Re: Went out to day.........
Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2010 6:30 pm
Benny
No, I am neither related nor acquainted with either of them. If you go back and read my original comments, you'll see that I was merely indicating that posting pictures with questionable content (large number of dead coon, coons getting caught on the ground by the dogs, etc) can provide tangible contribution to the antis in their efforts to convince non-hunters to see things their way.
As I indicated in a response to the comments of grouse, Tom A, cobalt, etc, and as grouse demonstrates oh so perfectly, I thought it would be a waste of time to respond because I knew that some people are unable to dissociate themselves from their opinions and would think that when their opinion or comments are scrutinized or refuted, they are being personally attacked. While I do not think I have attacked anyone (because to do so means, to me, to go on the offensive and make it personal), I will admit that my last two posts went up a notch or two in assertiveness; this is because I was refuting comments about me rather than about my position. Instead of discussing whether or not we contribute to our own demise, people choose to question if I actually hunt, suggest that I am using certain words only as a means to impress others, etc. I think the best way to shut down a line of thinking is to point out why the thinking is flawed in the hopes of convincing someone to abandon it. As an example, cobalt indicated that I was being hypocritical. I responded with a clarification on what being hypocritical is, provided examples on why I was not being hypocritical, and I appear to have convinced him such that we are no longer talking about anyone being a hypocrite any longer. Yet even now, after I believe I effectively turned the tables on the "idiot and moron" debate, and asked grouse if we could get back to the actual subject of this post, he takes it to a whole new low.
In fact, as I am writing this response to you, I must say that I find it odd that you would choose to ask me about my association with those who like to attack rather than directing your inquiry to someone like grouse. I'd be interested in understanding why that is exactly.
Rifleman, I'm just curious, are you related to Larry or ike? They like to attack and stir up discontent also. I'm not attacking here, just trying to sort out who's who.
No, I am neither related nor acquainted with either of them. If you go back and read my original comments, you'll see that I was merely indicating that posting pictures with questionable content (large number of dead coon, coons getting caught on the ground by the dogs, etc) can provide tangible contribution to the antis in their efforts to convince non-hunters to see things their way.
As I indicated in a response to the comments of grouse, Tom A, cobalt, etc, and as grouse demonstrates oh so perfectly, I thought it would be a waste of time to respond because I knew that some people are unable to dissociate themselves from their opinions and would think that when their opinion or comments are scrutinized or refuted, they are being personally attacked. While I do not think I have attacked anyone (because to do so means, to me, to go on the offensive and make it personal), I will admit that my last two posts went up a notch or two in assertiveness; this is because I was refuting comments about me rather than about my position. Instead of discussing whether or not we contribute to our own demise, people choose to question if I actually hunt, suggest that I am using certain words only as a means to impress others, etc. I think the best way to shut down a line of thinking is to point out why the thinking is flawed in the hopes of convincing someone to abandon it. As an example, cobalt indicated that I was being hypocritical. I responded with a clarification on what being hypocritical is, provided examples on why I was not being hypocritical, and I appear to have convinced him such that we are no longer talking about anyone being a hypocrite any longer. Yet even now, after I believe I effectively turned the tables on the "idiot and moron" debate, and asked grouse if we could get back to the actual subject of this post, he takes it to a whole new low.
In fact, as I am writing this response to you, I must say that I find it odd that you would choose to ask me about my association with those who like to attack rather than directing your inquiry to someone like grouse. I'd be interested in understanding why that is exactly.
