Wez vs Eddo - Thread Split

[wez]

because that was after you used it as a slam, showing that it obviously bothered you. I was curious, so I asked.

 

 

Huh??

 

How is that a slam? Why do you validate his right to be angry and fly off the handle at me every time we exchange words? Whats so bad about "welcome to the liberal party"? Not rocket science.. please don't play dumb, you know it doesn't fool me.

 

 

What does a post about missionaries and/or Jehovah Witnesses at another site have to do with any of this?

 

Don't hypocrites need saving?

[ImWithStupid]

Perhaps you could apologize to him for the confusion, as he did regarding the confusion of the killer comment...

 

Does that mean a member should appologize to me for confusing my statement as a threat of banning?

 

If not that's fine. I never expected it.

 

Why should we appologize if someone misinterprets a comment. If you clarify your meaning it should be enough and it should be taken as such, dropped, and not accusing them of trying to cover it up and backpeddal.

 

I know everyone can make a misinterpretation. I might have done it with wez's liberal comment, he says I didn't. I feel that if the person is man/woman enough to give the proper intent of the comment, unless it's obvious BS, they should be taken at their word.

 

extreme example. Bender is a jackass. What I meant was that I thought that Bender was an actual donkey. How as I to know.

[wez]

Perhaps you could apologize to him for the confusion, as he did regarding the confusion of the killer comment...

 

Hahahaha.. now I owe him an apology? No validation from me eddo.. none. I only validate truth, you know that.

[eddo]

How is that a slam? Why do you validate his right to be angry and fly off the handle at me every time we exchange words? Whats so bad about "welcome to the liberal party"? Not rocket science.. please don't play dumb, you know it doesn't fool me.

 

What's bad about it is that you know he isn't a liberal. Thus welcoming him to the liberal party is a slam. I will agree that he went overboard with it, but I do not doubt that you meant it as a slam.

 

Don't hypocrites need saving?

Relevance?

 

Does that mean a member should appologize to me for confusing my statement as a threat of banning?

Actually no. it would be you who should apologize to him (which I thought you did.) You made the comment, he misunderstood, but since it wasn't what you meant- it would be then, in my opinion, your responsibility to apologize for it.

 

Why should we appologize if someone misinterprets a comment. If you clarify your meaning it should be enough and it should be taken as such, dropped, and not accusing them of trying to cover it up and backpeddal.

 

I dunno that we should, as we are all adults here, but I thought it was pretty cool of TJ to apologize for the misunderstanding, and wez just blew it off. I thought maybe if he returned the favor (which I knew he wouldn't do) it might help us to move past it.

 

 

Hahahaha.. now I owe him an apology? No validation from me eddo.. none. I only validate truth, you know that.

I didn't say you "owed" him anything, but I thought it would be nice.

[snafu]

You know I stop more arguments with my wife by saying "I'm sorry we don't agree". Really it works.

[snafu]

Of course we're not all married so.....

[ImWithStupid]

Actually no. it would be you who should apologize to him (which I thought you did.) You made the comment, he misunderstood, but since it wasn't what you meant- it is your job to apologize for it.

 

So why should wez appologize to TJ for TJ being confused about wez' comment?

 

Quote:Originally Posted by wez

I didn't even call TJ a liberal. I agreed with him.

 

Perhaps you could apologize to him for the confusion, as he did regarding the confusion of the killer comment...

 

And yes I did appologize several times for both the misinterpretation of the whole threat issue and I tried several times to appologize for the misinterpretation of TJ being the one who started the personal attacks and asked him if we could move on. He refused to accept that and began insisting that I appologize again for him misinterpreting my comment as a threat, again. He just can't let it go. He keeps accusing me of always taking wez' side. You can ask wez, he's been warned many times in PM's and he has always been respectful of my requests at the time. Just because something wasn't done in public doesn't mean it wasn't happening. I believe you just said something just like this referring to another site.

 

Nobody, me, cloaked or bender can promise to be on a site that runs 24/7. People need to grow up and not let their little feelings be hurt by every at every little comment that might or might not offend them. I don't know about other people here but I graduated from junior high and can fend for myself and control my own responses. If you don't like someones debating style, don't respond to them or ignore them.

 

I was hoping to not turn this site into a micromanaged babysitting whinefest, and hoped people would do some self monitoring. That didn't seem to happen.

[ImWithStupid]

You know I stop more arguments with my wife by saying "I'm sorry we don't agree". Really it works.

