While frolicking around in alt.food.vegan, usual suspect of Road
Runner - Texas said:

>>>>>That's it. No apology, no more Mr Nice Guy to you. Your assumption is
>>>>>*completely* misplaced.
>>>>
>>>>You haven't shown any signs of getting it. Especially considering how
>>>>you went after my past signatures.
>>>
>>>I didn't "go after," I asked questions. And I did it politely.
>>
>> Yes you did go after them and you were not polite about it at all.
>
>I was polite. I pointed out certain facts based on firsthand
>observation, and I also suggested the OP should eat bananas if he wanted
>to help banana workers. Some people really don't get the harm done to
>the lower-rung employees during boycotts.
>
You took the signature seriously, or you wouldn't even have bothered
asking a question. As far as boycuts go, they do sometimes work, if
the company gets told why the boycott is made. Then they'll want to
improve the conditions in question to get their customers back.

>>>>>>It's what you get when you can't see each other.
>>>>>
>>>>>From the gist of his other posts, he could probably tell all kinds of
>>>>
>>>>>lurid stories about that kind of behavior.
>>>>
>>>>What he does with other consenting adults is not something I intend to
>>>>get upset about.
>>>
>>>Nor do I.
>>
>> Then why make an issue out of it or say that there's a contradiction?
>
>You're the one making an issue of it. I only asked one question and let
>it be.
>
It was a quite insinuating question. You acted like you were taking it
seriously, which I then believed, giving you the benefit of the doubt,
but it seems to be misplaced, as you now claim that you knew it was a
joke, all along.

>>>>>>Several usenet people have mistaken me for a man.
>>>>>
>>>>>:-X
>>>>
>>>>I've told you why.
>>>
>>>I'm biting my tongue because I'm WAY TOO polite even though I'm through
>>>being nice to you till you apologize.
>>
>> I have nothing to apologise for,
>
>Yes, you do. You've thoroughly mischaracterized my intent.
>
I was saying that you didn't get the humour which is a different
thing. Saying "strawman" doesn't do anything to my initial argument
about why I think you didn't get the joke.

Why did you act like you took it seriously, if you knew it was a joke?
I'd like to know that.

>> as I'm only pointing out that your
>> repeated insistence of taking usenet signatures seriously shows that
>> you don't understand the humour in it.
>
>Strawman.
>
>> Anyone understanding the humour
>> in usenet signatures would know to not take them seriously.
>
>Strawman.
>
>> Besides,
>> you were different to me in past discussions than you are now that
>> you're "through being nice".
>
>I've *always* been nice to you. Way too nice. The fact that you always
>jump the gun and decide I'm being mean without delving into issues
>doesn't wash, Nikitta. All that does is show how rash you are.

Your general going after anything you consider to be "liberal" or
whatever you call it and anyone talking about ethics isn't polite
behaviour in a newsgroup, or in general. Actually I see no difference
between this and what you call being nice to me in previous
discussions. I see no difference at all.
--
Nikitta a.a. #1759 Apatriot(No, not apricot)#18
ICQ# 251532856
Unreferenced footnotes: http://www.nut.house.cx/cgi-bin/nemwiki.pl?ISFN
"Hummm.... 86 percent male. Which probably explains why I only have fun 14 percent
of the time...." Therion Ware (a.a.)