EnviroLink Forum

Community • Ecology • Connection
It is currently Wed Oct 22, 2014 2:26 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 417 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 28  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Dishonesty
PostPosted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 8:55 pm 
Offline
Member with 200 posts
Member with 200 posts
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:12 pm
Posts: 314
Location: The Northwoods
The thread in question is this:

http://www.envirolink.org/forum/viewtop ... c&start=45

The mischaracterization of my posts in this thread as put forth by Sianblooz.

Sianblooz wrote, Page 4:
Quote:
First you say a child who gets caught in a conibear trap is stupid. Then you say trappers should be able to hide traps so people cannot find them except by accidentally tripping it.


Now, what I actually said was this (Page 2, same thread):

Quote:
If a child sticks his head in a conibear trap, well, can we say Darwin?


Page 3:
Quote:
I'll say it again...if a kid sticks his head into a conibear trap, that kid is a candidate for a Darwin Award.


A Darwin Award by no means states that a person is stupid but "honors" the person for improving the gene pool by removing themselves from it in really stupid ways. We have all done really stupid actions, doesn't make anybody stupid.

Secondly, I never stated that trappers hide their traps so people cannot find them except by accidently tripping over them. Sianblooz, I challenge you to quote where I stated what you accused me of writing.

On to the next dishonest remark by Sianblooz, Page 4:
Quote:
Capitalswine says I would steal the trap. He's a liar but is the possibliity of losing a trap a good reason for lying about where they are?


I never made no such statement. Here is what I said, Page 3:
Quote:
Why? So people with your beliefs can steal or vandalize the trap so it can never operate again?


The above quote was in response to this by Sianblooz on Page 3:
Quote:
Bottom line is the sickos who set these traps should be required to post signs informing the unsuspecting dog walker, or a family out for a NATURE walk, of the danger.

Why are they allowed to be so sneaky with traps that hurt, maim and kill ? Is it really so much to ask that they be FORCED to own up to what they do? Why do we let these sickos get away with this?


For some people who share Sianblooz's beliefs, that being vehemently opposed to trapping, it is not above those particular individuals to steal or permanently damage a trap. At no point in time did I ever write that Sianblooz would steal or vandalize a trap.

To read my response is that the trapper does not place signs stating that he has traps set in a particular area because some people who share Sianblooz's beliefs may steal or vandalize those traps.


It is implied that respect is paramount on this board. I have given you nothing but respect, Sianblooz, yet you have misrepresented and mischaracterized my position and my posts. In addition your have flat-out declared me to be a liar.

I will not take these false accusations and attacks lying down. I expect an immediate retraction of your false claims. Thank you.

_________________
Up the Irons!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 10:01 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2003 11:53 am
Posts: 2281
Location: Pittsburgh, PA USA
Seems like you are nitpicking a bit here, and on the losing side of the argument. One could certainly draw inferences from your statements that you thought the kids were stupid or that "people with your beliefs" could be interpreted as a reference to sianblooz him/herself. If you really are that touchy about how people interpret what you write, you should make sure to avoid writing things that are so easy to misinterpret!

I can't see how Sianblooz's interpretation of your words is dishonest, in fact I took them to mean the same thing.

-josh

ps- I think perhaps you now owe Sianblooz an apology for calling Sianblooz dishonest (see, I just did it too... but at least dishonest is one letter short of the word you actually used).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 10:10 pm 
Quote:
... "people with your beliefs" could be interpreted as a reference to sianblooz him/herself.


Then "sickos" could be interpreted as a personal attack on those here who are trappers.

And Sianblooz plainly called Capitalistswine a liar.

Quote:
He's a liar but is the possibliity of losing a trap a good reason for lying about where they are?


What I think is funny though, is the reference to "lying about where they are." Where did that come from? :lol:


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 10:40 pm 
Offline
Member with 200 posts
Member with 200 posts
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:12 pm
Posts: 314
Location: The Northwoods
josh knauer wrote:
Seems like you are nitpicking a bit here, and on the losing side of the argument. One could certainly draw inferences from your statements that you thought the kids were stupid or that "people with your beliefs" could be interpreted as a reference to sianblooz him/herself. If you really are that touchy about how people interpret what you write, you should make sure to avoid writing things that are so easy to misinterpret!

