What is the point of merely copying what I type -- which people can read for themselves? The substantive debate is not about me -- it's about the substance being discussed. But too often we find the debate steered toward the debater and away from that substance or any genuine rebuttal.
Don't take my word for it. Simply read and observe. It seems to happen again and again.
If the point is to notice that I self-edit for a few minutes -- well yes, I often do. I strive to write accurately and with clarity. That is not a vice -- it is a sign of care.
@Noflaps said in #71:
> What is the point of merely copying what I type -- which people can read for themselves? The substantive debate is not about me -- it's about the substance being discussed. But too often we find the debate steered toward the debater and away from that substance or any genuine rebuttal.
>
> Don't take my word for it. Simply read and observe. It seems to happen again and again.
You.re not fooling anyone by edit 10 times of more your comments.
VerionNumber =2
@Noflaps said in #71:
> What is the point of merely copying what I type -- which people can read for themselves? The substantive debate is not about me -- it's about the substance being discussed. But too often we find the debate steered toward the debater and away from that substance or any genuine rebuttal.
>
> Don't take my word for it. Simply read and observe. It seems to happen again and again.
>
> **If the point is to notice that I self-edit for a few minutes -- well yes, I often do. I strive to write accurately and with clarity. That is not a vice -- it is a sign of care.**
Your vice is hating emojis. ;-)
Fooling anyone? What are you talking about? How far from the substance do you wish to go? You've pointed out that I continue to wordsmith and polish for a few minutes. How does that rebut, or even concern, anything I say about the topic at hand?
If you can rebut the SUBSTANCE of what I say, please do. The thread is not about me. Trying to make it about me merely distracts, it does not rebut.
wasn't paying too much attention to news but didnt trump get impeached for trying to take congress's power or smthing?
@Noflaps said in #74:
> Fooling anyone? What are you talking about? How far from the substance do you wish to go? **You've pointed out that I continue to wordsmith and polish for a few minutes**. How does that rebut, or even concern, anything I say about the topic at hand?
>
> If you can rebut the SUBSTANCE of what I say, please do. The thread is not about me. Trying to make it about me merely distracts, it does not rebut.
Ask @wowbagger and the moderators if you're **wordsmitthing and polishing for a few minutes**.
When you've been editing up to a point that you made more than 5 versions and the first version was 10 minutes or more earlier **it is a completely different scenario**.
"Scenario?" I don't know what you mean by that.
The thread is meant to be a discussion and an opportunity for debate.
I am addressing a topic and responding, when I must, to what is directed at me. I don't believe that it is I who seems determined to depart from substantive discussion. But the readers can decide that for themselves.
I am interested in reading any genuine and effective rebuttals that address the points I actually make. I don't see how criticizing my effort to achieve clarity and better my own choice of words is a rebuttal, or even a consideration, of those points.
To the contrary, concentrating upon me, rather than the substance, seems to ignore those points. But such behavior seems to be becoming more and more common -- too many politicians, podcasters and professed pundits attempt to concentrate on the messenger, and attempt to rally a crowd against the messenger, rather than to respond carefully to the message.
Perhaps it would be helpful to wonder why they do that.
It is also quite interesting how one of noflaps favourite sentence is "WheRe dId i sAy Dis esSaKtLi ?!11??!1" with such editing habits ;)
Not a new info but if someone does the work to document, might as well jump on the opportunity to point that out ;)
@TurtleMat said in #78:
> It is also quite interesting how one of noflaps favourite sentence is "WheRe dId i sAy Dis esSaKtLi ?!11??!1" with such editing habits ;)
>
> Not a new info but if someone does the work to document, might as well jump on the opportunity to point that out ;)
I take issue, when someone replied to a version let's say **number n**, and then x versions later (version **number n + x**) some **words were deleted and** some were **added**. Not a fair way of debating imho.
@wowbagger open my eyes yesterday with **emoji vs edit minigame**.
Have a nice evening, ladies and gentlemen. I look forward, at some point, to seeing the thread return to the topic.
ADDENDUM, as an afterthought: After all, they say that "hope springs eternal." And I am nothing if not hopeful and optimistic!
:)