We have some idiot Californians who moved in down the street. They paid $500k when they could have got the same house and updated the yard one block over for $300k. Do you guys not look at comps?

Eh, could be worse. I bought my house from an FBI agent who was working in South America on something. She had this house built sight unseen. So all the light fixtures were one bulb closet size. I.e. large master bedroom, large living room, etc one bulb for the whole room. The master closet had a two bulb fixture. She also told me some malarkey about how you had to manually add water to the dish washer to make it run. The water cutoff was turned off.

http://www.refugees.bratfree.com/read.php?2,438957

Excerpts:

JoJo: "...Ever get on r/lostgeneration? It's full of the most obnoxious, stereotypical millennials who all think they deserve a free ride through life. When they're not complaining about their landlords having the audacity to expect the rent every month, they're whining about how the 'boomers' stole all the jobs and houses and deliberately destroyed the economy just to torture them. It's snowflake central!"

Techie: "Wow, I guess every generation has a segment consisting of snowflakes who only see the worst in everything. My observation is a little different. Millennials got to buy their houses for pennies on the dollar, as baby boomers and Gen Xs were giving up their real estate to the bank. Millennials are the most educated segment of the society, holding the most college degrees. They saw the highest wage growth and were most likely to be chosen for promotions at their jobs. Millennials benefited the most from crypto currencies and have built more wealth with their smartphones than any other generation. Think YouTubers, think bitcoin mining that created millionaires in a very short time. Maybe I am wrong but Millennials did not get the short end of the stick, in my opinion."

misskitty: "Do you know how much college degrees cost today? Even if you go with the cheapest option of commuting to a state school, you’re paying $10k/year for tuition alone. Living on campus would add an extra $10k. A private school is at least $40k/year. Then at least several hundred per year for university fees, and the school adds new fees each year. If you drive you pay hundreds per semester for parking. Unless you get an athletic or National Merit Scholarship, scholarships will give you less than $1000 if you’re chosen after you fill applications that are almost as taxing as job applications. Schools also go out of their way to keep you from graduating on time because they want more tuition money. AP/IB credit gives a lot less college credit than it used to. Having the most college degrees also means the competition is tougher. Now they expect concurrent experience in the field. There’s still a lot of politics involved as always.

"Housing prices have skyrocketed because of foreign investors. Also saving for a house became more difficult because apartment rents cost a lot more. Cryptocurrencies are the socially stunted people’s version of MLM. Most people lose money and a lot of the ones who gain still need regular jobs to pay the bills. And earning money on Youtube takes at least as much work as a job. You have to regularly make entertaining videos and hope that enough people enjoy them enough to subscribe. You wouldn’t say a director, producer, or actor has an easy job, would you?"

Do you guys not look at comps? ~ Ben at December 12, 2020 7:20 AM

A lot of people don't even know what "comp" means. If their agent didn't walk them through it, he/she failed in doing his/her fiduciary duty.

On the other hand, they may not have cared that they were overpaying

Having lived in the East Bay, I can understand how your neighbors might have had a distorted view of what a reasonable price for a house is. A nice townhouse in the East Bay that sells for $500,000 would, in a major city in North Carolina, cost $300,000. However, that same $300,000, in coastal California cities, would get you a hovel. So, you enter the new market prepared to overpay.

Denver had the same problem a few years back. Californians were moving to Colorado in droves and bidding up the price of houses. Rapidly rising prices in California had given them considerable equity when they sold there while Prop 13 kept their property taxes low. As a result, they were able to bid up the price of the houses they were buying.

Due to the sudden influx of Californians bidding up prices, Colorado property taxes were rising faster than incomes and people were finding themselves struggling to keep the houses they had been able to easily afford only a few years before. Rapidly rising housing costs were pricing new buyers out of the market.

Texas will be California now, in 25 years. The fucking idiots moving here to escape the insanity, are voting to start that insanity here. Wilco went blue this election. Wilco. 15 years ago it was the conservative bastion against Austin.

I'm looking for retirement land in Wyoming.

> Californians were moving to
> Colorado in droves and bidding
> up the price

Having cashed out of L.A. real estate so blissfully just three months ago, I'm now ready to affirm that this is a real problem, and sumbuddy oughtadoo sumthin' boutit. It's cryin' shame, really… People can be soooo selfish!!

Meanwhile, yeah, it was nice to arrive in the destination region with some dry powder for battle.

I can understand Conan. I'm just ranting. As Momof4 notes the stories of arrogant Californians moving and then trying to make their news homes back into their old ones with all the same issues that caused them to move are voluminous.

Truth is I overpaid for this house. I was on a time constraint (baby on the way) so I was willing to overpay to make my timeline. Though I only overpaid by about $25k.

The $500k house actually has a story behind it. The husband owns a construction business. So whenever his guys are out of work he has them working on his house. One consequence is the house is very very nice. Another is they had a home invasion obviously related to some of his employees. So after that the wife wanted to move. Not that it would make any difference. After all he is still going to have his guys working on his new house. But still feelings are feelings. So she wanted to move and he didn't. His solution was to price a $300k house at $500k and tell his wife the market was bad. Unfortunately for him some Californians showed up and were willing to overpay by $200k. Though the trick did work for two years.

My husband and I have been speculating about whether Elon Musk has bought the fixer-upper down the street from us in North Austin, and will put in a pool and have us over. (Unlikely on all counts).

No, you aren't the only one who thinks that when seeing the video... Read the reply tweets.

Nothing tickles the heart like a mag 4.5 temblor sixty hours after you've closed escrow.

…On the exit side, I mean.

Think of this next time you see an athlete doing some solitary ritual before the start.

But still feelings are feelings. So she wanted to move and he didn't. His solution was to price a $300k house at $500k and tell his wife the market was bad. ~ Ben at December 12, 2020 9:54 AM

I can relate. I kept my real estate license active, so I'm trying to earn some coin as an agent while I find a permanent gig. A house the client was interested in was $50,000 overpriced. The owners did some magnificent upgrades to it and want to recoup their expenses, but they did the upgrades on low-ROI elements and outdid the neighborhood. So, the comps won't support the asking price. The owners are going to need a transplanted Californian with cash to buy it; someone willing to buy in with negative equity. Client is not that person.

We almost did that in California. The neighborhood was not full of people who upgraded their houses, so when we reached a certain point, we stopped upgrading or curbed our vision, doing a simple upgrade instead. We sold at the top of the prices supported by comps - seven offers, all above asking, and easily recouped our upgrade expenses. Both of us had some experience in the mortgage industry, so we knew which upgrades have a high ROI and focused on those.

