Why am I not banned yet??

[jwocky]

I have no idea, I just liked his BBQ setup with river view. I am in Missouri, obviously named after the Missouri River. Now, the Missouri were an Indian tribe, I am not sure whether they are still around. And the name means "people coming in wooden canoes", says Wikipedia.
Soooooo, the translation, some other Indians gave as "the big muddy thing" is wrong and entirely libel ...

[Octal450]

Secret message of what I think of bugman:
sǝןɟısɥ' ןʎıuƃ' ɥıdoɔɹıʇ˙

[bomber]

Horray wrote

It's called substantiating claims - it isn't "out of context" if it backs up a statement that is made, which is why it is so easy for people to follow bugman's line of reasoning: he tends to go the extra mile and puts all sorts of links into his postings that allow people to easily verify who said something, why it was said, in response to whom, and under what circumstances - from where I am standing, that's what makes all the difference: I don't need to believe what bugman is saying, I can simply follow the pointers/quotes he posts and then make up my own mind independently - aka, the power of quoting

We may not always appreciate being quoted, and we may consider certain quotes to be "out of context", but that's better left as an exercise to the reader, aka this community.

(in case you missed it, some would claim that I am a little familiar with quoting and with quoting in the FlightGear ecosystem in particular)

Anyway, in all seriousness, by inflating such incidents this much, you are empowering the very people you are disagreeing with - and I am saying that as someone who's own behavior is also considered highly controversial by some, some of whom even ended up deciding not to participate in the forum/wiki anymore in response to my involvement apparently.

Realistically, this is the worst thing that people can do to deal with others who they disagree with - if, let's say, Thorsten doesn't get along with me, and disagrees with my way of posting here, and contributing to the wiki, he'd be well-advised to stay around and keep an eye on me, than just hand over this place to someone who he strongly disagrees with, so that it goes even more haywire.

Equally, whenever you are inflating minor misconceptions like this, you are empowering people like bugman even more - because there really is no way that you can win this debate as long as you're using these tactics (and language), and as long as people like bugman are so eloquent when it comes to dealing with these accusations.

It's as simple as that ...

[KL-666]

There are two mistakes that immediately jump at me in the text of Hooray.

1) The analogy of Thorsten having problems with Hooray and must hang around to watch Hooray. All fine for Thorsten if he can speak up. But if his texts are consistently moderated away, then Thorsten is only wasting his time watching Hooray.

2) Bugman dealing eloquently with situations. Never noticed that. He bans so fast, there is no chance to show off his eloquence (if there actually is any).

Kind regards, Vincent

[KL-666]

Here is a perfect example of what goes deeply wrong on that other forum. Wlbragg demands of Bomber to live by the whims of his suspicions. That is no way for people to go about among each other. It is an utterly indecent proposal. Really, everyone would benefit from better relations, if people quit being suspicious like the first housewife next door.

Re: Out of context quoting to mislead

Postby wlbragg » Mon Sep 05, 2016 12:02 am

I would like to get back to the crux of the original post also, because what I really don't understand is why it is considered so "out of context"?

I have to tell you that I had immediate suspicion when I saw Bomber posting, what appeared to be, these random topics. What is he up to? Is this a mind game of some sorts or is it a genuine quest for knowledge? After following a couple of them progress in a civil fashion, I gave the benefit of the doubt to Bomber. But the suspicion was certainly there from the start.
Then Bugman post a quote from Bomber which said what it said and raised the suspicion level in my mind back into the red.
You said what you said Bomber, what is "out of context? The possibility that the current discussion going on at the time was genuine?
If you want the benefit of doubt...

https://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=30258&sid=6f9b7b475ce040b788b7d3ffdd1c03b7&start=90#p293625

[IAHM-COL]

Here is a perfect example

Postby wlbragg » Mon Sep 05, 2016 12:02 am

Oh wow.
Bomber... you are guilty till proved the contrary. And you should not be concern, or complain about it.

[bomber]

Long suspected there are entrenched views but was hoping it was just to the content of my posts but it seems it goes further than this to the very motive of my posting.

It's a shame.

[KL-666]

Wlbragg is getting repetitious.

My suspicion was up from the very start

https://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=30258&p=293635&sid=7d016423b5cbc7aa39311a31ecef5264#p293633

After that he starts making up excuses for how his suspicion developed deeper. But that is completely besides the point. The sick thing here is to have suspicion from the very start. How can that be, unless it is a blatant prejudice?

Kind regards, Vincent

[bomber]

How can anyone be suspicious about a flight modelling conversation in a forum specifically for flight modelling ?

Nobody forces them to join in the conversation, if it doesn't interest people, then don't read it, don't post to it.. but to have suspicions about the motive behind the conversations is just bizarre.

What do they think I'm attempting to do ?
What's the worst I can do, be seen as a reasonable person, have an intelligent conversation about a topic I might just know a bit about, on a forum dedicated to the subject ? And whilst doing so, pass on a bit of knowledge to other people interested in flight modeling or using JSBsim ?

You know I might even learn something from doing it, view something from a different perspective or understand better a technique used.

Simon

[KL-666]

Now, that is funny. As scientific as Thorsten wants to come over about his own probable contradictions, as unscientific he judges others, getting completely indulged in unscientific matters like motive. And worse, randomly picking one expression of motive as completely true and the other as completely false.

But the actual fact of the matter is that we've had by now several people posting here who later stated elsewhere their true motive to be to keep arguments going etc

https://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=30258&start=90#p293643