Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 28 of 28

Thread: Travelling musicians

  1. #16
    Semi-Intelligent Entity xCrucialDudex's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,561
    Quote Originally Posted by straightXed View Post
    are you suggesting it isn't increasing?
    Are you? If yes, then how do you know?

  2. #17
    ..... straightXed's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    England, UK
    Posts
    12,530
    Quote Originally Posted by xCrucialDudex View Post
    Are you? If yes, then how do you know?
    Am i suggesting it isn't increasing? Why would i suggest that? How do you think one would know either way? Is this the only point of contention you have with my post?
    Others walk the bow, I walk the string

  3. #18
    Semi-Intelligent Entity xCrucialDudex's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,561
    Quote Originally Posted by straightXed View Post
    Am i suggesting it isn't increasing? Why would i suggest that? How do you think one would know either way? Is this the only point of contention you have with my post?
    You said

    The act of moving there is certainly not unusual, its an act that continues to happen at a measurable rate and that rate is increasing.


    How do you know it's increasing?

  4. #19
    ..... straightXed's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    England, UK
    Posts
    12,530
    Quote Originally Posted by xCrucialDudex View Post
    You said
    I think you misread what i wrote there.



    Quote Originally Posted by xCrucialDudex View Post
    How do you know it's increasing?[/I]
    Theres a whole bunch of stuff you aren't addressing in my post, if this is the only thing you are contending should i take it that you are conceding on all other points?
    Others walk the bow, I walk the string

  5. #20
    Semi-Intelligent Entity xCrucialDudex's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,561
    Quote Originally Posted by straightXed View Post
    I think you misread what i wrote there.
    Would you care to elaborate?

    Quote Originally Posted by straightXed View Post
    Theres a whole bunch of stuff you aren't addressing in my post, if this is the only thing you are contending should i take it that you are conceding on all other points?
    I'm sorry, but that's about the only thing that perked my interest there.

  6. #21
    ..... straightXed's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    England, UK
    Posts
    12,530
    Quote Originally Posted by xCrucialDudex View Post
    Would you care to elaborate?
    Re-read it, its just a semantic issue.



    Quote Originally Posted by xCrucialDudex View Post
    I'm sorry, but that's about the only thing that perked my interest there.
    Thats fine, apology accepted but if you aren't interested in discussing the other points then i may be less inclined to discuss just the things you want to discuss it just seems unfair. I will happily answer your questions when you answer mine...i think thats fair, don't you?
    Others walk the bow, I walk the string

  7. #22
    Semi-Intelligent Entity xCrucialDudex's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,561
    Quote Originally Posted by straightXed View Post
    Re-read it, its just a semantic issue.
    Done several times already, I can see only what you write. Increasing means increasing, i.e. rate is becoming greater. How else can this be understood? And if it's increasing, well, how do you know?


    Quote Originally Posted by straightXed View Post
    Thats fine, apology accepted but if you aren't interested in discussing the other points then i may be less inclined to discuss just the things you want to discuss it just seems unfair. I will happily answer your questions when you answer mine...i think thats fair, don't you?
    I always felt people were free to discuss whatever they find interesting. If you're disappointed someone doesn't find something you wrote interesting enough, well, write something else! And yes, life's unfair, someone like yourself should've learned that long time ago. Or wait, are you trolling me? xsecx put the dude on moderation as well, please.

  8. #23
    ..... straightXed's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    England, UK
    Posts
    12,530
    Quote Originally Posted by xCrucialDudex View Post
    Done several times already, I can see only what you write. Increasing means increasing, i.e. rate is becoming greater. How else can this be understood? And if it's increasing, well, how do you know?
    I think what i am referring to has gone over your head. But it is there.




    Quote Originally Posted by xCrucialDudex View Post
    I always felt people were free to discuss whatever they find interesting. If you're disappointed someone doesn't find something you wrote interesting enough, well, write something else! And yes, life's unfair, someone like yourself should've learned that long time ago. Or wait, are you trolling me? xsecx put the dude on moderation as well, please.
    I've not suggested you are not free to discuss what you find interesting but that conversations don't work so well if you suddenly stop discussing the points being discussed and besides have you considered that i may also be exercising this freedom? As you may have noticed the conversation isn't progressing as a result, so whilst it is your right to ignore the main points i made it has only resulted in this conversation and if this is what you find interesting then fine but i was interested in the original topic myself.