While I agree that Ben and Momof4 have a point, you all also need to realize that our very own Texas raised kids are also way more liberal than their parents. After years of liberal indoctrination at the public school, they are ready to drink the Koolaid when they hit the campus, especially at places like UT. I have several friends whose kids have come home virtually unrecognizable after a couple semesters on that particular campus. Even A&M isn’t the safe bet it once was.

My recommendation is to make sure YOU teach your kids to think before you send them off. I taught mine to question conventional wisdom, especially if fits all of your biases too closely. Question what you are taught, ask why a lot. We are also fortunate that my daughter attends Baylor, which while liberal, still has a classical curriculum and open free speech. It’s a good option for bright students. They discount their tuition heavily for high performers, which puts it in reach for students who have a real drive for a college education and not a college party.

Oh I am well aware Sheep Mom. My sister moved to Seattle and fits in quite well there. We don't talk much because I'm not that interested in being bullied. It is a bit interesting that she can't seem to understand a conversation requires consent of everyone involved in it. Just because she wants to give me a lecture doesn't mean I have to stay around and listen to it.

And when I say 'can't understand' I'm not doing the passive aggressive doesn't agree with me thing. I literally mean can't understand. She wants a closer relationship. We've talked about what needs to be done to make that happen. In really basic terms too. The very concept that I get a say in things appears to befuddle her. I would have though my ability to hang up the phone or drive away (which I've had to do multiple times) would be evidence enough. Guess not.

Back on the more general point, your kids spend 8-9 hours a day in public school. Either you teach your values or they get the school's. By the time college rolls around it is way too late to change things. Only life with it's patented hammer to the head technique has much effect.

RIP Tommy Lister.

President Lindberg : [phone call from President to Korben Dallas] Major Dallas, I first would like to salute a warrior, you are a shining example of this Army's might, in the name of the Federation and it's territory...

Korben Dallas : Mr. President, Mr. President, any idea when you gonna be getting to the point?

President Lindberg : O.K. There's a ball of fire, it's 1200 miles in diameter headin straight for Earth, and we have no idea how to stop it. *That's* the problem.

Korben Dallas : [sighs] How long do we have?

Scientist's Aide : [off the President's look] If its speed remains constant, in an hour and fifty-seven minutes.

Korben Dallas : I'll call you back in two hours.

The very idea that if ones children do not end up thinking similarly to their parents once they are adults is evidence that they are not independent thinkers is astonishing.

I am left to wonder how many folks here see the world exactly as their parents did... and if their parents saw the world exactly as their parents... and so on all the way back to the dawn of humanity.

It seems to me that many of the folks concerned with "liberal indoctrination" are really at odds with the notion that their children might have minds of their own and simply see the world differently once they are no longer in an environment that is under your direct control.

By all means teach your children to be independent thinkers... just accept that with this comes the reality that independent means they will draw their own conclusions that may not be aligned with your own.

Only someone as confused as you, Arty, could take that away from this discussion.

Thank you, Ben. I didn’t say she had to think just like us. In fact, I tell her to question everything and be open to other people’s perspectives. I don’t want her to become a mindless progressive drone, or worse, a pseudo intellectual bore like Artemis.

Ben,

It is not the least bit confusing at all if the moment your child returns home after having gained their own independent life experience and has come to their own conclusions that some so-called progressive political ideas have merit... that they are now a "mindless" drone.

This is what was said:

"After years of liberal indoctrination at the public school, they are ready to drink the Koolaid when they hit the campus, especially at places like UT. I have several friends whose kids have come home virtually unrecognizable after a couple semesters on that particular campus."

Different political ideas are apparently the same as joining a cult (that is that the Koolaid reference is talking about).

If your child comes home with liberal ideas and you are politically conservative then you somehow believe they have been brain washed.

You have not even admitted the possibility they they might understand something of the world that you do not grasp.

When Sheep Mom calls these people "unrecognizable"... what do you think she means?

It's not like we have droves of people going off to college and coming home covered in face tattoos and drooling into a cup.

What conservative parents object to is their children coming home with a broader perspective on life and no longer sharing their particular brand of religious and/or political views.

These sorts of changes are very natural and realistic for any independent thinker.

Sheep Mom Says:

"In fact, I tell her to question everything and be open to other people’s perspectives."

Great... and so what happens if after she has done this she decides that she wants to vote democrat?

Has she been turned into a "mindless progressive drone" or has she questioned everything and decided that she disagrees with you politically?

Based on what I have seen it doesn't seem to me that you would be interested in having an open good faith conversation with her to find out why she believes what she believes in such a situation... the very fact that she wanted to vote progressive would be evidence enough for you that her mind was no longer her own.

If you don't feel this way, then do me a favor and name 10 independent progressive thinkers who in your view arrived at their views through a reasonable analysis of the facts available to them.

Can you at least be honest here and admit that when you talk about "independent thinkers" what you really mean is someone who doesn't disagree with you on any of your personal sacred cows?

There’s nothing I love better than being condescended to by ignoramus with a PhD in bumper sticker progressivism. I’m sure you are like the eternal flame of truth to all of the kids you teach remedial English to at the community college. It’s just too bad they don’t pay adjuncts enough to leave their mom’s basement. Don’t worry though, once we get authentic socialism you can apply to the government for a housing allowance and finally be a real boy.

😂

> we knew which upgrades have a
> high ROI and focused on those.

Which?

And are they the same for condos?

Sheep Mom,

Don't be daft... scientists don't teach remedial English courses... or any English courses for that matter.

I don't even work in academia.

Putting that nonsense aside I will simply point out at this moment that you didn't even present one argument defending your position in that silly screed of yours.

It is no wonder you are deeply concerned that the instant your child walks out of your home into a larger world they will return with remarkably different views than the ones you want them to hold.

It is not possible to persuade anyone to see things your way using those tactics when you lack authority over them.

Clearly you don't have sound arguments that would prevail in the open market place of ideas.

Now back to the subject at hand:

Please name 10 independent progressive thinkers who in your view arrived at their views through a reasonable analysis of the facts available to them.

If you cannot do this then your entire argument about wanting your daughter to be "open to other people’s perspectives" is disingenuous.

If she came home and told you she no longer believed in the bible and wasn't going to attend church any more I suspect your head would explode.

Which? And are they the same for condos? ~ Crid at December 13, 2020 5:44 PM

It really depends upon the layout of your house, your area, the market, and what your improvements do.

