View Single Post
YoDude's Avatar
Posts: 2,869 | Thanked: 1,784 times | Joined on Feb 2007 @ Po' Bo'. PA
#30
Originally Posted by oldpmaguy View Post
Oh my, you are correct, sir or madam. How embarrasing. I guess it's due to the fact that YoDude was so adamantly confrontational and defensive in regard to my "agitprop" remark, that I simply assumed he was the OP, and then unconsciously ignored even the very names I was using as quotes in my own posts! How remarkable a thing the human mind is, wouldn't you agree?

So the only question left to ask is, Why was YoDude so adamantly defensive regarding my "agitprop" remark? His was response #15, and mine was response #19. I would have assumed that by not quoting the OP, it was understood that I was replying to the thread's main intent, and not responding to anyone's response in particular.

It is indeed odd that YoDude chose my comment to focus on as a potential reply to his own response - I can se no clear reason for that.

Oh well, I admit being confused, but only by someone who is themself confused. I promise I will try and do better next time. And thank you, fatalsaint, for calling my attention to my error.

...so Uwe, all that bit about agitprop and stealth marketing and loaded language, that was for your benefit. Enjoy, then, I hope you read up on it!
Dude you are confused. Did you miss a med or suttin'?


Reading may be fundamental but comprehension is a whole 'nother matter.

This is a threaded conversation that can have contributions from multiple parties. My post was about how confusing some of these responses are if we don't extend the courtesy to all forum members by quoting the post we are referring to.

I even asked you if I was the one you were replying to. Your pretentious use of an obscure word to describe a behavior caused me to look up all the possible definitions including ones from the words root language to see how they may have applied to my post.
(Yes HellFlyer. Мы все товарищи ... but some apparently don't know this. )

I offered an explanation of how one definition may have been used and how I thought that it may have been misapplied.

You responded with more confusion based BS but stated that it was me you were referring to and then accused me of posting BS.

When I asked for a quote you did quote me but gave it someone else's byline.

How do you do that by freakin' accident?

When someone else called you on it you imply that I was the confused one.

... and you still refuse to use the quote tool and referred to my post by thread number. Which BTW means jack **** if any previous post gets deleted later or the thread is split or merged with another.

Please take the time to familiarize yourself with how a forum works best.
__________________

SLN member # 009