I can't see how Sianblooz's interpretation of your words is dishonest, in fact I took them to mean the same thing.

-josh

ps- I think perhaps you now owe Sianblooz an apology for calling Sianblooz dishonest (see, I just did it too... but at least dishonest is one letter short of the word you actually used).


How am I nitpicking when Sianblooz commits a misrepresentation about what I wrote?

Show me where I called a child stupid?

Show me where I said a trapper should be able to hide his traps so people cannot find them except by accidentally tripping it.

Show me where I wrote that Sianblooz steals and/or vandalizes traps.

Why is that Sianblooz can insult trappers in general and that is not an inference to Donnie? But if that is the case, then Sianblooz has called Donnie a "sicko".

Sianblooz has called me a "liar" with no supporting evidence or documentation to back up said accusation.

If one person can go around on this board making misrepresentations, mischaracterizations and making unsupported accusations against an actual member of this board, what is to stop somebody else from doing so?

If you truly think I'm the liar that Sianblooz makes me out to be then history is bound to be repeated.

I'm not asking or demanding an apology from Sianblooz, I'm demanding a retraction on his/her misrepresentations about what I wrote.

_________________
Up the Irons!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 11:37 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 3:45 pm
Posts: 1340
josh knauer wrote:
Seems like you are nitpicking a bit here, and on the losing side of the argument. One could certainly draw inferences from your statements that you thought the kids were stupid or that "people with your beliefs" could be interpreted as a reference to sianblooz him/herself. If you really are that touchy about how people interpret what you write, you should make sure to avoid writing things that are so easy to misinterpret!

i think he was attempting to correct what sianblooz took out of context the first time, and i laughed at the tongue in cheek darwin remark even though i've heard that before.

I can't see how Sianblooz's interpretation of your words is dishonest, in fact I took them to mean the same thing.



-josh
i do completely see the dishonesty in the twisting of what was actually said, especially the part regarding "trap stealing", the mischaracterizations of trappers and i can empathize with capitalitswine due to the line of questioning and bs that came with sianblooz's accusations of my personal "lawlessness" that was never researched or corrected by her after such remarks were made. like you josh, i take the individual's past behaviors into account as well when i look at what their intentions possibly or probably were when something like this comes up.


ps- I think perhaps you now owe Sianblooz an apology for calling Sianblooz dishonest (see, I just did it too... but at least dishonest is one letter short of the word you actually used).


thats a knee slapper :lol: :lol:

_________________
lately i been thinkin' aunt betty stopped her blinkin'....soon she'll be a stinkin'..........my deceased mother in law speaking of her aunt who had died.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 11:37 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 7957
Location: Cape Breton Npva Scotia
josh knauer wrote:
Seems like you are nitpicking a bit here, and on the losing side of the argument. One could certainly draw inferences from your statements that you thought the kids were stupid or that "people with your beliefs" could be interpreted as a reference to sianblooz him/herself. If you really are that touchy about how people interpret what you write, you should make sure to avoid writing things that are so easy to misinterpret!

I can't see how Sianblooz's interpretation of your words is dishonest, in fact I took them to mean the same thing.

-josh

ps- I think perhaps you now owe Sianblooz an apology for calling Sianblooz dishonest (see, I just did it too... but at least dishonest is one letter short of the word you actually used).




It would be dishonest to insinuate that the owner was not the person who victimized the dog and the trapper Josh. If the owner had practiced responsible ownership neither the dog or the trapper would have been a part of this witch hunt. Also note that hunters and trappers are not classified by conservationists as sickos. In fact they are often chosen to preform certain wild life conservation practices because they are astute wildlife students who are far removed from what Sianblooz classes as Sickos.

_________________
I use red, not because of anger but to define my posts to catch rebuttals latter and it makes the quote feature redundent for me. The rest of you pick your own color.

Life is a time capsule we strive to fill with precious memories.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2006 12:28 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20562
Location: Southeastern US
Well, It seems there is a need for retractions and apologies, BUT they should come in more of a choronological order should they not?

We have RF misrepresenting the statement of Sianblooz here:

http://www.envirolink.org/forum/viewtop ... 5615#35615

Saying someone told a lie is different from calling them a liar just as saying someone did something stupid is different from calling them stupid.