Modestly increasing the HLA (Heated Living Area) will usually pay off, depending upon the improvement. Finishing a basement or an attic can pay off well. Adding a story, not so much. Stay within reach of the houses around you.

Modest kitchen and bathroom upgrades usually return a pretty good portion of the money spent on them, especially if those rooms were a bit dated to begin with. Ambitious improvements in those areas will likely not pay off. If you're putting high-end appliances or fixtures in a modest suburban house, you're not going to get that back when you sell.

Painting in relatively neutral colors can pay off, but putting your own unique touches on a wall won't; that includes wallpaper. Landscaping and curb appeal improvements can pay off as well. The trick on any improvement is to not go overboard, to stay relatively neutral.

There's a long list of improvements that don't usually pay off. The seller in my earlier post spent thousands installing a sunroom. Not a lot of payoff in that.

Likewise, converting a garage, adding a home office, converting a bedroom to a walk-in closet, or combining bedrooms into a master suite don't usually pay big dividends and can lower the price of your house. Installing solar panels will also not increase your house's selling price.

========================================

There’s nothing I love better than being condescended to by ignoramus with a PhD in bumper sticker progressivism. ~ Sheep Mom at December 13, 2020 5:08 PM

No no, Sheep. You don't understand. Artie is "qualified to teach graduate level courses [at] a real university."

In addition, Artie has "won dozens of industrial awards and been awarded patents." And "everyone [he] work[s] with and [has] ever worked with [has] always praised [his] communication skills both verbal and written." Everyone. Always.

Artie is always right, Sheep. You see, his opinions are formed entirely using facts and logic - so he repeatedly tells us.

I wonder, Artie, if you'd view a child of yours who came back from college as a Young Republican with social-conservative values as an independent thinker who made up his own mind. Or would you think he'd been brainwashed?

By the way, Artie, "brainwashed" is one word.

Conan,

Aren't you the one who just recently accused me of "stalking" you by critiquing your statements in another thread?

I'm not even chatting with you here and yet you are compelled to talk about me... and not to me.

"By the way, Artie, "brainwashed" is one word."

Thanks Conan... I am glad you were able to verify that I had one grammatical error in a blog post.

Carry on.

Conan Says:

"Artie is always right, Sheep. You see, his opinions are formed entirely using facts and logic - so he repeatedly tells us."

You're just still salty because everything I told you would happen in the 2020 election happened exactly as I suggested.

Even the part about Trump refusing to concede under any circumstances.

Have his tantrums started to become presidential for you yet?

Conan Says:

"I wonder, Artie, if you'd view a child of yours who came back from college as a Young Republican with social-conservative values as an independent thinker who made up his own mind. Or would you think he'd been brainwashed?"

I've always been extremely interested in why my children think what they think.

I want to understand how they came to their conclusions and I listen to what they have to say.

If they came to supported different ideas than my own I certainly would not jump to the conclusion that they have been "indoctrinated" or that they "drank the koolaid".

We would lay out the facts and I would listen to what they think. If I disagreed it would be based on the facts available and I would try to explain my reasoning to them.

It is bizarre to presume that if another generation sees the world in a fundamentally different way than the one that came before it is because of something nefarious.

It is my greatest hope that my children are able to enrich my life intellectually as much as I hope to do for them.

Generally speaking conservatives do not see things this way. For them the world is very hierarchical and they do not often think their children will ever have anything of value to teach them.

Just look at what Ben had to say here:

"Either you teach your values or they get the school's. By the time college rolls around it is way too late to change things. Only life with it's patented hammer to the head technique has much effect."

So what does this imply Ben believes?... it suggests that he believes that if his children have divergent views that it will be corrected by the force of life... that living itself will compel his children to see things his way.

This is of course demonstrably false.

Millions of people get along just fine in the real world who do not share Ben's perspective on life... there is no reason to believe his children would be any different than those folks just because they do not view things as their father does.

...and yet you are compelled to talk about me... and not to me. ~ Artemis at December 13, 2020 7:37 PM

So, right after you say I did not talk "to you," you commented on the comment I made directly to you.

And, Artie, there was no stalking. I was already in this thread, as evidenced by my follow-up comment to Crid on home improvements and my earlier comments to Ben on property values. In fact, I've been commenting on this thread since yesterday. I didn't join it just to comment on your post.

Nor do I presume, as you do, that my role here is to "look for baseless assertions and correct the record when the evidence suggests someone is incorrect."

Now, about your kid returning from college as a Young Republican, what say you?

Now, about your kid returning from college as a Young Republican, what say you? ~ Conan the Grammarian at December 13, 2020 7:56 PM

Never mind. Our comments crossed on that one.

And Artie, I know plenty of conservative with liberal kids who are fine with that, who respect their children's rights to make up their own minds. So, don't lay your "Conservative generally don't do that." on me.

I still don't think this person is American

Thanks for that advice. It has the sting of common sense, specifically the part about not outpacing the elegance of the market.

This new place needed new floor in kitchen and dining, and I had gone for pricey Italian stone in the last place… But then decided "luxury vinyl" was in keeping with this neighborhood. No regrets! It's a lot better than the vinyl of our childhoods, and may prove more fun to bounce aging bones off of in years to come.

In my somewhat limited experience, RE seems to be one of those truth-exposing realms of human endeavor. One of the great frailties in our nature, one all grownups should take pains to avoid, is presumption everyone else secretly shares our beliefs and desires. (Car preferences are another such marketplace.)

In real estate, that's sun rooms, wallpaper, light fixtures and ridiculous additions. And proximity to gyms / bars / churches / highways.

It helps to be too old to care about impressing people you don't even like.

Conan Says:

"And, Artie, there was no stalking. I was already in this thread, as evidenced by my follow-up comment to Crid on home improvements and my earlier comments to Ben on property values."

You are in almost every thread that takes place on this blog.

This is why your assertion that me commenting to you at all is evidence of "stalking" makes no sense.

You comment in threads all the time that I do not participate in.

There are times I come across a comment that happens to be illogical or factually dubious and then I say something.

It simply was not reasonable for you to accuse me of "stalking" you on this blog when you are more or less omnipresent.

Any thread I choose to participate in you are likely to have put your 2 cents in already.

What do you presume this is, some kind of bizarre blog race to comment first?

In this particular thread the comment that I found to be dubious happened to not be from you... as I told you before, I have zero interest in selecting you out of the crowd. I am just interested in correcting the record on arguments that are lacking.

Conan Says:

"I know plenty of conservative with liberal kids who are fine with that, who respect their children's rights to make up their own minds. So, don't lay your "Conservative generally don't do that." on me."

