Your opinions are completely irrelevant on this topic, Barry and not any 
different from anything we've already heard from you a thousand times. 

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" <raunchydog@> wrote:
> >
> > Share, Emily's frustration with you isn't it isn't about 
> > labels, it's about lies and your lack of courage to have 
> > an intelligent discussion with her that would allow her 
> > an opportunity to defend herself against your allegations.
> 
> I would like to thank Raunchydog for this definition
> of what, in her opinion, constitutes an "intelligent
> discussion." It's when someone agrees to argue with 
> your self so that it can defend things said about its 
> self that it doesn't agree with. 
> 
> In other words, "intelligent discussion" is All About
> Ego. 
> 
> Someone gets their button pushed by someone else on 
> the forum. They demand "satisfaction," in the form of
> an argument they believe they can "win," and thus
> "defend themselves against your allegations." 
> 
> When you come right down to it, isn't this a pretty
> pissy way to spend one's time? Feeling that one has
> to draw other people into confrontations so that you
> can "defend" that which does not even exist -- your
> self, and your puny attachment to what you think that
> self is, and how it should be perceived?
> 
> My feeling is that if someone says something about me,
> that's pretty much their business. It does not affect
> me unless I allow it to. Seems to me that if you allow
> what people say or think about you to affect you so 
> much that you feel a need to argue about it, that's 
> your problem, not the problem of the people who blow
> you off.
>


Reply via email to