    Like i said previously it just comes across that you stop responding to these points because you didn't have a cohesive response, if thats not the case then fine but i would contest that me asking you to discuss the points i made before we move away from those points to answer your question is certainly not trolling by any means. I'm fine with you saying you are not interested in discussing it but then i must ask why engage into that discussion in the first place? And the fact that life isn't fair is true, not sure if you are trying to suggest something else by suggesting that i should have learned that a long time ago, i sense a little frustration but i could be wrong. But yes while life is unfair it doesn't mean striving for fairness is wrong or that we should sit back and accept things we believe to be unfair. So with that in mind we can go back to my suggestion of discussing things in a fair way, i am happy to continue with the discussion and move on to your question in due course of that, i am trying to be accommodating for what its worth but i think at this point you may just be more inclined to rebuke anything i write almost unconditionally.
    Others walk the bow, I walk the string

  9. #24
    Semi-Intelligent Entity xCrucialDudex's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,561
    Quote Originally Posted by straightXed View Post
    I think what i am referring to has gone over your head. But it is there.
    I can't really know that until you explain. If you feel like that's a lot of work, no problem.


    Quote Originally Posted by straightXed View Post
    I've not suggested you are not free to discuss what you find interesting but that conversations don't work so well if you suddenly stop discussing the points being discussed and besides have you considered that i may also be exercising this freedom? As you may have noticed the conversation isn't progressing as a result, so whilst it is your right to ignore the main points i made it has only resulted in this conversation and if this is what you find interesting then fine but i was interested in the original topic myself.

    Like i said previously it just comes across that you stop responding to these points because you didn't have a cohesive response, if thats not the case then fine but i would contest that me asking you to discuss the points i made before we move away from those points to answer your question is certainly not trolling by any means. I'm fine with you saying you are not interested in discussing it but then i must ask why engage into that discussion in the first place? And the fact that life isn't fair is true, not sure if you are trying to suggest something else by suggesting that i should have learned that a long time ago, i sense a little frustration but i could be wrong. But yes while life is unfair it doesn't mean striving for fairness is wrong or that we should sit back and accept things we believe to be unfair. So with that in mind we can go back to my suggestion of discussing things in a fair way, i am happy to continue with the discussion and move on to your question in due course of that, i am trying to be accommodating for what its worth but i think at this point you may just be more inclined to rebuke anything i write almost unconditionally.
    Conversations also don't work so well when you deliberately avoid explaining what you meant to say and simply send people back to what you'd written. So, your view is kind of one-sided, at best. And it's kinda funny to see you talking about this train of thought when you don't really put any energy into following your own convictions. Because, in my reality a fair type of discussion is when someone asks to explain what someone else meant to say and they just do it, because they maybe realize the way they express themselves in writing, or language generally speaking -- a tool that happens to be often subject to interpretation -- objectively is a challenge in communication process for not just recipient of a message, but also the communicator. To assume communicator is always delivering a fine message is arrogance. And if you really strive for fairness perhaps you should be able to admit that forcing your idea of fairness onto someone else isn't exactly fair. Of course, you can ask directly to address your points but appealing to fairness in order to evoke a desired behavior comes across as a little too manipulative.

    So far, I asked you directly to explain/rephrase what you'd written, because without complete understanding of your message I cannot really productively and constructively to continue participate in the discussion. Yet you insist I should reply nonetheless. It's weird that you'd want someone to stay misinformed and see them carry on with discussion.

  10. #25
    ..... straightXed's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    England, UK
    Posts
    12,530
    Quote Originally Posted by xCrucialDudex View Post
    I can't really know that until you explain. If you feel like that's a lot of work, no problem.
    Its just a case of reading it through, its a simple mistake in semantics, i had mentioned this. Its probably not going to be worth it now...its like having to explain a joke and it then seeming unfunny. If you really would like an explanation of it though i would happily explain




    Quote Originally Posted by xCrucialDudex View Post
    Conversations also don't work so well when you deliberately avoid explaining what you meant to say and simply send people back to what you'd written.
    Is this referring to the semantic issue? I asked you to read that again because i thought rereading it would make it clear and obvious, when it didn't it seems you had missed it but its not a big issue...it was a little bit of distraction from the main crux of things.


