BLOGS!
Posted on 09/15/2010 6:20:00 PM PDT by jveritas
Thank you for the ping bd476.
“My islam comment was a random silly joke. Was the first thing that popped into my head....”
Reinforcing why some here observe what he posted, and agree with him.
It would only take a few seconds to click his page, and see the first lines are a quote from the Bible.
A tiny bit of thought at that point might lead a thoughtful person to not make snide remarks.
I realize I haven't been on FR as much as "usual" lately, but - geesh - what do you mean??? What trend?
I am SO sorry to see you leave, FRiend. I really valued your comments and opinions over the years. The translation service you provided for us a few years ago was invaluable... THANK YOU.
I really hope you reconsider...
I think people can read the Bible and still have a sense of humor. Some apparently can’t.
LOL that’s what I thought too. chet and those darn pit bulls.
I hope you reconsider. Take a break and refocus.
Iraqi Documents Are Put on Web, and Search Is On [FR's jveritas makes the news]
Kinda strange. #267 says June 1, 2007......but I could swear I scrolled over it earlier, and it said June 1, 1997, which I knew had to be bogus. Was it corrected, or am I losing it? And 255 1/2 is just weird. Good to hear from you.
I certainly cannot fault his reasoning for leaving FreeRepublic. I just wish I knew what it was.
“Idiot Breyer was on Larry King tonight and he seemed to back-track.”
I saw he was going to be on, I’ve watched him before on cspan. Why would you waste your time tuning into that - LK OR Breyer??
Heh, yeah, it DID say June 1, 1997.
That 255 1/2 was explained to me by the guy who posted it (the post originally had a big picture of Rush smoking a cigar) but his explanation went over my head after the first sentence full of computer jargon. He inserted that post from post #300 somehow..
Anyway, it’s almost scary what some people can fabricate on the internet, especially with photoshop et al. It’s getting harder and harder to separate fact from fake.
You will most certainly be missed.
I understand, though.
I wish we could just get some of the yapping hyenas off of here. They can be a detriment, but I know it's not that easy.
Fine, you are not being banded for your opinion. You are being a cry baby and stomping away. Get a backbone.
BLOGS!
I received a follow-up communication from jveritas elaborating. I suggested to him he should share his reason with the group.
While I won’t (and I believe it’s against FR rules) divulge the contents of a private mail, it does seem at least one of the topics I strongly support, he strongly does not. And yes, there’s an indirect correlation with the election results of the day.
I wish he would share it with the group. Makes understanding quite a bit easier. It’s pretty simple really.
If he’s still reading I’ll suggest again he could clear up a lot by simply telling everyone.
My take is: the irresistable force, and the immovable object.
Too many not resisting the irresistable force.
Not enough, remaining immovable. :)
-
jveritas, you still out there?
(still extending a wish you’ll reconsider)
I will also make my ap[ology public.
I NEVER said you were muslim, I was just GUESSING that since you are from the middle east that you had a different attitude of muslims.
You would have grown up with them, played with them, befriended them as a child.
I KNOW you are a Christian, but that did not mean you didn’t KNOW many muslims as friends especially from possibly Lebabnese social groups that are here in America or just from speaking to people in the street.
Because of all these things, I took a guess that, while you didn’t agree with islam, our words on this forum lately were getting too aggressive, and since I was guessing you had muslim friends, you were angry at how angry we were all getting here, especially me.
and BOY, I was wrong!
I love you man, and I am sorry I guessed what I guessed! :)
Oh, it's not you. Clearly my IQ alone dropped the forum average severely. - paulycy Class of 2008
People are wound tight, that’s for sure.
It is a general problem with written communication. People know themselves, and when reading people responding to them, they assume that the other person has the same access to knowledge.
Further, you have no visual clues about how your conversation is being interpreted. If you were in a room with him, he would see your face and probably know you were being funny. And if he didn’t, you’d see the negative reaction on his face and explain it was a joke and say you were sorry, and he’d realize he had overreacted, and you’d move on.
In the e-mail/slow-chat world like this, he reads your comment; he knows he is under death threats for his faith, and (speculation) maybe perceives the personal glee over things like koran-burning here as putting HIS life in direct danger (think about that, if the MILITARY is afraid of getting killed over koran-burning, how would an American Christian civilian living in a middle-eastern country feel?
For all we know, he has people around him who DO try to convert him. Further, he just went through a stroke of conversation in another thread in the past week where it seemed someone attacked him for being from Lebanon, as if he should keep quiet about what happens HERE (another somewhat of a misunderstanding).
SO he sees your comment, has no way of judging the purpose, and starts thinking, it could be nothing, or it could be something, and it makes me mad.
Then, and this is the important part, because we are TRAINED in verbal/visual communication. His brain expects that if you were being friendly, you will react to his “response” and fix it. But you don’t — because you can’t see him. And his brain starts telling him this is serious. And the more he waits, the more he stews. By the time he’s ready to respond, he’s no longer in the “what did you mean” place, he’s in the “I hate you for attacking me” place.
It’s important for all of us to remember that. As a published opinion writer, I often get e-mails from friends and enemies alike that have a bone to pick with somethihng I’ve said. And if they are several paragraphs long, you can almost ALWAYS see this progression. It starts polite, the first paragraph expresses the disagreement in conversational form. The second paragraph then restates it more forcefully, as if you disagreed with their first paragraph. By the third paragraph, they express exasperation that you aren’t understanding, and then they start name-calling.
It’s because they were writing as if they were talking to me, and I was staring at them without responding in any way. Their brain expected response, and guided their next statements.
Anyway, I know this is long-winded. I like giving my theory of internet communication.
It’s why as childish as it may seem, emoticons and sarcasm tags have a real place, as the replace the visual cues.
Dude, breathing through your mouth is just sick and wrong!
Pervert.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.