 

When I'm in a debate and it is obvious parties are set in their beliefs and no matter what is said, I often us the old, "I guess maybe we just need to agree to dissagree" line.

 

Works 98% of the time. Everyone goes away friends. The times it doesn't, I guess I don't need friends that badly.

[eddo]

So why should wez appologize to TJ for TJ being confused about wez' comment?

 

because the confusion started with what wez said. (and because Tj apologized as well.)

 

 

 

And yes I did appologize several times for both the misinterpretation of the whole threat issue and I tried several times to appologize for the misinterpretation of TJ being the one who started the personal attacks and asked him if we could move on. He refused to accept that and began insisting that I appologize again for him misinterpreting my comment as a threat, again. He just can't let it go. He keeps accusing me of always taking wez' side. You can ask wez, he's been warned many times in PM's and he has always been respectful of my requests at the time. Just because something wasn't done in public doesn't mean it wasn't happening. I believe you just said something just like this referring to another site.

 

Actually, I said it more in reference to this site. But, as has been said, this is in the past.

 

Nobody, me, cloaked or bender can promise to be on a site that runs 24/7. People need to grow up and not let their little feelings be hurt by every at every little comment that might or might not offend them. I don't know about other people here but I graduated from junior high and can fend for myself and control my own responses. If you don't like someones debating style, don't respond to them or ignore them.

 

I was hoping to not turn this site into a micromanaged babysitting whinefest, and hoped people would do some self monitoring. That didn't seem to happen.

 

I agree on both counts- that it should, and because some of us cannot move forward, it isn't.

[ImWithStupid]

because the confusion started with what wez said. (and because Tj apologized as well.)

 

That doesn't answer the question on why TJ doesn't owe me an appology. We both agreed that I had appologized. He is the one who hasn't and you keep defending his position.

 

I asked this in response to your statement...

 

Originally Posted by eddo

Perhaps you could apologize to him for the confusion, as he did regarding the confusion of the killer comment...

 

I asked...

 

Does that mean a member should appologize to me for confusing my statement as a threat of banning?

 

Then you say this...

 

Actually no. it would be you who should apologize to him (which I thought you did.) You made the comment, he misunderstood, but since it wasn't what you meant- it would be then, in my opinion, your responsibility to apologize for it.

 

What is the difference?

 

You say that since TJ was confused with what wez said, and appologized for it, wez owes him an appology, but TJ was confused with what I said, and I already tried to appologize but TJ wouldn't let it go, I owe him another appology, but he doesn't owe me anything.

 

I must be missing something.

[snafu]

Why is it that IWS and I see the same thing but everybody else is sees something else?

[eddo]

That doesn't answer the question on why TJ doesn't owe me an appology. We both agreed that I had appologized. He is the one who hasn't and you keep defending his position.

What is the difference?

 

You say that since TJ was confused with what wez said, and appologized for it, wez owes him an appology, but TJ was confused with what I said, and I already tried to appologize but TJ wouldn't let it go, I owe him another appology, but he doesn't owe me anything.

 

I must be missing something.

 

LOL, this is all starting to make my head hurt, but I think I didn't get what you were getting at, IWS. I'm sorry for that.

 

ok, lets go thru this one by one, to make sure we are talking about the same instances:

 

1. 
   [ ]TJ brought up wez's killer status. Wez misunderstood, got upset, and TJ manned up apologized. Wez ignored it.
    
   [ ]Earlier Wez said to TJ "Welcome to liberalism". TJ got upset, no apology, just denial from wez.
    
   [ ]Earlier than that IWS mentioned the word "ban" in a pm to TJ. TJ misunderstood, got upset, IWS manned up and apologized. TJ ignored it (as best as I remember anyway.)
   

 

It is my opinion that the one that originally stated the offending remark should be the one to apologize, if for nothing else than just the confusion. Sure the other one should likely apologize as well, especially if they over-reacted to the confusion (like TJ did with the "ban" comment) but that isn't as necessary as accepting the given up apology. Know what I mean?

 

 

 

I'm getting into this much more than I anticipated, but seriously, is apologizing for confusion really that hard to do, or accept?

[ImWithStupid]

LOL, this is all starting to make my head hurt, but I think I didn't get what you were getting at, IWS. I'm sorry for that.

 

ok, lets go thru this one by one, to make sure we are talking about the same instances:

 

1. 
   [ ]TJ brought up wez's killer status. Wez misunderstood, got upset, and TJ manned up apologized. Wez ignored it.
    
   [ ]Earlier Wez said to TJ "Welcome to liberalism". TJ got upset, no apology, just denial from wez.
    