That is all well and good Conan... but my original comment wasn't to you.

I am speaking with reference to a particular type of conservative who does not operate this way.

Specifically the kind of conservative who would say something like this:

"After years of liberal indoctrination at the public school, they are ready to drink the Koolaid when they hit the campus, especially at places like UT. I have several friends whose kids have come home virtually unrecognizable after a couple semesters on that particular campus."

The conservatives I know with more liberal minded children do not refer to them as "indoctrinated" or suggest that they drank "the Koolaid".

That whole "Koolaid" reference is related to joining a cult.

Conservative parents who actually respect their children as independent thinkers would never use such a description.

Also...

"Nor do I presume, as you do, that my role here is to "look for baseless assertions and correct the record when the evidence suggests someone is incorrect.""

I don't "presume" it is my role... it is my right to hold conversations as I see fit.

If I want to look for baseless assertions and correct the record who exactly are you to tell me otherwise?

For someone who constantly takes umbrage at the suggestion that someone else might tell you what to do you seem awfully eager to dictate to another adult when they should feel free to speak their mind.

You for example see it as your role to look for typos in my posts.

Whatever floats your boat Conan... as I told you before, carry on.

Yet you cannot do the same for me... you want to have the liberty to correct typos, but would simultaneously deny me the liberty to correct erroneous statements.

In my view the second endeavor is more worth while than the first, but to each their own.

I am speaking with reference to a particular type of conservative who does not operate this way. ~ Artemis at December 13, 2020 10:28 PM

You said, "Generally speaking conservatives do not see things this way." You tarred the entire group with your biased brush. You also failed to use a comma in there.

That whole "Koolaid" reference is related to joining a cult. ~ Artemis at December 13, 2020 10:28 PM

While the phrase did originate in reference to the Jim Jones People's Temple cult, it has been used many times since in non-cult terms to indicate complete buy-in.

According to Wikipedia, drinking the Kool Aid "can also be used ironically or humorously to refer to accepting an idea or changing a preference due to popularity, peer pressure, or persuasion."

What's more, the phrase is erroneous. The powdered drink consumed at the People's Temple in Guyana was Flavor Aid, not Kool Aid.

Before the suicide, Jones and his cult were lauded by such liberal luminaries as George Moscone, Harvey Milk, Jane Fonda, Jerry Brown, Willie Brown (mentor of Kamala Harris), Diane Feinstein, Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter, and Walter Mondale. Jones and his Temple provided rent-a-rallies for liberal politicians, flooding campaign events with supporters and campaign headquarters with volunteers.

Jones advocated socialism, calling capitalism the devil. He praised the Symbionese Liberation Army for bringing the country closer to change. Jones praised Castro's Cuba as an island paradise, only criticizing it for not offering enough "freedom" on abortion.

Survivors of the Temple say Jones' connection with these powerful people legitimized him and intimidated cult members. Without those powerful leftists running interference for him, he could not have gotten away with so much.

So, let's talk conservatives and cults, Artie.

You for example see it as your role to look for typos in my posts. ~ Artemis at December 13, 2020 10:28 PM

Au contraire, mon ami. I do not "see it as [my] role." I do it because it irks you and you annoy me.

And not typos, Artie, spelling and grammar errors made by a guy who claims intellectual superiority over everyone on this blog, but whose writing clocks in at a fourth-grade level. Caesar non supra grammaticos. And you ain't Caesar.

Thanks for that advice. It has the sting of common sense, specifically the part about not outpacing the elegance of the market. ~ Crid at December 13, 2020 9:43 PM

No problem. Most of real estate is common sense and an awareness of the market.

My other advice would be don't base all your upgrades or improvements on resale value. Get some enjoyment out of the place. If you want a sunroom or a pergola, put one in. Just don't overbuild, or demand a 1:1 payoff when you sell.

> a fourth-grade level.

That, plus all the social miscues, clumsy idioms, etc. A tawdry patois of not-from-here, institutional, and aspy.

> Get some enjoyment out of the place.

✔

Conan Says:

"You said, "Generally speaking conservatives do not see things this way." You tarred the entire group with your biased brush. You also failed to use a comma in there."

Nonsense Conan... the word "Generally" is a qualifier that denotes that it is usually true but not universally true.

By definition that means I am not talking about the "entire group".

I get why you are so hyper focused on commas when your vocabulary could use some work.

You tend to have great difficulty with qualifiers... for you thinks are typically all or nothing propositions.

I will also note that you constantly take great offense at even the slightest insinuation that casts conservatives in a bad light... regardless of qualifiers... yet you never have anything to say about tarring other groups you don't have a personal stake in.

For example, the following statement required no rebuff from you whatsoever in terms of how it fails to be sufficiently narrow:

"While I agree that Ben and Momof4 have a point, you all also need to realize that our very own Texas raised kids are also way more liberal than their parents. After years of liberal indoctrination at the public school, they are ready to drink the Koolaid when they hit the campus, especially at places like UT."

That entire statement is general... it is talking about all the kids in Texas who go to public school.

It makes no distinction about how some of those kids might not get "indoctrinated" by liberals who are getting them ready to "drink the Koolaid".

That is a very general smear... and yet that disturb you in the least.

If it is fair for Sheep Mom to suggest that liberals are engaged in an indoctrination campaign of Texas children... then it is certainly fair for me to say that generally speaking conservatives have a very hierarchical mindset.

Stop being a thin skinned twit.

Conan,

I'll also note that my statement about conservatives generally favoring a hierarchical mindset is already well documented:

https://www.businessinsider.com/psychological-differences-between-conservatives-and-liberals-2018-2#research-also-suggests-shared-values-likely-matter-more-than-shared-politics-when-it-comes-to-who-we-vote-for-13

"Trump supporters ... seek power over others, are motivated by wealth accumulation, and prefer conformity, hierarchy, and clear-cut rules for behavior,"

So it isn't so much that I tarred an entire group with a broad brush as this is a psychologically difference recognized between liberals and conservatives.

Once again... you are at war with facts and reality... not me.

Don't shoot the messenger.

Conan Says:

"Au contraire, mon ami. I do not "see it as [my] role." I do it because it irks you and you annoy me."

I am confident that in your fantasy world you honestly believe this... but the reality is that I don't mind in the least.

I don't pretend to be a perfect or even good typist.

For example just two posts above I typed the word "thinks" when I really intended to type "things".

In the vast majority of cases any correction you present I am already aware of after a quick reread of my post.

If I could edit after posting I might be inclined to fix such things, but that option does not exist so my blog posts exist imperfections and all.

