I was small, mouthy and bad tempered and therefore got filled-in quite regularly until the painful moments became too painful. Was a late bloomer, so to speak.
Really sir you could have at least used montebank a more creative term. Thou equally as inflammatory a term and unjust as charlatan . Here your word for the day decorum look it up please .
This is where Steve started, http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/loun...ch-preamplifier-part-ii-6297.html#post4251615, and he's dead wrong ...
It doesn't really matter very much, it's not a very nice thing to be called. Dishonest. I guess I might feel it reflected on me personally. My personality. My personal integrity.
OTOH you can call me a charlatan all day long, but the cap doesn't fit, so... I don't find it very offensive. I always note insults, however, they affect the rules of engagement.
Personal attacks are OK by me. You want to treat me like an idiot, but you want to take offence if I call you an idiot. That's like, the condescending con-man's set piece number one.
Oh please, can't you remember that we're all gentlemen.
What? Not one charlatan? Out of 2.75 billion english-speaking internet users worldwide?
It's not just all in the rude words.
OTOH you can call me a charlatan all day long, but the cap doesn't fit, so... I don't find it very offensive. I always note insults, however, they affect the rules of engagement.
Personal attacks are OK by me. You want to treat me like an idiot, but you want to take offence if I call you an idiot. That's like, the condescending con-man's set piece number one.
Oh please, can't you remember that we're all gentlemen.
What? Not one charlatan? Out of 2.75 billion english-speaking internet users worldwide?
It's not just all in the rude words.
In the universe of inter-personal relations:
Calling someone a bad thing is always a personal attack.
I think you need to get out a bit more - maybe go to the pub....
I'd love to hear your reasoning as well. Tell me why exactly that charlatan is any more inflammatory or unjust a word than "thief." "Because it is" isn't an argument by the way.
se
So you're saying that calling someone who steals a thief is a personal attack? Really?
se
IOW, Steve shouldn't take offence if someone calls him a loud-mouthed thug, because that's what he obviously is ...
Last edited:
You have to be kidding. And BTW my comment of this afternoon holds for Mr. Hawksford, he was out of his expertise and his math was just plain wrong. Your problem is that you don't understand the math at that level either (that's not an insult BTW). IIRC jn also found fault with his experimental technique, you should recognize that.
Last edited:
Still waiting for an actual argument as to how charlatan is a personal attack. I'm just seeing a bunch of non sequitur smoke screens going up. If charlatan is indeed a personal attack, then there should be an actual argument as to why it is a personal attack. And "because it is" isn't an argument.
se
In the social universe* saying to a person's face or in their presence they are a bad thing is a personal attack.
I'm surprised you don't realize this.
As I said, I think you should go out more...maybe go to the pub.
.........................
*This discussion board is part of the social universe.
From Wikipedia, "a person practising quackery or some similar confidence trick in order to obtain money, fame or other advantages" - you haven't pointed out the quackery, confidence trick, money, fame or other advantages, bits yet ...
The math was right. The interpretation was nonsense. It's been explained repeatedly, and there's a reason that he couldn't get it published anywhere reputable.
I think maybe you've spent a bit too much time at the pub.
Let's say for the sake of argument that the person in question is that bad thing. A thief for example. Are you actually arguing that it is a personal attack to say that person is a thief? And that someone who is a thief should never be called a thief? Is that your argument?
se
- Status
- Not open for further replies.