   [ ]Earlier than that IWS mentioned the word "ban" in a pm to TJ. TJ misunderstood, got upset, IWS manned up and apologized. TJ ignored it (as best as I remember anyway.)
   

 

It is my opinion that the one that originally stated the offending remark should be the one to apologize, if for nothing else than just the confusion. Sure the other one should likely apologize as well, especially if they over-reacted to the confusion (like TJ did with the "ban" comment) but that isn't as necessary as accepting the given up apology. Know what I mean?

 

 

 

I'm getting into this much more than I anticipated, but seriously, is apologizing for confusion really that hard to do, or accept?

 

My position is that if someone feels that a personal attack or threat is interpreted, ask the person to explain.

 

If the persons explanation is that no attack or threat was intended, be an adult and accept this explanation. No appology needed.

 

I though this was an adult forum, not Maple Story.

[timesjoke]

Wow, now IWS is pan handling for appologies, lol.

 

Being as most of the problems of late have been between myself and Wez, I though a conserted effert on my part to offer a clear slate and move foward would help the entire forum,

 

 

This is like my kids, one gets something, the other wants the same things or they feel bad.

 

 

IWS, your a moderator who was part of this situation getting out of hand in the first place, wez was given too much slack and a few of us gave as good as we got. I am hoping that your efferts were successful and I am giving Wez a chance to mend fences, but now it seems like your trying to keep the mess stirred up.

 

 

You are a moderator, any kind of threat of banning, implied or not is a very serious matter and is taking things to a level the regular members cannot go.

 

The reason I doubt your sincerity of claiming it was innocent due to other things you have said and done, not the specific act itself. You have been pissy with me both before and after the incident and then we add to that your mistaken assumption of what Wez said to me driving you to toung lash me on the open forum.

 

 

You were wrong and said that you see your mistake like a football mistake, nothing to feel bad about. If you cannot see how your status as a staff member makes your actions more severe then the other normal members, maybe you need to rethink your role here.

 

I am not staff here, I cannot effect you the way you can effect me so clearly when you E-raise your voice to me, it has a bigger impact.

 

 

Wez and I are not staff, we are on the same footing. I am offering the olive brance for both of us and for the entire forum to find peace.

 

 

I am willing to do the same between the two of us but we are not on the same footing. It is up to you to mend this fence because your the one blasting me from a possition of power, a possition to effect me where I cannot effect you.

[snafu]

Wow, now IWS is pan handling for appologies, lol.

 

Being as most of the problems of late have been between myself and Wez, I though a conserted effert on my part to offer a clear slate and move foward would help the entire forum,

 

 

This is like my kids, one gets something, the other wants the same things or they feel bad.

 

 

IWS, your a moderator who was part of this situation getting out of hand in the first place, wez was given too much slack and a few of us gave as good as we got. I am hoping that your efferts were successful and I am giving Wez a chance to mend fences, but now it seems like your trying to keep the mess stirred up.

 

 

You are a moderator, any kind of threat of banning, implied or not is a very serious matter and is taking things to a level the regular members cannot go.

 

The reason I doubt your sincerity of claiming it was innocent due to other things you have said and done, not the specific act itself. You have been pissy with me both before and after the incident and then we add to that your mistaken assumption of what Wez said to me driving you to toung lash me on the open forum.

 

 

You were wrong and said that you see your mistake like a football mistake, nothing to feel bad about. If you cannot see how your status as a staff member makes your actions more severe then the other normal members, maybe you need to rethink your role here.

 

I am not staff here, I cannot effect you the way you can effect me so clearly when you E-raise your voice to me, it has a bigger impact.

 

 

Wez and I are not staff, we are on the same footing. I am offering the olive brance for both of us and for the entire forum to find peace.

 

 

I am willing to do the same between the two of us but we are not on the same footing. It is up to you to mend this fence because your the one blasting me from a possition of power, a possition to effect me where I cannot effect you.

 

GOOD!!! THEN EVEYBODY TAKE A LEAF OFF THE BRANCH, SIT BACK AND SHUT THE UP! You to eddo!

Now I can go back to my Southern Comfort in peace.

[ImWithStupid]

Examples...

 

Wez posted this, which I wondered if it was a jab at me, I asked for clarification...

 

Off Topic Forum - The Ultimate Chat and Debate Forum - View Single Post - New Rule On Conduct

 

This was his response...

 

Off Topic Forum - The Ultimate Chat and Debate Forum - View Single Post - New Rule On Conduct

 

Comment explained. No backlash.