It's just a blog Conan, this is not professional correspondence for which such things might concern me.

Please understand that whenever you do this I imagine you to be that pathetic guy in the back corner of the room after a someone has given a presentation who raises their hand during the discussion to point out that slide 5 was missing a hyphen.

No one respects or appreciates that guy... that guy is laughed at around the water cooler.

Conan,

I'll even help you out a bit.

I missed typing the word "didn't" in the following sentence entirely:

"That is a very general smear... and yet that [didn't] disturb you in the least."

In addition, I have erroneously inserted the word "a" into the following sentence where it doesn't belong:

"...in the back corner of the room after a someone..."

The difference between you and I is that I recognize and am comfortable with being an imperfect typist.

You on the other hand continuously misuse and misunderstand very basic vocabulary... and you take great insult when it has been pointed out that once again you failed to understand plain English.

What kind of an idiot looks at a statement with the word "generally" and then insists the person is talking about a group in it's entirety?

The appropriate word to do that would be the word "universally".

It is time for you to focus your education on vocabulary Conan. That is far more important for communication than your focus on typos.

Just some friendly advice to help you progress.

Nonsense Conan... the word "Generally" is a qualifier that denotes that it is usually true but not universally true.

You like to use qualifiers so you can repeat your own stereotypes and wiggle your way out of being accused of using stereotypes. "I said 'generally,'" is your get-out-of-jail-free card.

Here, you qualify your bias by saying it is usually true. That, according to you, is the way to bet. If you met a conservative, you'd expect him to conform to that, to be so hierarchically rigid that he would think his children could never have anything to teach him. You'd structure your response to him according to the belief that he's rigidly hierarchical; because you say, generally, he is.

You operate with a stereotyped view of all conservatives (as drooling, backwards religious nuts) and claim your bias is backed by evidence.

However, the article you provided as evidence in this case doesn't really support your contention that conservatives are "generally" so hierarchical that they think their children have nothing to teach them; that conservatives don't want to enrich their children's intellectual lives and, in turn, have theirs enriched by their children.

The article talks about people being likely to judge more favorably those who agree with them; and that is a phenomenon the article says is found on both sides of the aisle. The article doesn't even support your contention that conservatives favor a more hierarchical model of society and behavior. You've read into the article your own biases.

According to the abstract of a Cambridge study published in the British Journal of Political Science, "...the transmission of partisan orientations from parent to child occurs less than half the time, which is qualitatively different from the generally held view. More importantly, the findings provide a greater understanding of how key predictors facilitate the political socialization process. Specifically, politicization improves child perception, but has no role in the child's motivation to adopt parental values. Closeness and parental value strength influence children to want to be like their parents, but do nothing to improve children's ability to recognize their parents' values. And education, previously thought to have little role in transmission, does not influence a child's ability to understand their parent's affiliation, but appears to make children more likely to reject whatever they believe it to be."

That last sentence describes the phenomenon to which Ben is referring.

Face it, Artie, today's liberalism is as much an organized religion as anything put out by the churches of old. Departure from the dogma is severely punished. Any evidence presented that runs counter to the dogma is regarded as heresy and is suppressed. Anyone who strays from the teachings of this new church is excommunicated (e.g., cancel culture). It's not the factual, evidence-based scientific approach to life that you maintain it is.

And, Artie, conservatives not all William Jennings Bryan blindly defending the Rock of Ages against an onslaught of science.

...but the reality is that I don't mind in the least. ~ Artemis at December 14, 2020 9:29 AM

You've made far too big a deal of it in the past for me to believe it doesn't irk you.

For example, you typed over 350 words here to tell me how much it doesn't bother you.

Conan Says:

"You like to use qualifiers so you can repeat your own stereotypes and wiggle your way out of being accused of using stereotypes. "I said 'generally,'" is your get-out-of-jail-free card."

No Conan... I use qualifiers like "generally" because when one uses qualifiers in this way it acknowledges the existence of exceptions.

Words have definitions despite your desire to ignore them for your convenience.

Furthermore, me using the word "generally" isn't so much a dishonest tactic on my end so much as you ignoring it is a dishonest tactic on your end.

This is hardly the first time you have even done something like this.

For example:

http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2016/03/the-babyificati.html

In this thread Patrick said the following:

"Generally, in an in indoor environment, I prefer people keep their fluids to themselves. ~ Patrick at March 19, 2016 1:26 PM"

To which you responded:

"So, outdoor toilets at your house?"

Which was a patently absurd response... the word "generally" would hardly suggest Patrick meant for people to urinate outside.

Here was his response:

"Knew that was coming. If nothing else, you're predictable. Note, I said, generally.

No, Conan. Unlike a spitoon, an indoor toilet is designed to receive and remove the waste and can do so within seconds." - Patrick at March 19, 2016 4:32 PM

See that... same dishonest rhetoric on your part to purposefully distort a completely reasonable comment into some bizarre extreme that no good faith participant in a conversation could interpret in the way you did.

As Patrick noted then (4 years ago mind you)... this is just how you operate, it is nothing new and completely predictable.

People use qualifiers to denote that they aren't talking about all possible situations... when you then ignore the qualifiers to try and win cheap points you are being intellectually dishonest.

But this is just who you are and who you always will be.

"Here, you qualify your bias by saying it is usually true. That, according to you, is the way to bet. If you met a conservative, you'd expect him to conform to that, to be so hierarchically rigid that he would think his children could never have anything to teach him. You'd structure your response to him according to the belief that he's rigidly hierarchical; because you say, generally, he is."

No Conan... I treat everyone as individuals.

If I say for example that in general men are taller than women. Sight unseen if I were asked to place a bet on who was taller between 1 random man and 1 random woman I would bet the man was taller... but I would never let that generally true observation impact my view of the height of anyone I met. I would see how tall they were and adjust accordingly to the specifics.

That is how rational people operate.

Only an idiot hears the claim that in general men are taller than women and starts spouting off examples of women over 6'11'' and men shorter than 5'2'' in an effort to discredit the reality of the distributions of the population

Of course such people exist and in any scenario you need to deal with the actual individuals in front of you.

It is just as true that in general conservatives favor a hierarchical outlook on the structures of society. This has been demonstrated in the scientific literature.

That doesn't make it universally applicable to any specific person you run across in life.

Conan Says:

"You've made far too big a deal of it in the past for me to believe it doesn't irk you.

For example, you typed over 350 words here to tell me how much it doesn't bother you."

Hogwash... just yesterday this is all I had to say on the subject:

"Thanks Conan... I am glad you were able to verify that I had one grammatical error in a blog post.