Then we have the borderline personal attacks where people are actually calling others liars. Now, this would require some level of proof to support their claim, would it not? Do you think they should get started before there are similar complaints?

http://www.envirolink.org/forum/viewtop ... 8482#38482

http://www.envirolink.org/forum/viewtop ... a433#38352

http://www.envirolink.org/forum/viewtop ... be69#35764

BTW, Josh did not remind you of the policy of not using a poster's name in a title of a thread. It is not proper you know.

If this is a dead issue so be it, if not there seem to be a lot of issues that could become problems if we are to take them as such .... :?

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2006 12:41 am 
Offline
Member with 200 posts
Member with 200 posts
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:12 pm
Posts: 314
Location: The Northwoods
Wayne Stollings wrote:
Well, It seems there is a need for retractions and apologies, BUT they should come in more of a choronological order should they not?

We have RF misrepresenting the statement of Sianblooz here:

http://www.envirolink.org/forum/viewtop ... 5615#35615

Saying someone told a lie is different from calling them a liar just as saying someone did something stupid is different from calling them stupid.

Then we have the borderline personal attacks where people are actually calling others liars. Now, this would require some level of proof to support their claim, would it not? Do you think they should get started before there are similar complaints?

http://www.envirolink.org/forum/viewtop ... 8482#38482

http://www.envirolink.org/forum/viewtop ... a433#38352

http://www.envirolink.org/forum/viewtop ... be69#35764

BTW, Josh did not remind you of the policy of not using a poster's name in a title of a thread. It is not proper you know.

If this is a dead issue so be it, if not there seem to be a lot of issues that could become problems if we are to take them as such .... :?


Wayne, a couple of hours after I posted the thread I thought something looked wrong. Thank you for removing Sianblooz's name from the thread title as that particular rule had slipped my mind.

Now to address the rest of your post, I don't see how those examples are relevent to this situation as I was not involved those examples and the conversation particulars.

I am taking note of the fact that Sianblooz misrepresented MY posts not anybody else's on this forum. If Sianblooz or anybody else has a problem with mispresenting of posts that's between them. The fact of the matter remains that Sianblooz misrepresented my posts and made the accusation that I am a liar without evidence or documentation to back up said claim. It's a nice deflection technique though.

Of course, Sianblooz is not required to retract his/her misrepresentations but it will not be forgotten and will not be settled. This is far from a dead issue as I am not a liar and I will not stand to be misrepresented and mischaracterized. Thank you.

_________________
Up the Irons!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2006 12:53 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20562
Location: Southeastern US
Capitalistswine wrote:
Wayne, a couple of hours after I posted the thread I thought something looked wrong. Thank you for removing Sianblooz's name from the thread title as that particular rule had slipped my mind.


No problem, it was no biggie ... :wink:

Quote:
Now to address the rest of your post, I don't see how those examples are relevent to this situation as I was not involved those examples and the conversation particulars.


No, but it does indicate the potential for a lot of similar demands, does it not?

Quote:
I am taking note of the fact that Sianblooz misrepresented MY posts not anybody else's on this forum. If Sianblooz or anybody else has a problem with mispresenting of posts that's between them. The fact of the matter remains that Sianblooz misrepresented my posts and made the accusation that I am a liar without evidence or documentation to back up said claim. It's a nice deflection technique though.


Actually, in the context used you were called a liar in the part about saying Sianblooz would steal a trap. Since that was a misunderstanding of what you were intending to say, that would make your belief also a misunderstanding ... technically speaking. I agree it would be good manners to clarify the situation, but it seems yours was the prior issue of lack of clarity.

Quote:
Of course, Sianblooz is not required to retract his/her misrepresentations but it will not be forgotten and will not be settled.


As I said, it would be better manners to do so, but so many here seem to forget their manners at times. It is such a shame too.

Quote:
This is far from a dead issue as I am not a liar and I will not stand to be misrepresented and mischaracterized.


Nor should you stand for it, IF you had made a clear statement that was misrepresented. I do not believe you did make a clear statement, but that is your call.

Quote:
Thank you.


No, thank you for the clarification, it is very easy to misunderstand posts on a board such as this. :wink:

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2006 8:25 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2003 11:53 am
Posts: 2281
Location: Pittsburgh, PA USA
Donnie Mac Leod wrote:
It would be dishonest to insinuate that the owner was not the person who victimized the dog and the trapper Josh. If the owner had practiced responsible ownership neither the dog or the trapper would have been a part of this witch hunt.

