|
U-Know! Forum » NEW FEATURE: Advice to Demonstrators After the Trashing of Millbank |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
dodge one 1242 posts |
Nov 19, 2010, 13:44
|
||
|
If you refer to Myers actual comments, they are still a matter of record. However, if you are intimating about his {Merricks} comments in reply to me further up the thread....well, happy hunting in the ethereal internet edited comments trash bin. At least i have the conviction and gumption to stand behind my actual words and argue to the best of my ability{such as it is}. Whatever anyway, feel free to continue ignoring me. An honest REAL free thinker doesn't stand a chance amongst these ranks.
|
|||
|
dodge one 1242 posts |
Nov 19, 2010, 13:49
|
||
|
Your opinions on things are so predictable at this point. I don't know that a guy like yourself is worth engaging in conversation about anything anymore. You are a coward that retracts his points of view with un-clever editing and twisting of others comments.
|
|||
|
Kid Calamity 9044 posts |
Nov 19, 2010, 14:14
|
||
|
I was referring to the edits that Myers said that Merrick had been making to earlier posts. I think that sort of thing, when done in serious discussion is a bit underhand and frankly beneath what I thought Merrick was all about, Dodge. _____________________________________ And, yes Dodge, to a certain extent I'm afraid I do tend to ignore most of your posts, these days. Since your return you have had less to contribute as constructive and interesting content. You seem a very different person this time round. So much of your conversation comes out simply as an angry or repremanding attitude towards pretty much everyone. I'm afraid don't feel I glean anything insightful or even vaguely edifying from your posts, these days - like I do with many other folk, here. We all have moments of disagreement every now and then, but we don't hold grudges for long and certainly don't go dredging the forum's archive to find long forgotten indiscretions. I'll continue reading what I want to - and ignore what I want, also. So, ner. That's all I want to say on the matter in this thread, as it's diverting the conversation's theme. But if you want to continue feel free to start a thread all about it.
|
|||
landells 680 posts |
Nov 19, 2010, 15:20
|
||
Dodge, Merrick made his post at 18.50 and edited it at 19.12 but your response to his post wasn't made until 19.18 - so Merrick's edit wouldn't have been anything to do with your comments
|
|||
IanB 6761 posts |
Edited Nov 19, 2010, 16:31
Nov 19, 2010, 16:23
|
||
|
I have little in common with Merrick in terms of what he sees as the range of means that are acceptable in achieving his aims and those of his fellow travellers. That said I often post my first drafts on HH boards and then edit and add to them even though they are live posts. Mainly for typos but sometimes for sense and expanding a thought. Maybe he does some of that too. Once or twice I have made an inflamatory or personal comment and thought better of it almost immediately and knocked it out. This after getting into some daft rows about music (of all things) with Keith and others. In those circs I never mark them as an "edit". Which I probably should. That said editing someone else's post in quote (rather than excerpting it) is v naughty if that is what he has done.
|
|||
Myers 151 posts |
Nov 19, 2010, 16:30
|
||
|
It's on the undercover cop thread, Ian. My original comment is at the bottom of page three, his re edit is at the end of page four. On the last page I mention the re edit. It's not a huge deal, but shows that a post can be twisted, even in a small way, to suit your own needs.
|
|||
grufty jim 1978 posts |
Edited Nov 19, 2010, 16:31
Nov 19, 2010, 16:31
|
||
|
IanB wrote: I have little in common with Merrick in terms of what he sees as the range of means that are acceptable in achieving his aims and those of his fellow travellers. That said I often post my first drafts on HH boards and then edit and add to them even though they are live posts. Mainly for typos but sometimes for sense and expanding a thought. Maybe he does some of that too. In those circs I never mark them as an "edit". Which I probably should. That said editing someone else's post in quote (rather than excerpting it) is v naughty if that is what he has done. I don't know what Merrick is alleged to have done here, though knowing him as well as I do, I'm confident there was no malicious intent or attempts to dishonestly portray someone else's views. Like IanB, I often make minor edits after a post has gone live. Mostly it's to correct spelling / grammar. Occasionally I'll rephrase something that I find clumsy upon subsequent reading, though never to alter the meaning of what I said -- merely to try and clarify it. Once in a blue moon I'll add to / edit the substance of what I said, in which case I'll always mark it as an edit. Regarding the quotation of the post I'm replying to, I always try to quote either the full post (where practical) or else a lengthy extract (even though this, weirdly, sometimes comes under fire). I do this so as to retain the context of the original... i.e. in an attempt to be fair. I find the tendency of others to mischaracterise / take statements out of context very frustrating.
|
|||
|
Myers 151 posts |
Edited Nov 19, 2010, 16:34
Nov 19, 2010, 16:33
|
||
|
Hi Jim. As I say, it's not a huge deal, but he re wrote some of my quote, and labelled it as a direct quote from me.. It's not a biggy in this instance. Edited for appalling grammar.
|
|||
Merrick 2148 posts |
Nov 19, 2010, 17:56
|
||
|
Myers, I'm genuinely sorry that you feel I misrepresented you. I assure you i had not intention of it. As it was in reply to your post, which I haven't edited at all, I presumed that people would have read your post before mine, otherwise they're diving in the middle of a discussion and wouldn't make much sense of it. You said "Of course, the worst thing about this crass statement, is that we are talking about it rather than the ethics of what happened. Bit of a shame". I said "Incidentally, I completely agree that the worst thing on this thread is [Myers wrote:] that we are talking about it rather than the ethics of what happened." I felt - still do - that it's a broad agreement, that whatever our different feelings about the terminology we spent so long discussing, it's a shame that it made the thread discuss that instead of some of the other issues involved. I think it's fair enough when people select the bits of a post they're replying to to focus on, as long as the original remians intact. Again, sorry you felt this was unfair.
|
|||
|
Myers 151 posts |
Nov 19, 2010, 18:01
|
||
|
Hi merrick. It's not a big deal I kind of wish I'd never mentioned it. Have a good weekend.
|
| Pages: 9 – [ Previous | 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 9 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| U-Know! Forum Index | |