Carry on."

This isn't about my response Conan. I've ignored your childish antics over the years and it has made no difference.

You don't do this because you think it irks me... you do it because you are obviously very insecure and for whatever reason this makes you feel better about yourself.

Would I prefer you to stay on topic and discuss items of substance?... of course... but not because any of your antics "irk" me... it is because I find the entire thing to be a waste of time and utterly boring.

The saddest part is each time you do this to try and prop up your own fragile ego you need to understand that what I see is a pathetic insecure person desperately trying to seek status.

In other words, this behavior is a demonstration of your own deep-seated need to elevate yourself in some imagines hierarchy.

I would say this is a surprise, but you are a very partisan conservative and generally people like you are driven by hierarchical structures in society. You want to establish yourself in the pecking order by highlighting typos.

But who really cares... I know I don't see any of this as a status symbol. It's just a random blog in some obscure corner of the internet.

...just yesterday this is all I had to say on the subject....

That was yesterday. Other days, however, you've had a lot to say.

250 words this time.

You don't do this because you think it irks me... you do it because you are obviously very insecure and for whatever reason this makes you feel better about yourself.

Well, since you can read my mind, read this.

Conan Says:

"Well, since you can read my mind, read this."

Once again you take great umbrage at a violation of your imagined hierarchy.

You were just completely at ease reading minds just a few moments ago with this nonsense:

"If you met a conservative, you'd expect him to conform to that, to be so hierarchically rigid that he would think his children could never have anything to teach him."

All because I made a general statement about conservative thought that has been well-documented in the psychological literature.

I get it though... you'll do the mind reading around here... but how dare anyone suggest they have insight into your thoughts... that is something you will not stand for!!!

Look Conan, nothing you do is the least bit surprising at all, you are completely predictable... just as Patrick stated 4 years ago.

Let me try and explain something else to you since it seems to be going over your head.

I am interested in having substantive conversations about the facts and reality.

To that end your obsession about typos isn't constructive. You imagine that I have taken personal insult from your antics simply because I would prefer to focus on something more engaging.

This would be no different than someone trying to have a serious conversation with you while you insist on shoving your hands down your pants to scratch your balls. That person isn't personally offended by your childish behavior if they ask you to focus and get your finger out of your nose.

It also wouldn't make any sense for you to insist that you shove your hands down your pants specifically to "irk" them.

They would look at you like the fool you are if you said something like that... but sure, keep scratching your balls in public... I don't mind on a personal level even if I prefer that you were mature enough to be able to keep your hands out of your underwear.

To that end your obsession about typos isn't constructive.

Not typos, Artie, poor written communication skills. You keep trying to trivialize my criticisms of your writing by dismissing them as an obsession with typos, or by dismissing this blog as so inconsequential that good writing on it is unnecessary, even beneath you.

You're free to leave at any time and resume the ever so important work you're doing that has provided you, if you're to be believed, with industrial awards, patents, and the enthusiastic acclaim of everyone around you.

I think it's you who needs validation on some hierarchy and cannot find it in your physical life; nor here.

As for Patrick's comment four years ago, what about his comment
in April of this year, where he said about you, "Wrong, as always, Artemis."

How about what Patrick said in August, again of this year, "When it comes to Conan v. Artemis, I'm firmly on Conan's side."

As for that joke four years ago about the indoor release of bodily fluids at Patrick's house, I simply failed to make it clear to someone who then still held a certain amount of animosity toward me that it was a general joke and not one at his expense.

So, if we're using Patrick as the infallible authority, I may be predictable, but you're always wrong.

G'night, Artie. Hope you find that validation you so desperately need.

Conan Says:

"Not typos, Artie, poor written communication skills."

Let's not pretend you are the least bit interested in communication here.

Patrick clearly indicated that in general he would prefer people keep their fluids to themselves:

"Generally, in an in indoor environment, I prefer people keep their fluids to themselves. ~ Patrick at March 19, 2016 1:26 PM"

And you interpreted that very clear statement as him saying that he doesn't let people use the toilet in his home and that they need to urinate outside.

In this thread you interpreted a very clear statement that in general conservatives like hierarchical social structures as a blanket attack on all conservatives as being rigidly attached to hierarchies.

None of that "miscommunication" was caused by an inability of the author to clearly use the written word.

That "miscommunication" was solely due to your own antisocial desire misinterpret plain English when it suits your purposes.

Or do you honestly not know what the word "generally" means?

"As for Patrick's comment four years ago, what about his comment
in April of this year, where he said about you, "Wrong, as always, Artemis.""

Really Conan???

You honestly think that Patrick is going to reinterpret his statement to mean that he was talking about not letting guests use the bathroom?

Again, you are purposefully obtuse.

In any case, let's look at something more recent:

http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2020/11/elinktion-night.html#comments

"Artemis, in fairness to you, you may be right." - Patrick at November 4, 2020 3:21 PM

So how do you square that circle Conan?... going from "Wrong, as always, Artemis." to "you may be right"?

I will explain it to you... the first comment was an exaggeration. Patrick didn't really mean that I was always wrong. It is a turn of phrase to try and disregard someone you happen to disagree with.

Surely you recognized that as hyperbole, right?

If not how did I suddenly become right?... and if I was right, then logically Patrick would not consider me to always be wrong any longer.

Again, you aren't interested in real or honest communication.

You are only interested in irrational nonsense, like insinuating that Patrick want's his house guests to pee outside because he said that generally he would prefer people keep their fluids to themselves.

"So, if we're using Patrick as the infallible authority, I may be predictable, but you're always wrong."

Nope... if we go by this little game you remain predictable and I may be right... I've apparently been upgraded while you remain the same predictable old Conan.

wordy

Crid,

Careful... Conan might become apoplectic at the sight of your sentence fragment that lacks proper capitalization and punctuation.

After all, we know how consistent he is in his application of clear communication protocols.

Or maybe... just maybe... it is the defense mechanism he retreats to when arguing in bad faith with folks who he disagrees with when the facts and logic favor their side of the conversation.

Not to worry, you'll be safe from criticism because you stroke his fragile ego from time to time.

Nope... if we go by this little game you remain predictable and I may be right... I've apparently been upgraded while you remain the same predictable old Conan. ~ Artemis at December 14, 2020 2:37 PM

Selective memory there, Artie. I was "upgraded" before you were, "When it comes to Conan v. Artemis, I'm firmly on Conan's side." That's "firmly" on my side while you merely "may" be right.

Artie, when I get into things with you, I always feel like I'm trapped in a child's playground insult contest. Never more so than in this exchange.