 

This was said, and could have been interpreted as a slight jab at me, I asked for clarification...

 

Off Topic Forum - The Ultimate Chat and Debate Forum - View Single Post - New Rule On Conduct

 

You replied with this...

 

Off Topic Forum - The Ultimate Chat and Debate Forum - View Single Post - New Rule On Conduct

 

I accepted that. No harm done.

[eddo]

My position is that if someone feels that a personal attack or threat is interpreted, ask the person to explain.

If the persons explanation is that no attack or threat was intended, be an adult and accept this explanation. No appology needed.

I though this was an adult forum, not Maple Story.

 

Hey man, adults can apologize too. Especially if there is a history of things blowing up between the two parties.

 

Because of that- I think it was nice of TJ to apologize. I think it was crappy of wez to not even think about it. I think it was nice of you to apologize to TJ. I think it's wrong of him to keep dragging it on.

 

I think snafu is jealous of my man boobs. Thus him telling me to shut up too.

[snafu]

Hey man, adults can apologize too. Especially if there is a history of things blowing up between the two parties.

 

Because of that- I think it was nice of TJ to apologize. I think it was crappy of wez to not even think about it. I think it was nice of you to apologize to TJ. I think it's wrong of him to keep dragging it on.

 

I think snafu is jealous of my man boobs. Thus him telling me to shut up too.

 

peep.... OK ...... lol wez apologized too. They both did. IWS did. I am. You did. Everything is honky dory!!

[eddo]

Examples...

 

This was said, and could have been interpreted as a slight jab at me, I asked for clarification...

 

Off Topic Forum - The Ultimate Chat and Debate Forum - View Single Post - New Rule On Conduct

 

You replied with this...

 

Off Topic Forum - The Ultimate Chat and Debate Forum - View Single Post - New Rule On Conduct

 

I accepted that. No harm done.

 

The difference? You weren't offended. had you been, I would have apologized. Because it's the right thing to do.

[eddo]

peep.... OK ...... lol wez apologized too. They both did. IWS did. I am. You did. Everything is honky dory!!

 

no, wez didn't apologize. He refused to (to TJ anyway):

 

Hahahaha.. now I owe him an apology? No validation from me eddo.. none. I only validate truth, you know that.

[snafu]

no, wez didn't apologize. He refused to (to TJ anyway.)

 

Double click sorry again. I don't know how I'm doing that.

[snafu]

no, wez didn't apologize. He refused to (to TJ anyway.)

 

Yes he did! Don't make me go back and do the search! And if not I bet anything he will.

 

PS: I got purty man boobs.

[eddo]

Yes he did! Don't make me go back and do the search!

 

by all means do. If I am wrong, I will man up and apologize.

 

 

 

and your man boobs are still i a training bro compared to mine.

[snafu]

by all means do. If I am wrong, I will man up and apologize.

 

 

 

and your man boobs are still i a training bro compared to mine.

 

OHH... .. Ok I'll try.

[ImWithStupid]

Wow, now IWS is pan handling for appologies, lol.

 

I expect no appology from anyone. I was just pointing out the irony of eddo saying that wez needed to appogize to you for your misinterpretation because you did and he didn't, but I need to appologize to you again for your misinterpretation of a statement I said as a threat, even though I already tried, not only about the interpreted threat, but about the possible missinterpretation of who started the personal attacks.

 

I would love to put things behind us, but it appears that you are the one who cannot let it go.

 

If you look back at the same time I was supposedly taking wez' side against you on the "no food for fat people" thread, I was agreeing with you on another thread.

 

This doesn't seem to be the behavior of someone with a grudge.

 

I truely interpreted wez' response as meaning Libertarian party. I'm sorry if my misinterpretation led to you being the one happened to appear to fire the first shot.

 

My intention was to get the thread back on topic without having to resort to sending both of you to the idiot box, as the behavior had been going on for several posts.

 

We can't control what people say to us, but we can control how we respond. The option of reporting a post to the staff has always been there. It's the triangle shaped sign on the top right of the thread.

 

As for the interpreted threat against you for banning. It was never my intention, I tried to explain this both publicly and in PM's. I can't help how you feel, I can only hope you trust me at my word.

 

If you insist that I continually gave wez a free ride, as your jabs keep insinuating, just ask him how many times I have warned him with PM's. I know he will tell you the truth and he has always taken these warnings/suggestions of conduct, respectfully and he has always respected them, in the thread at question anyway.