This is your opinion, which certainly does not qualify as a "fact" except to you and people who agree with you. Stating a contrary opinion should not be deemed as dishonest but rather just that... a difference of opinion. You could even claim the person is "wrong" but why would you claim they are lying when they are just expressing their opinions?

Quote:
Also note that hunters and trappers are not classified by conservationists as sickos. In fact they are often chosen to preform certain wild life conservation practices because they are astute wildlife students who are far removed from what Sianblooz classes as Sickos.

I'm sure there are some conservationists that could be found that do think that hunters and trappers are sickos. I'm sure we could find some that think hunters and trappers are really aliens from another planet. So what?

It really seems to me that you are using the word "dishonest" to describe anyone who disagrees with your line of logic. That's a really pathetic rhetorical tactic and I'd suggest you change your approach to disagreeing with those that express opinions other than yours.

-josh


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2006 9:27 am 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!

Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2005 12:14 am
Posts: 870
Wonder how long she'll last at this board before all of her supporters disappear like on the last handful of boards?

It always happens...it's just a matter of time.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 10:48 pm 
Quote:
We have RF misrepresenting the statement of Sianblooz here:

http://www.envirolink.org/forum/viewtop ... 5615#35615


Doesn't appear we do.

We have you claiming so, is all.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 11:03 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 7957
Location: Cape Breton Npva Scotia
RF wrote:
Quote:
We have RF misrepresenting the statement of Sianblooz here:

http://www.envirolink.org/forum/viewtop ... 5615#35615


Doesn't appear we do.

We have you claiming so, is all.




I think Wayne missed the dog poo was who Sianblooz was appologizing to and that the whole story is Sianblooz was calling Wiijim a liar while making out it was an apology. Wiijim told of beating his cat to death in front of his child. What Sianblooz isn't telling folks on this board is that the cat had been mortaly injured and Wiijim hit it hard with a shovel to finish it off quickly. We know this from another board but Wayne doesn't know the whole story. Knowing the full story and Sianblooz we know that the intent was to call Wiijim a lying piece of dog poo and insinuate he was cruel for killing the cat in fron t of his child. .

_________________
I use red, not because of anger but to define my posts to catch rebuttals latter and it makes the quote feature redundent for me. The rest of you pick your own color.

Life is a time capsule we strive to fill with precious memories.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 11:16 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20562
Location: Southeastern US
RF wrote:
Quote:
We have RF misrepresenting the statement of Sianblooz here:

http://www.envirolink.org/forum/viewtop ... 5615#35615


Doesn't appear we do.

We have you claiming so, is all.


Ok, where is the quote to support your claim. If you can provide post where Sianblooz called Wijim a "liar" I will apologize for my error, but if you cannot you have been proven wrong yet again .... :wink:

The ball is in your court now.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 11:24 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20562
Location: Southeastern US
Donnie Mac Leod wrote:
RF wrote:
Quote:
We have RF misrepresenting the statement of Sianblooz here:

http://www.envirolink.org/forum/viewtop ... 5615#35615


Doesn't appear we do.

We have you claiming so, is all.




I think Wayne missed the dog poo was who Sianblooz was appologizing to and that the whole story is Sianblooz was calling Wiijim a liar while making out it was an apology. Wiijim told of beating his cat to death in front of his child. What Sianblooz isn't telling folks on this board is that the cat had been mortaly injured and Wiijim hit it hard with a shovel to finish it off quickly. We know this from another board but Wayne doesn't know the whole story. Knowing the full story and Sianblooz we know that the intent was to call Wiijim a lying piece of dog poo and insinuate he was cruel for killing the cat in fron t of his child. .


I missed the point where Sainblooz called anyone a liar. I have read the representations that was the case, but not the exact quote. Since the connection was to the point Capitalistswine was trying to make about his post being misrepresented, someone is trying to use a double standard here. As for the "other boards story" it means nothing in this case other than there is a history of conflict. If the perceived insinuation is considered valid in the "correction" of Sianblooz's post why is it not also applicable to Captialistswine's posts? Or vice versa? Since none of you "corrected" Caplitalistswine one must assume you agreed with his point yet jumped on the double standard when it suited ... just as has been the "problems" illustrated with the ARAs. :?

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 417 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 28  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 13 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group