Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.
K… It’s justifiable enough to me, and that’s enough for me, so if you’re upset enough to have a comment chain like this then… I guess I don’t know what you’re looking for. So, I’m probably going to stop replying because I’ve said why, and you rejected my why. Twice.
Read again. I never rejected anything. Literally all I did was point out the logic of your thinking. You could have agreed the logic I pointed out was in fact your correct belief. But instead you decided that logic wasn’t good enough, and responded with annother justification. That’s all that happened here.
I never used an angry word. I’ve been nothing but civil. And I’m sorry I couldn’t explain your own logic to you well enough. That’s my failing.
You may be better served reading up on Behavior Modification Therapy. It’s more effective at producing positive changes in people, then the blanket shunning your doing.
Yah. That makes sense. After re-reading everything there are no aggressive statements; No explitives or insults. There’s nothing in thewords themselves displaying anger.
However it is common for people to see disagreement or contention as a hostile attack. Especially when contesting a perceived morality. The only sensible reason I can see my words would appear angry to you, is that you’re reading my words with your emotions and conflating the two.
So if I angered you in my questioning the validity of your moral condemnation, I apologize. It’s a regrettable consequence. One that’s common enough, I should have predicted it. I might have handled things differently if I had.
Even my previous comment you called passive agressive, was intended to be condescending. I could have softened that more.
K… It’s justifiable enough to me, and that’s enough for me, so if you’re upset enough to have a comment chain like this then… I guess I don’t know what you’re looking for. So, I’m probably going to stop replying because I’ve said why, and you rejected my why. Twice.
Read again. I never rejected anything. Literally all I did was point out the logic of your thinking. You could have agreed the logic I pointed out was in fact your correct belief. But instead you decided that logic wasn’t good enough, and responded with annother justification. That’s all that happened here.
deleted by creator
I never used an angry word. I’ve been nothing but civil. And I’m sorry I couldn’t explain your own logic to you well enough. That’s my failing.
You may be better served reading up on Behavior Modification Therapy. It’s more effective at producing positive changes in people, then the blanket shunning your doing.
deleted by creator
Yah. That makes sense. After re-reading everything there are no aggressive statements; No explitives or insults. There’s nothing in thewords themselves displaying anger.
However it is common for people to see disagreement or contention as a hostile attack. Especially when contesting a perceived morality. The only sensible reason I can see my words would appear angry to you, is that you’re reading my words with your emotions and conflating the two.
So if I angered you in my questioning the validity of your moral condemnation, I apologize. It’s a regrettable consequence. One that’s common enough, I should have predicted it. I might have handled things differently if I had.
Even my previous comment you called passive agressive, was intended to be condescending. I could have softened that more.