Edit: With apologies to Lex, who got in while I was typing this comment, but I can assure you, this is my final word.
mikecash said:
You're right. I lied. I have never encountered the phenomenon either here or on other forums before, so there is no way I could ask a general question regarding it. I made it all up.
I can't understand clearly what you're meaning here, other than you're making a sarcastic comment, but I think I understand your message. As for the "phenomenon", I'm not sure what you mean by this, but I don't think it's that important.
I don't know how my statement that your post inspired the question got overlooked.
What makes you think I overlooked it? I read it several times actually a little puzzled how I could inspire something and yet not have it directed at me, when there was no one else around who was an obvious candidate for your criticism.
Since you're such hot stuff on inferring things where nothing was implied, it is a wonder to me how you miss picking up on the one thing I actually did directly imply by putting your choice of the word "fire" in quotation marks.
Because I was interested in arguing the points that you were denying. Not the things that you freely admit.
When you paraphrase another's words, it is generally best to indicate that you're paraphrasing. I can't find where I made the statement, "Oh, but I didn't actually fire it at you in particular" which you attribute to me.
Since it troubles you, I've gone back and re-edited the comment to make it clear that I was paraphrasing - I'm more than happy to do that. Since your original words were both box-quoted also appeared a couple of posts earlier, I assumed that anyone with any intelligence having read your comments would know that I wasn't attributing a direct quote as they would know you hadn't used these exact words.
I used quote marks from a stylistic point of view to make it obvious which part of the sentence was supposed represent my personal belief about what you were thinking, but in hindsight perhaps quote marks could be misleading, so again I'm happy to make it clear that you didn't say this, even if I still believe it's what you fully intended.
Do you do the same thing in face-to-face conversations? Hearing what you want/expect to hear rather than what was said?
I'm not quite sure what the relevance of what I do in face-to-face conversation has to do with anything, but since you asked, no I don't believe I do. What I frequently do however is point out when I believe someone is using what I think it is fair to say is a fairly childish tactic - i.e. casting general aspersions and then lamely hiding behind the charade that it wasn't directly pointed at an individual, so how could it possibly cause offence when the implication is clear for all to see. I think you did this, you say you didn't... Other people can decide for themselves.
Anyway, enough is enough. The bickering is going on far too long, and I wouldn't be surprised if a moderator doesn't close this thread if it doesn't get back on track soon. Let's be honest - no matter how right we both think we are, these types of arguments only annoy other forum users and I think I've made my views fairly clear, so there's little point in continuing. Since I wouldn't want to be accused of a similarly childish tactic of trying to grab the final word and then call a halt, you're more than welcome to respond - I won't be continuing this line of disagreement any further.