    Quote Originally Posted by xCrucialDudex View Post
    So, your view is kind of one-sided, at best.
    Well no, i would say its two sided at best because some people are happy to reread things if the response they initially gave indicates they have potentially misread it...it was only a couple of short sentences so i don't know why that would be such a hardship. But i appreciate that you have done this and still not seen it, its not a big issue i am just letting you know one of your replies indicated a slight misreading but its really not a big issue. I understand that with you it would seem one sided.

    Quote Originally Posted by xCrucialDudex View Post
    And it's kinda funny to see you talking about this train of thought when you don't really put any energy into following your own convictions. Because, in my reality a fair type of discussion is when someone asks to explain what someone else meant to say and they just do it, because they maybe realize the way they express themselves in writing, or language generally speaking -- a tool that happens to be often subject to interpretation -- objectively is a challenge in communication process for not just recipient of a message, but also the communicator. To assume communicator is always delivering a fine message is arrogance. And if you really strive for fairness perhaps you should be able to admit that forcing your idea of fairness onto someone else isn't exactly fair. Of course, you can ask directly to address your points but appealing to fairness in order to evoke a desired behavior comes across as a little too manipulative.
    Firstly thank you for the predicted rebuke. Secondly i am putting just as much energy as you are into this conversation, you have asked me to readdress points and i have asked you to, neither of us have and as a result neither of us are talking about the subject matter of the thread which apparently you no longer find interesting to talk about...at least with me. The semantic issue is really a throw away one aqnd the only one i haven't really explained. Your other question about a figure increasing is a question i am happy to answer and have considered my answer but it comes after i have asked questions of you which you simply have ignored and this falls inline with my convictions consistantly. I would like to answer your questions for you even if the answer seem irrelevent to me or perhaps uninteresting. But if you will simply just ignore my questions and suggest they are some how unworthy of your time then i find that a little bit rude especially when you still are expecting me to address your question. If you find what i have to say so uninteresting about your thread then thats fine but i am happy to return to talking about the original issue rather than this odd discussion that is clearly not going anywhere. I do not see what you really find so unacceptable about me asking you to answer the questions i asked of you before i address the one you asked of me...do you really not see that as fair? But lets be clear about this, i have never forced you to do anything i am clearly just exercising the choice you defined previously, you have always had a choice to converese with me or not as have i. There is no forcing of this whatsoever, i have presented what i believe to be fair and if you truly believe its unfair for me to ask you to answer my questions about the original matter then ok please feel free to choose not too. But like i have said i too am able to be free to choose and if i feel that someone is ignoring my points and questions in a very dismissive way then surely you can see why i would be inclined not to engage further? I mean surely you feel the same when i don't address your question? I am putting a lot of effort into being reosonable with you, a lot of people on here to find discussions with you very difficult and i am sure thats not really your aim is it? I mean you aren't actually trying to troll the boards are you? But i do hope we can return to the discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by xCrucialDudex View Post
    So far, I asked you directly to explain/rephrase what you'd written, because without complete understanding of your message I cannot really productively and constructively to continue participate in the discussion. Yet you insist I should reply nonetheless. It's weird that you'd want someone to stay misinformed and see them carry on with discussion.
    Ok, as far as i was aware the only thing you had asked me to explain or rephrase was a silly semantic issue that arose after you had asked your question yet ignored my own. It was just a throwaway point and not really the focus of this at all. If i have misunderstood you then i sincearly appologise and as i definitely do not wish you to answer the questions i asked without all the relative information needed. The questions i asked which related to your assertion in the post previous to them and the original post were as follows:


    I mean surely you can get your head round certain groups of immigrants being of a low number but still existing and it being perfectly fathomable?

    And you can surely understand that people from all over the world may find themselves there at some point and may choose to move there?

    What is it you can't get your head round if its not something i have already addressed?

