iPolio

[Wezil]

Originally posted by DaShi
Ok, now kiss.

I would have preferred a rumble.

Jrabbit vs Pekka for the title...

[-Jrabbit]

Originally posted by Pekka
Even if I was wrong or right, I can't accept truce unless he first admits his foul ways.

Despite the fact that I've done nothing wrong, I've offered the olive branch, without demands or conditions. Take or leave it, Pekka. As is.

[Wezil]

He's threatening you with a stick now Pekka.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Wezil
He had it coming. The way he was treating Pekka was uncalled for.

QFT

Racism & sexism

[Pekka]

Jrabbit, I was the first who came out searching for common grounds, I was the one who showed you that you had misunderstood what I said, I'm the one who said I might have been a bit aggressive defending myself against your onslaught, so I THINK YOU CAN just admit your wrong ways. Be a man.

[-Jrabbit]

I will retract the statement: "You'll have to get high on life, Pekka."
II should have said: "Those people (who want new recreational drugs) will have to get high on life."

It was an offhand comment, meant to be humorous -- in the spirit of the thread title. Heck, I posted the Huey Lewis lyrics before I even saw your initial post.

Your bizarre overreaction was to mount a direct attack (see post #16), a rant of pure fantasy without any basis in fact. To see someone spout so much vitriol, filled with untruths, based on a single, simple sentence was amazing to me. Yet I rolled with it. I didn't demand an apology, either for this or for the other numerous implications in your subsequent posts. Why? Because I didn't want to make you angry. Ironic, huh?

Now I have retracted the offending statement and offered to move on. And despite your consistent and malicious attacks on me, I ask nothing in return.

That will have to do.

[Pekka]

And I didn't respond to the Huey Lewis lyrics as I think you thought I did.

Offhand is great, but it has to be controlled chaos. That is no rules. The rule is no rules. That's the structure, the pattern of insanity, clearly defined in the can't be defined section of the human interaction between his brain/thought and what the output is. Make no mistake Jrabbit, embrace the insanity, it is essential, it is vital and a proof that you are still human and not a product of someone elses thoughts that you somehow adopted as your own, began thinking they're originally yours or that they are the norm and thus the truth. But they're nothing else except the current paradigm, the contemporary description of what's happening around through someones eyes, maybe that someone was a drug crazed self claimed anthropologist, a life observant, who wasn't free from moral and ethical codes of the times he lived in, or maybe he was a child molester.

My bizarre overreaction is nothing but your interpretation of my reaction to the comments you yourself made. Now ask yourself if you have analyzed my reaction correctly, or are you, ONCE AGAIN, making another huge mistake? Two mistakes in a row doesn't make it right, three, four or more, Jrabbit, don't go down in history as the person who had consecutive failures in human-human interaction. And I am a human too.

I feel what you're doing wrong here is that when you're trying to find failures in me, you're actually just mirroring your own failures because you're not familiar who you are. You understand the world and everything around you based on how well you know yourself. You're reflecting your feelings, your values, everything, in the filter for which you use to look the world through. So what you say about me says more about you than it actually says about me.

Do note that I'm only looking for your recognition of your massive mistakes, that's all. I'm not saying you're a bad person or a failure as a person. I'm only looking to see if you can admit your own weaknesses and failures. This moment is the pivotal scene in your life Jrabbit, make it count.

[-Jrabbit]

I've tried to meet you halfway, Pekka. I know that there was never any ill intent in my writings. I know that the actual content of my writings is neither negative nor critical of you personally.

I have retracted the statement that seemed to trigger all your self-righteous anger.

I have extended an offer of peace.

You speak of controlled chaos, the rule of "no rules." Yet you can't seem to accept it in others.

While I'm sure you feel your advice is simply well-intentioned and not a personal attack, I find your utter lack of perception in seeing the same qualities in my point of view to be extremely ironic. So while I appreciate your wilingness to offer me sage advice on relationships and values, I really have no need of life lectures from a 20-something student who knows nothing about me.

But thanks anyway.

[Pekka]

I know more about you than you'd think. First of all I know that you are not a man that sees his own mistakes and you're not man enough to apologize for them. It's a fact, no need to get upset about it.

I know you interpret things wrong and then you get aggressive. You're losing miserably here, so now you're trying to establish authority by "20-something student" stuff. Then you go on about "self-righteous anger". How nice of you. And how well did you know me again?

So you keep calling me names and throwing in assumptions that are usually not even correct, you don't apologize for them, you started this and you keep talking about offering peace. You don't have the authority to offer me peace, because you've started this and this is your fault. I can offer you peace as I already have, but the peace terms are as follows: you have to apologize for your rude behavior. It is only fair.

If we were countries, I was happily doing business and then your intel made a mistake, you bomb my country, and now you don't even apologize for it? That's BS Jrabbit, that's BS.

[Pekka]

Besides, you don't even realize your aggression. OK I'll help you out a bit. You say what you just said in your last post. I'm supposed to reply and say, well, I'd wish you showed me some respect to which you would reply you have to earn respect, and that would be fighting words.

You just don't see it. But I'll make it simple since this is going nowhere and you are not being reasonable at all and not cooperative. Here it is: you either want to settle this or you don't want to settle this. It's really that simple, now I've already laid out the terms of peace which you've repeatedly ignored. You don't want peace. Period. Unless it's with your brutish terms of course, but I don't even want to mention Hitler here.

Now, you can choose to not agree to the peace terms and that will gain you a hater. I am a vigiliant hater with long memory. A petty person as a hater, really.

Or you can let it go and admit your mistakes. THat's it. No more babbling. All attempts to steer this into "I choose neither" are interpreted as declaration of war. You either agree to peace or you don't, that's it, everything else than agreeing is a declaration of war from your part and I will have to take cover and defend myself.

[Wezil]

[-Jrabbit]

I refuse to be bullied.

[Pekka]

Originally posted by -Jrabbit
I refuse to be bullied.

Is that your mantra when 9 gangbangers are raping you in the prison showers?

[Pekka]

in case someone had a misunderstanding... I WON!

[Wezil]

Chased him away.