDSM, ala 50 Shades of Grey. Kermit was completely suited up in a privacy costume. I explained the purpose of the privacy costume, and how he didn't need it this time.
In part of your reply, you said, "Buzz kill." That's right after you said that this photo was for humor purposes.
I didn't reply to you then, and look at what happened... I stayed on your friend's list. I dare to argue with you this time, and "whack," the ban hammer.
Again, you demonstrated yourself to have anger, stress, and control issues. The sense that I'm getting, from your attitude on your threads, is you saying this, "Better do as I say or there will be consequences."
Erin Conley Fogelberg: He may be a old classmate of mine but after this last novel I unfriended him and even blocked him.
No, you unfriended me and blocked me because you didn't like the fact that I destroyed you in argument. You couldn't handle my consistently destroying you in argument despite your demands that I restrain my responses.
The fact that you wrote a novel or two in response to me, after blocking me, shows that you have control issues. It also shows that you are the very thing that you accuse me of being.
The difference between us is that I presented a reasoned, logical, fact-based argument. This is what drives the volume in my replies. You ranted off in tangents because you were emotionally charged.
You couldn't handle disagreement, you didn't like the fact that I called your video's argument to question.
Erin Conley Fogelberg: I know of several others that have done the same,
There's one common denominator in all of them, they couldn't "control" the situation in a debate with me. They couldn't handle being destroyed in debate. They wanted me to stop hammering them, when all they had to do was to stop replying to me.
In fact, if you did not attack me for my first response, the entire argument would not have happened.
They wanted to have the last word, and retaliated by preventing me from replying to them continually when I refused to back down.
People unfriending and blocking me are not going to stop me from destroying their arguments. There not going to stop me from being who I am; from destroying their arguments; and from exercising my freedom of speech.
The mere fact that they took action to unfriend and/or block me proves that their action did not work to "change me." They most certainly did not stop me from replying to them. These batches of replies on this blog are a cleaned up version of what I posted on Facebook my wall.
I will not be silenced. You'll get your azz handed to you, and you will get proven wrong in other forums.
You love to "dish it," but you're not woman enough to take it. Also, like these others, you saw that you "lost control" during the debate. The move to "unfriended" was your way of feeling like you "regained control."
Erin Conley Fogelberg: even one of his relatives have unfriended him and blocked him because of the novels
That one relative that you talk about is [Radical Liberal Brother]. I unfriended him for refusing to stick to the topic of my thread, for refusing to answer my simple straight forward questions, and for actually being the very thing that he accused me of being.
He responded by blocking me. He eventually unblocked me. Then he blocked me again when I destroyed him in another debate on one of our brother's threads... Despite his claiming that he could not see my posts.
My other brothers pointed out that he got destroyed. He blocked me in response. Whenever I get into a debate with a radical liberal family member, or someone in our mutual friends list, he lobbies them to block me.
I guess it's easier to "make that mean guy disappear" than it is to come to terms with the fact that you people simply don't know what you're talking about.
Oh yeah, [Radical Liberal Brother] has been blocked by multiple family members as well. You shouldn't be using him as a reference.
Erin Conley Fogelberg: and ignorance on certain issues.
No, you didn't block me for that ignorant assumption. You unfriended and blocked me because you were getting your azz handed to you. My argument forced you to question your own argument, thus putting you in a situation that you couldn't control.
Unfriending and blocking me was a way for you to gain "control" of the situation. You have control issues. It was also a way to compensate for your inability to stand your ground in debate.
Again, I will not argue an issue unless I've done extensive research on it. You failed to do anything remotely close to proving anything that I said as "wrong." All you did was ranted your opinion about my "acting" like a "know it all," quotation marks used strongly.
In no instance did you prove that I was the very things that you accused me of being. More importantly, in no instance did you prove that I was "ignorant" of the issue that we were debating.
Even you acknowledged one or two of my counter points in contradiction to your main theme... of the post that I disagreed with.
All you've done was get emotional and acted like a control freak.
You can't accuse someone of being "ignorant" of certain issues simply because they disagree with you. You have to prove it with a reasoned, logical, and fact based argument. I presented the facts, facts that you did not try to counter with your own sources... Sources that I would've also dismantled.
The argument, on this topic, indicates that your "knowledge" of the issue is emotionally driven based on your own experience and your own biases... To hell with what the actual facts say... or with other people's experiences if they contradict yours.
Erin Conley Fogelberg: Yes in tons of pain with broken leg but this has nothing to do with dealing with someone that thinks they know it all and is ignorant and uninformed. (REPEAT POINT)
You've repeatedly expressed your opinion about what "I don't know," while at the same time repeatedly failed to prove that point. Instead of accusing me of being "ignorant and uninformed," quotation marks used strongly, how about sticking up for your opinion and argue your point using logic, reason, and facts?
Nowhere in your thread did you do so. You couldn't, because the facts were not on your side. You did; however, have lots of propaganda in your arsenal. You were completely driven by emotion, anger, and the need to control.
You repeatedly demonstrated that you have anger, control, and stress management issues. I would not be surprised if these were contributors to the fallouts you've had in your previous relationships.
I would not be surprised that, in the abusive relationships that you had, you contributed greatly by "poking the bear."
No comments:
Post a Comment