    Now i don't know exactly what if anything about these questions needs rephrasing or needs explaining but i am very happy to do so if you could just let me know what bits you don't get and i will help so you are able to answer...if you so wish, no gun to your head or anything.
    Last edited by straightXed; 07-22-2012 at 05:33 AM.
    Others walk the bow, I walk the string

  11. #26
    Semi-Intelligent Entity xCrucialDudex's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,561
    Quote Originally Posted by straightXed View Post
    Its just a case of reading it through, its a simple mistake in semantics, i had mentioned this. Its probably not going to be worth it now...its like having to explain a joke and it then seeming unfunny. If you really would like an explanation of it though i would happily explain






    Is this referring to the semantic issue? I asked you to read that again because i thought rereading it would make it clear and obvious, when it didn't it seems you had missed it but its not a big issue...it was a little bit of distraction from the main crux of things.




    Well no, i would say its two sided at best because some people are happy to reread things if the response they initially gave indicates they have potentially misread it...it was only a couple of short sentences so i don't know why that would be such a hardship. But i appreciate that you have done this and still not seen it, its not a big issue i am just letting you know one of your replies indicated a slight misreading but its really not a big issue. I understand that with you it would seem one sided.



    Firstly thank you for the predicted rebuke. Secondly i am putting just as much energy as you are into this conversation, you have asked me to readdress points and i have asked you to, neither of us have and as a result neither of us are talking about the subject matter of the thread which apparently you no longer find interesting to talk about...at least with me. The semantic issue is really a throw away one aqnd the only one i haven't really explained. Your other question about a figure increasing is a question i am happy to answer and have considered my answer but it comes after i have asked questions of you which you simply have ignored and this falls inline with my convictions consistantly. I would like to answer your questions for you even if the answer seem irrelevent to me or perhaps uninteresting. But if you will simply just ignore my questions and suggest they are some how unworthy of your time then i find that a little bit rude especially when you still are expecting me to address your question. If you find what i have to say so uninteresting about your thread then thats fine but i am happy to return to talking about the original issue rather than this odd discussion that is clearly not going anywhere. I do not see what you really find so unacceptable about me asking you to answer the questions i asked of you before i address the one you asked of me...do you really not see that as fair? But lets be clear about this, i have never forced you to do anything i am clearly just exercising the choice you defined previously, you have always had a choice to converese with me or not as have i. There is no forcing of this whatsoever, i have presented what i believe to be fair and if you truly believe its unfair for me to ask you to answer my questions about the original matter then ok please feel free to choose not too. But like i have said i too am able to be free to choose and if i feel that someone is ignoring my points and questions in a very dismissive way then surely you can see why i would be inclined not to engage further? I mean surely you feel the same when i don't address your question? I am putting a lot of effort into being reosonable with you, a lot of people on here to find discussions with you very difficult and i am sure thats not really your aim is it? I mean you aren't actually trying to troll the boards are you? But i do hope we can return to the discussion.



    Ok, as far as i was aware the only thing you had asked me to explain or rephrase was a silly semantic issue that arose after you had asked your question yet ignored my own. It was just a throwaway point and not really the focus of this at all. If i have misunderstood you then i sincearly appologise and as i definitely do not wish you to answer the questions i asked without all the relative information needed. The questions i asked which related to your assertion in the post previous to them and the original post were as follows:


    I mean surely you can get your head round certain groups of immigrants being of a low number but still existing and it being perfectly fathomable?

    And you can surely understand that people from all over the world may find themselves there at some point and may choose to move there?

    What is it you can't get your head round if its not something i have already addressed?

    Now i don't know exactly what if anything about these questions needs rephrasing or needs explaining but i am very happy to do so if you could just let me know what bits you don't get and i will help so you are able to answer...if you so wish, no gun to your head or anything.
    I won't address your reply point by point, simply because I'm short on time right now and will be leaving soon to meet up with a friend.

    However trivial and/or throwaway the point, I felt for some reason it was an important one (maybe because I understood it in a completely different way from the one you meant it to sound, but anyway). Overall, I find it extremely important to always try to take into consideration every detail if I look at a piece of art, listen to a musical composition or reading someone's reply on the Internet forum. It's a matter of principle to try not to make any conclusions until I've reached seemingly complete understanding of what I've experienced (best to my capacity and however erroneous it may be eventually), which is often characterized by a distinct feeling. That feeling, it didn't happen with your reply, that's why I'm reluctant to go further with it and am asking to explain what you'd meant to say. I'm honestly lost as to how else that throwaway point can be understood. Perhaps, that will give you a better idea about my "predicted rebuke".

