Active Now

Randy D
Element 99
my2cents
texasescimo
Kittigate
Danilo_G
Discussion » Questions » Emotions » Do you share my scare now because: "Apparently politics attracts sociopaths"?

Do you share my scare now because: "Apparently politics attracts sociopaths"?

 

Posted - September 27

Responses


  • 6405
    No not really as there are plenty of sociopaths outside of politics as well  :P
      September 27, 2020 1:33 PM MDT
    4

  • 1232

    A number of jobs attract sociopaths, Lawyers, Judges, Surgeons, Police, Army, Navy, so on so forth.

      September 27, 2020 1:50 PM MDT
    2

  • 37775

     

      The way you’ve phrased your response fails to denote that the jobs/professions you listed also attract people who are not sociopath.  Being a sociopath is a human condition, jobs and professions are human constructs, so theoretically, no job or profession could be excluded from the possibility or probability of attracting sociopaths. 

      While honoring your right to your opinion and with the acknowledgment that you and I don’t have to see it the same way, I respectfully disagree with your assessment. 

      September 27, 2020 2:07 PM MDT
    2

  • 1232
    Sociopaths are attracted to high risk jobs, as they seek the excitement and risky nature of it, as they often feel rather flat, they also enjoy the feelings of rage, and control.

    https://www.bustle.com/p/9-jobs-sociopaths-are-most-likely-to-have-12982458 This post was edited by kjames at September 27, 2020 7:12 PM MDT
      September 27, 2020 2:24 PM MDT
    2

  • 37775

     

      That does not alter my rebuttal in the slightest way. 

    ~

      September 27, 2020 2:29 PM MDT
    2

  • 1232
    In response to your "rebuttal" of my answer, that you felt you needed to make for whatever reason, I answered the question listing the jobs which sociopaths are "most likely" to be predisposed to because of their personality traits, to show that it is not just politics that they are drawn to. I'm not stating that non sociopaths do not make these job choices; and if you don't like my response,  then you will have to lump it.
      September 27, 2020 2:37 PM MDT
    3

  • 37775

     

      I am not now and I was not angry with you when I responded to your answer, nor am I disparaging your level of intelligence, your character, your values, your personality, nothing about you personally in any way. I did not respond to you with the intention of offending you nor to hurt your feelings.  Speaking of feelings, you express that you don’t understand why I “felt” the need to respond.  You are incorrect; I did not feel anything about it, I did not have an emotion that prompted me to respond, I had a thought, a belief, an idea.  There are vast differences between feelings and thoughts. Also, this website is a completely open and public forum.  Just as you have the right to post here, so do I. If you don’t want feedback to what you post, then don’t post.  If you only want positive feedback that strokes your ego, thats not likely to happen each and every time you post something. If you’re too delicate to accept that others may have opinions and perspectives that differ from yours, I cannot assist you with that affliction.

    What you have written here, including “most likely” and “predisposed” differs from your original answer in that you give slightly more detail as to what you meant. You did not state the jobs most likely, you merely stated the jobs. My response is based on the exact words that you wrote, and I was quite clear in making my points. If you expect people to read your mind, you’ll most likely be unsuccessful at it or at least disappointed when it doesn’t happen. Often when we wrote things, the idea formulated in our heads seems to be the same words we put down, but when read by someone else, subtleties and nuances aren’t always picked up, such as your original post; you now state you meant more than was written in it. Authors should never fall in love with their first drafts (first rule of writing). I think you have taken exception to my post when I meant you no ill will at all, I just gave an opposing viewpoint. 

      There is nothing for me to “lump”.  If you truly believe that advising me to lump it as intelligent, mature, adult discourse, there is also the possibility that you may not like what I have written here, but I will not advise you to lump it; I choose to express myself and to state my position, not lumping anything. 

      September 27, 2020 5:04 PM MDT
    2

  • 1232

    Science states that rationality cannot exist without emotion.  Secondly, I don't come on the boards to have my ego stroked or whatever, I come on here as a question and answer site, to answer questions as I can best respond, and maybe have a laugh along the way.

    What you made was a rebuttal, a rebuttal is an argument contrary to the one being made.  And since you appear to think that rationality of thought can exist without emotion, then maybe you need to understand cognitive psychology. Your thinking is just a reflection of your internal environment, not everyone else's, and this is where thought is very limited to ones own perspective or filter, and so fails without emotion miserably, so even though you may not understand my response, someone else may, and so therefore, if you were truly looking to not be argumentative or critical, you could of just asked for further clarity.

      September 29, 2020 8:14 AM MDT
    1

  • 37775

      (could of have asked)

      You’re absolutely correct; one of the options available to me was to ask for clarification. It was not the only option, there is potentially a myriad of options that any person has when responding to another person. For instance, I could have showered you with profuse praise and adoration. Had I done so, I doubt I would have been invited to lump it. I don’t decide for you what you will write, you don’t decide for me what I will write. Isn’t it ironic that you inform me that I could have asked for clarification when you also could have asked me for clarification. It appears you became 
    perturbed, apparently you assumed I was attacking you by expressing an angle different than yours.  
     
      Listen, bottom line is that I harbor no animosity toward you. None. Zero. Nada. Zilch.  I stand by the simple point that I saw something differently than you did, I wrote it.  I don’t retract one word I wrote, I have no reason to back down or apologize for any supposed transgression against you.  I don’t think it’s worth drawing lines in the sand or starting WWIII. 
      September 29, 2020 8:35 AM MDT
    1

  • 1232

    Randy, you don't see me hanging off people's comments demanding that they respond to me in a certain way, and criticising the way they've responded. You don't see me hanging off people's responses correcting their grammar, those behaviours are all forms of control, people imposing their rules on others on a "question and answer site" of all things!

    This isn't the grand spelling bee, this isn't Wikipedia, this isn't the army, it's a social site.  I come on here to relax, I'm not here with a pole up my backside wanting everyone to write, spell and do as I think fit.  I can let go a few grammar mistakes and if I don't understand a response then I respond in a social manner,  not one that provokes.

    "Like it or lump it," is a turn of phrase similar to "Well you can please some of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people, all of the time."   
     

    This post was edited by kjames at September 29, 2020 9:43 AM MDT
      September 29, 2020 9:41 AM MDT
    0

  • 37775

     

      You’re correct in that your choices about what you wrote here are your choices, and by the same token, my choices about what I wrote are my choices. There’s no mandate that you have to or should post exactly the way I do, nor is there a mandate that I have to or should post the way you do. I’m  aware of what o post and I’m well aware of how it’s received by others. Have you seen me change in spite of or because of other people disliking what I post?  NOOOOOOO. You‘re not reinventing the wheel here, many others have expressed their opposition to some things that o post, yet it hasn’t stopped. Take from that what you will. Attempting to plant a medal on your own chest by stating the differences between what I post and what you post is a self-aggrandizing move. Fine, you’re a wonderful person because you don’t post what I post! Fine, you’re a better person than I am!  Fine, you’re never wrong and everyone must always agree with you, and when they have the audacity to disagree in any way, they’d better keep their traps shut!
      Hold your breath while waiting for me to ever fall for that. 

      September 29, 2020 10:40 AM MDT
    1

  • 1232
    But you haven't posted like other people do Randy, in fact you haven't even answered this question, what you did, and often do is hang off peoples comments rebutting them and correcting grammar mistakes, which as I have said is controlling and imposing. All you are doing here, is admitting that despite being "well aware" of how your behaviour is received by others, you do not care, which is why you do not change, and all this means is that you do not respect other peoples boundaries, which is antisocial, and why the conflict remains.  
      September 29, 2020 10:59 AM MDT
    0

  • 37775

     

      So aren’t you now doing exactly what you’ve accused me of doing: dictating to me that I have to or should respond to the post in the way that you prefer I respond as opposed to what I’ve done?  Make up your mind: either it’s wrong when I do it and ok when you do it, or it’s wrong when either one of us does it. 
     

      I don’t control any person when I comment about grammatical errors. I have never ordered anyone to change or edit their errors, I have never demanded any action whatsoever. People are completely free to ignore me, get angry with me, call me names about it, laugh with me about it, argue with me about it, joke with me about it, report me to admin, change the subject, point out my own grammatical errors, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. That is not control. You are strong enough as a person that you cannot be controlled by me, and so are dozens of other people. I take it in stride however anyone perceives a grammar correction or notification that I post on his or her thread. I don’t lose any sleep over it, and I don’t think anyone else should either If someone claims to be controlled by a website post . . . 


      If you have somehow developed the magical ability to never once on your life do anything with which others found execution, or if you have never in your life done anything that another person disliked, then what I wrote before is doubly true, you’re the best person in the world, the most wonderful human being in history. Sainthood might be in your future. For my part, I’m not even striving for such accolades, so if I fall short, I accept it. Sorry that I can’t measure up to your obvious example of perfection. 

      September 29, 2020 5:47 PM MDT
    1

  • 1232
    No I'm not doing what you are doing, I'm setting a boundary to have the freedom to make spelling mistakes and answer questions how I wish, the same privilege you have, but I want those freedoms without YOU imposing YOUR grammar fixations, and rebuttals on MY answers, that's the difference, no one is doing it to you, and no one wants to. When people sign up to this site, there isn't a clause in the section which states everyone must answer in accordance with a certain way so that everyone understands, (which is near impossible since interpretation is down to a person's own filter), and neither does it say you must not make spelling and grammatical mistakes, the site says none of these things, but YOU do, and you have taken it on to impose yourself, on other people's freedoms to answer questions however they like!

    Yes, people can report you, they can tell you that they do not like your monitoring behaviour, but it makes no difference, because you said so yourself, you don't care, you don't care about other people's freedoms of expression, or boundaries.  This is why I can say yes I'm not perfect, but I don't go out of my way to stomp over people's personal boundaries or freedoms on a daily basis either.

    So your motivation for coming here, is it to answer questions, or is it to make sure people are answering questions to your liking, and spelling things correctly? Because boy, for people who want to come here and relax and have fun, or converse freely without spell check it's like having some school teacher, or army Sargent breathing down your neck, and there's no fun, or freedom, in that, and you certainly cannot respect someone who conducts themselves in such a manner.


    This post was edited by kjames at October 12, 2020 12:34 PM MDT
      September 29, 2020 6:14 PM MDT
    1

  • 37775

     

      No, that’s not “my motivation”, as you state it.  That’s part of my interaction here. It is neither my main motivation nor my only motivation.  If you are not so seething with contempt for me that you cannot fairly assuage what’s plainly in front of you on the screen, and you’re also willing to be fair, you will notice that my interaction on this website is multifaceted.  I will freely admit that when it comes to grammar-related postings, I far outdo any other person here, I will not lie about that.  It is not, however, the only thing that I do here, so it is not my singular motivation.  

      For you to claim you’re not hypocritical in doing what you accuse me of doing is laughable.  Your arguments are pointless grasps for your way to be the way that I should follow your expectations and your example. You come off as if you’re some queen whom I must obey. It makes as much sense as me telling you that you have to post according to my expectations. I. Have. Not. Done. That. This started by me stating how your words are received, at no point have I said you should change them or should have changed them.  You can continue to beat this dead horse of yours if you so desire, I’ll hold up my end until the cows come home if that’s what floats your boat.  You serve, I’ll volley.

      News flash: I do not expect you to change how you conduct yourself here, and I am not going to change how I conduct myself here.  I am not making any attempt whatsoever to change your mind about anything that I do here, and at the same time, you will not be able to change my mind about anything I do here. I already know that you don’t like what I do, you have made that point quite well and quite often.  You can continue to repeat it, tweak it, expand upon it, expound it, diagram it, put it on a billboard and it would not become any more clear than you have already made it. I get it.  I understand.  I read you.  Message received.  After I absorbed it, there is no new or different action that I will undertake on reversing myself. I tried to bottom line this with you once, I‘ve let you know that no amount of browbeating is going to wear me down.  We have a saying in the South, “You don’t believe that fat meat is greasy”.  