Grow up.

Conan,

If you want to have serious adult discussions then why don't you make a real attempt to avoid your stupid and childish word games and stick to the subject material.

I didn't bring up the example of the time you pulled the same nonsense with Patrick where you purposefully misinterpreted the word "generally" because I consider Patrick to be infallible. I brought up the example because it demonstrates a repeated pattern of dishonest behavior on your part. In this case it was the exact same schtick.

You frequently play stupid word games when you have nothing substantive to add to a conversation and feel backed into a corner from a rhetorical perspective.

You do this because of your own intellectual insecurity.

"Artie, when I get into things with you, I always feel like I'm trapped in a child's playground insult contest."

The simple solution for your problem is for you to stop being a child.

It is amazing that you accuse me of having a "selective memory" after you say demonstrably false things like this:

"As for that joke four years ago about the indoor release of bodily fluids at Patrick's house, I simply failed to make it clear to someone who then still held a certain amount of animosity toward me that it was a general joke and not one at his expense."

Suddenly four years later after you feel like you have buried the hatchet it was all a "joke" and Patrick simply failed to get it... but here is you going on and on and on about said "joke" in the same thread I linked to:

"An indoor toilet, when used properly (i.e., flushed or hit squarely), is quite effective at receiving and removing waste. However, to perform its designed function, the toilet has to be successfully hit by the user (and not the floor next to it) and then flushed." - Conan the Grammarian at March 19, 2016 7:14 PM

"Patrick made the comment about banning the discharge of bodily fluids indoors and both lujip and I commented about indoor toilets and sweating being releases of bodily fluids typically done indoors. From there Patrick petulantly replied, "Knew that was coming. If nothing else, you're predictable. Note, I said, generally." He always relies on that "generally" when called out on a comment." - Conan the Grammarian at March 20, 2016 11:46 AM

This precise interaction doesn't remind you of anything that just took place here?

It is exactly the same nonsense... someone uses the qualifier "generally"... you purposefully misinterpret it in the most ridiculous manner possible... and then when they point out that the qualifier doesn't justify your childish statements you resort to saying that they only use the word "generally" as an excuse to get away with something.

This is the type of person you are Conan... you've been this way for years... you've been this way with multiple people... and when you are justifiably called out on it you respond in the following way:

"Patrick, you'd be a lot more interesting to have a conversation with if you'd drop the condescension. You're simply not the smartest person in the room." - Conan the Grammarian at March 19, 2016 7:14 PM

So you give him the most inane interpretation of his own words possible by insinuating that he doesn't let guests use his bathroom and makes them urinate outside... and when he points out you are being ridiculous you called *him* condescending and told him he wasn't the smartest person in the room.

This is another interesting point to be honest because you are frequently obsessed with this whole "smartest person in the room" concept.

Conan, these blog conversations frequently involve very few people... so who exactly are you trying to imply is the "smartest person in the room" when you keep saying this kind of thing to different people in different discussions?

The fundamental issue is you have a massive ego problem and you are only capable of getting along with people if they are willing to play to your intellectual insecurity.

This is even true for Patrick as the only time you started getting along with him was *after* he expressed fear of getting in a disagreement with you because you take insult so easily.

Just stop your stupidity already... you've been at this for years and no one is really all that interested in your complex.

Conan,

Just to add some educational substance to this conversation. The reason you continually go off the rails with your strange and irrational interpretations of what others have to say is because what you are engaging in is the following:

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Appeal-to-Extremes

"Erroneously attempting to make a reasonable argument into an absurd one, by taking the argument to the extremes."

You should not expect to be able to do this in conversation and have the other person act as if you have made some deeply insightful point.

Along with the Gish Gallop, this is one of your go to forms of irrational rhetoric.

Your ability to reason is deeply flawed and no quantity of typos on my part will even change that. The only thing that will change that is when you take the time to learn how to hold discussions in good faith.

Until then you will always be stuck in the sand box.

"The reason you continually go off the rails with your strange and irrational interpretations of what others have to say is ..." ~Arty

I don't think you've correctly interpreted almost anything I've said for years. If there were lots of people having that problem the issue would be on my end. But that clearly isn't the case.

As for Conan, he may be a stick in the mud but it is quite rare he is unable to respond on topic with others here. Once again he doesn't appear to be the communication issue.

Ben Says:

"I don't think you've correctly interpreted almost anything I've said for years."

Nonsense Ben... just the other day I actually defended a point you made to Crid in terms of accurately pointing out that both mean and median are averages.

Or even when I agree with you I haven't managed to interpret you correctly?

Cut the shit.

Ben,

I'll also draw your attention to two items.

1 - It wasn't so very long ago that you apologized to me for your participation in the unnecessarily adversarial culture that exists here. If you remember I told you that I appreciated the sentiment but that it was up to you and others to operate in good faith to keep conversations civil.

2 - It also wasn't very long ago where you were in a disagreement with Conan where you were adamant that he absolutely refused to stay on topic and address any of the points you were trying to discuss.

Both of these are important for you to keep in mind because here is the crux of the issue... Conan is EASY to get along with so long as you agree with what he has to say.

The instant you express any disagreement at all, or even independently express an opinion that doesn't fit into his version of reality he becomes completely impossible to communicate with.

Go ahead and put it to the test... try disagreeing with him for a while and see how that works out.

Do you socialize?

Crid,

Come on... at least update your trolling to fit with current events.

So, no?

Crid,

We are in the middle of a viral pandemic and you want to have a competition with regard to who is socializing more???

This is bad trolling even for you.

Congrats Arty. In five years you were able to correctly interpret a single line that covered a basic mathematical fact. So, given just how much you have written over those years you are able to respond accurately under 1% of the time?

As for disagreeing with Conan, not exactly an uncommon event. Go look at the thread on the Scottish grave if you want an example. We had no problem communicating with each other. I understood his position and he understood mine. We did disagree. But that is not an issue with communication.

And since you want examples for yourself just look at this thread. What was my response to you? How about how Sheep Mom responded to you? I'm sure you feel she was 'unnecessarily adversarial' to you. All I can say is you should try not being a bigoted asshole. But you've been given that advice repeatedly and don't appear capable of following it.

Heck, as you make clear here you didn't even understand that apology.

Orion, do people like you?

Crid,

My spouse and children like me... I don't think you can say either of those things.

Ben,

When you say things that are genuine and make sense I understand them.

On the other hand, when you apparently make an apology I give you the benefit of the doubt that you are being genuine. I suppose I should have just regarded you as a liar. I'm not responsible for misunderstandings where you have not presented yourself honestly.