    By and large, though, I'm kind of amazed at why you would go into this much detail to discuss something so obvious. What you're talking about makes perfect sense and it kinda goes without discussion. My statement about how I cannot wrap my mind around Neil's decision, is not to be understood literally. All I said essentially was that I personally find it hard to completely and fully relate to his decision, because on certain levels my personal values and aspirations in life would prevent me from doing something like that. Generally speaking, of course I can wrap my mind around such a decision and everything you wrote before. Hence no interest to discuss this, it's just obvious, and in my opinion doesn't deserve such a high-profile discussion.

    And, no, I've never trolled anyone except my close friends or people who first attempted to troll me. And, no, I am not intentionally trying to be difficult with anyone. Ever.

    Cheers!

  12. #27
    ..... straightXed's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    England, UK
    Posts
    12,530
    Quote Originally Posted by xCrucialDudex View Post
    I won't address your reply point by point, simply because I'm short on time right now and will be leaving soon to meet up with a friend.

    However trivial and/or throwaway the point, I felt for some reason it was an important one (maybe because I understood it in a completely different way from the one you meant it to sound, but anyway). Overall, I find it extremely important to always try to take into consideration every detail if I look at a piece of art, listen to a musical composition or reading someone's reply on the Internet forum. It's a matter of principle to try not to make any conclusions until I've reached seemingly complete understanding of what I've experienced (best to my capacity and however erroneous it may be eventually), which is often characterized by a distinct feeling. That feeling, it didn't happen with your reply, that's why I'm reluctant to go further with it and am asking to explain what you'd meant to say. I'm honestly lost as to how else that throwaway point can be understood. Perhaps, that will give you a better idea about my "predicted rebuke".
    Well the predicted rebuke was down to any attempt i made to make the conversation more palatable but continuing to receive a lack of response to the points which you have now said you fully agree with but i like you wasn't about to jump to a conclusion that you felt that way. Especially as you had contended what i had said to start with and would only respond by saying you weren't interested in replying to those points even though i was under the impression that maybe you were really struggling with the concept. Stranger things have happened and theres no harm in asking questions to be absolutely sure.

    Quote Originally Posted by xCrucialDudex View Post
    By and large, though, I'm kind of amazed at why you would go into this much detail to discuss something so obvious. What you're talking about makes perfect sense and it kinda goes without discussion. My statement about how I cannot wrap my mind around Neil's decision, is not to be understood literally. All I said essentially was that I personally find it hard to completely and fully relate to his decision, because on certain levels my personal values and aspirations in life would prevent me from doing something like that. Generally speaking, of course I can wrap my mind around such a decision and everything you wrote before. Hence no interest to discuss this, it's just obvious, and in my opinion doesn't deserve such a high-profile discussion.
    Well as obvious as it may be for you what you had written painted a totally different picture and made it sound like you had issues with the concept, what amazes me was why you didn't just respond as such in the first place and avoid a large discussion of something that could have passed with a relatively small amount of discussion. But whilst at this point in your life you cannot imagine yourself doing it you still should be able to comprehend that others can and do emigrate, so writing that you don't comprehend why someone would was questioned, i mean i can't comprehend me moving to France but i can fully comprehend the choices of those that want to or do. So it wasn't to be taken literally but there was no way of me knowing this but you could have said so a lot earlier, this is why the suspicion of trolling was entertained. It only received such high profile discussion because you failed to clarify when questioned about what you said or meant to say...something you later accused me of and said you would expect in terms of a fair discussion. But i agree it was really not necessary at all and it was never my intention, i had one simple issue with your post and its taken this long to establish what you wrote was not actually how you thought about things. I am glad you are able comprehend what really is a completely understandable action and i think someone struggling with that concept would really need to rethink things.

    Quote Originally Posted by xCrucialDudex View Post
    And, no, I've never trolled anyone except my close friends or people who first attempted to troll me. And, no, I am not intentionally trying to be difficult with anyone. Ever.

    Cheers!
    Well i haven't attempted to troll you so you are either saying you haven't trolled me or that we are close friends!!!

    Do you think you come across as being difficult sometimes?
    Others walk the bow, I walk the string

  13. #28
    Semi-Intelligent Entity xCrucialDudex's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,561
    Well, define being difficult.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •