On 4/5/2022 2:52 PM, Iikka Hauhio
wrote:
I consider that
insulting. I never misrepresent you intentionally.
You do it EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. I say X. You tell me I've said
X-squared. I say I didn't say X-squared, I said X. You say
X-squared is just X times itself, so how is that any different
than X-squared? I say because X means one thing and X-squared
means another. You say that X-squared is just X times itself, and
if I didn't mean X-squared, why didn't I say so, and why am I
getting angry at you when you're just trying to have a nice
discussion?
I'm tired of this conversation.
I might have
misunderstood what you have said.
I don't think you misunderstood me. I think you understood me
just fine, disagreed with me, and tried to say my opinion was
wrong because you said so. Up to that point, I'm fine — you're
entitled to your opinion. I explain why I find your opinion
unconvincing — i.e., you haven't provided any evidence.
I'll make the observation that you (Iikka) have the tendency to seemingly ignore what the other person says, repeat what they wrote back to them in a way that ignores their main point, and then claim that you agree with them. But this comes across essentially as declaring that you're right, which might be irritating to many people.
For example, consider what you wrote to SuStel: "I think you too see how it could have a meaning, as you have multiple times described what it would mean, and I agree with your analysis."
SuStel has described multiple times why the meaning of {roppu'} would be "weird", i.e., it indicates the completion of an action on a non-action. Instead of acknowledging or addressing this, you've simply declared that it can be done, and then claimed that you agree with him. Effectively, this is saying that he agrees with you, which I can see why would be infuriating. Very clearly, if you did agree with his analysis, you'd recognise that {roppu'} doesn't make sense; so either you actually disagree with his analysis, or you don't fully understand it.
If I may make a suggestion, instead of "You said X, and I agree with you" (where the other person might not feel that X accurately represents what they said), it might be more conducive to a productive conversation to phrase it like, "I think you said X; is that right, and if not, what am I missing?"
(Or, you know, challenge the other person to a {vItHay'}, as is the Klingon custom.)
--
De'vID