There are other occasions where you say things that are irrational and unworthy of serious consideration... I don't really understand those items either... but no rational individual should ever really understand the rantings of a crazy person.

"All I can say is you should try not being a bigoted asshole."

Bigoted???... now you are a victim of discrimination???

You can fuck right off with that nonsense.

Just earlier you ranted about how you and your sister do not talk because she is a big bully who "can't" understand you.

If your own family cannot understand you, why on earth would you ever presume you were a clear communicator?

Let's get back to reality for a moment and take another gander at that thread where Conan was busy telling Patrick won't let guests urinate outside.

In that thread I made a comment that Conan was being unfair to Patrick in his fallacious interpretation of his words. Keep in mind that Conan now insists his interpretation wasn't even genuine... so in that regard my critique was completely fair.

Here is where you popped in to chime in:

"Sorry Patrick. If you are on Artemis's side you immediately lose. It's like argumentum ad hitlerum." - Ben at March 20, 2016 5:31 PM

So Patrick and Conan are having a fight... I point out that Conan's interpretation wasn't reasonable (which has now been confirmed by Conan himself as being an accurate appraisal)... and you just popped in to compare me to Hitler.

But you are a victim of bigotry... lol

Ben,

Just to drive my point home that your argument doesn't hold water, here are three separate examples of the "wonderful" communication skills you guys demonstrate.

"I understand it is a religious catechism that government should fund pure research projects. But I've seen little proof to back it up." - Ben at August 25, 2019 7:00 AM

"Should?

I never said "should," Ben. I said government can be "an adequate funder of pure research."" - Conan the Grammarian at August 25, 2019 12:38 PM

"I still say provide some proof of that Conan." - Ben at August 25, 2019 5:53 PM

"I say provide proof of your assertions! I still stand by mine that you will get more quality pure research if the government doesn't do it." - Ben at August 26, 2019 8:42 AM

So let's take a moment to dissect what happened here. Conan made a point you disagreed with. So instead of engaging honestly you started off by putting words in his mouth and then asked for proof of his claims. Conan then correct you for putting words in his mouth and provided no evidence to support his actual argument. You then asked two more times for evidence and received nothing of substance and then conversation ended.

That is a master class in how *not* to communicate effectively. Neither of you were even close to being on the same page. Nor did either of you actually even bother to expand upon your positions in a substantive way.

Okay, let's move to the second example:

"That may be what you intended Conan. But it certainly isn't what you wrote." - Ben at November 13, 2017 6:30 AM

"Still insisting on being dense, eh Rad? I've already shown my statement is correct. If you want to prove me wrong you need to provide data showing that. The burden of further proof is on you not me." - Ben at November 15, 2017 5:53 AM

So here you are first telling Conan that what he writes doesn't match what he says his meaning is... which means you are saying he is communicating poorly. Then you got into an argument with Radwaste and told him he was being dense multiple times... because apparently he didn't understand what you were saying (this suggests you weren't communicating clearly... or that you have a tendency to call people names who disagree with you).

Okay, third example:

"Again with the IQ stuff. Please provide some actual evidence instead of speculation. Because the employment data to day says you are wrong." - Ben at August 11, 2020 6:37 AM

"If you are now making a claim that sub-median IQ is causing an increase in underemployment then you need to present some evidence to support that." - Ben at August 11, 2020 4:24 PM

"All I've been saying over and over is you aren't supporting your argument Conan." - Ben at August 12, 2020 7:59 AM

"When I asked you to support your claim instead of just making speculations you talked about the Boxer Rebellion and modern male despair." - Ben at August 12, 2020 7:59 AM

"You are mixing all kinds of things again Conan. You need to keep things separate and clean." - Ben at August 12, 2020 11:01 AM

"I think you're missing the forest for the trees, there, Ben." - Conan the Grammarian at August 12, 2020 2:11 PM

So let's break that exchange down... you start by telling Conan he is just presenting speculation and needs to present evidence in support of his arguments. You repeat this request several times over and Conan doesn't even bother responding to your request in a meaningful way. You even note that instead of clearly communicating the evidence for his position he ran off on unrelated tangents and pointed out that he was all over the place and mixing things together in a way that didn't make sense.

After all of that Conan simple informed you that you didn't understand because you were missing the forest for the trees.

No matter how you slice it, one or both of you wasn't communicating clearly or reasonably.

This is a pattern Ben. Many folks on this board are only capable of dealing with disagreements around the edges... real disagreements are met with evasion, disregard... or in the most extreme circumstances hostility.

Work on your reading comprehension and civility. Till then I'll keep ignoring you because you aren't really adding to the conversation. As you document here you didn't understand what people wrote and hence were unable to respond in a rational manner.

Ben,

The civility issue on this blog has never had it's origins with me.

You even admitted this here:

http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2020/05/biden-having-a.html

"Just to be fair about things since we are on the subject. Arty, you were right and I was wrong when I characterized your views. I misunderstood the view you were trying to make. The level of sasback you gave was proportionate. Hell, it was actually less that I deserved. And to take things even a step further I acknowledge your greater insight into DNC politicking." - Ben at May 4, 2020 6:50 PM

You fully acknowledged that you mischaracterized my views and that my response to your misconstruing of my words was well deserved.

Here was part of my response:

"At some point folks need to decide if that is the kind of discourse we all want to have here or if the goal is to have real conversations with people of differing perspectives." - Artemis at May 5, 2020 8:41 AM

To which you replied:

"I wouldn't get your hopes up too much Arty. I'm still the same ass I've always been." - Ben at May 5, 2020 7:37 PM

I will give you a modicum of credit for being correct about you being the same ass you've always been.

It takes a really deranged person to admit to being an ass... to admit that they are uncivil... to admit that they have misconstrued what I have said... and then months later to declare that I am not civil enough and need to communicate better.

Needless to say, I don't believe you are a reliable narrator when it comes to the issues you have with your sister. I think she would have a very different version of events to tell and I suspect she would be more credible.

Ben Says:

"I'll keep ignoring you because you aren't really adding to the conversation."

I'll also note that this is the kind of irrational nonsense you say that doesn't make any sense.

You have been ignoring me... not reading what I am saying... yet you confidently declare that I haven't been correctly interpreting what you have said.

Those two things are mutually exclusive. It is not possible to both ignore what someone is writing and also know what they have been writing.

Stay classy Ben.

"spouse"

Crid,

Yes... spouse... it is one of the ways married people refer to their partner.

That isn't something you'd know much about.

Do you deny that you're not American?