      September 29, 2020 6:47 PM MDT
    1

  • 1232

    So hanging off PEOPLES ANSWERS in the comments section to correct THEIR grammar, regardless of knowing that it is not well received, is part of your "interaction" here? What to deliberately and knowingly upset people, impose your will on them, crossing their boundaries and wishes, I think that's an odd way to want to "interact."

    I'll say again, if you look at this thread, you will see that I ANSWERED the question, and then YOU HUNG OFF MY ANSWER IN THE COMMENTS SECTION, commenting that my answer deserved a rebuttal, and then further on, correcting MY GRAMMAR.  I haven't done that to you, as I said you haven't even ANSWERED THIS QUESTION, this is a conversation that has gone between you and I, after you have crossed MY boundary.  And this is what you do often, someone can post a great question on here, and there can be some great content, and you spend your time not engaging in the conversation, but just hang off peoples answers correcting their grammar, that is NOT what this SITE is designed for, ALL it requires of a person is to ASK and ANSWER QUESTIONS.  The moderator has not, to date, decided to employ another moderator to SPELL CHECK the site, as such you have taken it upon yourself to IMPOSE on people's answers in the comment section without invite, or want, and correct their spelling, and this is antisocial behaviour, why the moderator isn't taken action is beyond me, but a lot of people have left this site because of it, in fact some have made it VERY CLEAR how they feel about your controlling and stifling behaviour, and it has been them that have been unfairly removed from the site.

    You are right I have made it VERY CLEAR to you about how I feel regarding your CONTROLLING, AND IMPOSING behaviour, as it crosses my boundaries, because even when I have expressed my wishes, you have continued to take advantage, because you do not respect people’s wishes or boundaries, and of course this thread is a demonstration of that. I have even given your questions a wide berth in order to avoid you, because of your behaviour.

    So all I can say is, that if I ever reach a point in my life, where I feel the need to TROLL the comment section of a QUESTION AND ANSWER website in order to correct people's grammar, then please feel free to shoot me.

    I will finish leaving what I did on another answer, regarding this kind of behaviour.

    • "Grammar police," these are not normally people that are working in a job as an editor, librarian or school English teacher. Neither are they well-meaning grammar lovers whose sole aim is to be helpful when giving grammatical feedback, in private, by "modelling." 
    • These are individuals who cross the line by dishing out public corrections, with the intent of making themselves feel superior while putting others down. Such pedants seek out opportunities to brandish their grammar skills in an attempt to embarrass or humiliate anyone who commits a grammatical blunder. Not surprisingly, then, the grammar police are commonly perceived as rude, annoying, and even bullying by others. 

    A research study looked at the personality traits of people who react to errors in written communication. Study participants read email responses to a housemate-wanted ad, that either was error-free or had been modified to include typos or homophone errors (grammos), such as confusing to, too, and two. Participants were then asked to employ an evaluation scale for each message, which gauged their reactions to the writer, in addition to completing other research instruments. The study concluded:

    “More extroverted people were likely to overlook written errors, that would cause introverted people to judge the person who makes such errors more negatively. Less agreeable people were more sensitive to grammos, while more conscientious and less open people were sensitive to typos.”

    The grammar police are inclined to forage for grammar gaffes in cyberspace, with a specific hunger for “Comments” sections. Comments sections, for instance, are to language bullies what the Cheers bar was to Norm Peterson, or what murky waters at twilight are to the bull shark.”

    Above all, communication - correctly formatted or not - is all about understanding, so if you give a little grace when it comes to grammar mistakes, you'll find that communication improves overall.  People on social media sites, such as question and answer sites, usually use them for the social aspects, and do not want to feel "controlled" by someone's compulsion to use those sites for a completely different reason. It is all about how well you can read social cues and respect boundaries.

    So judging by what I know of grammar police, then no, they don't normally change, because overall they care more about what they get from behaving the way they do, than social cues, being understanding, other people’s boundaries and feelings.

     

    This post was edited by kjames at October 12, 2020 12:34 PM MDT
      September 30, 2020 2:02 PM MDT
    1

  • 37775



      (PEOPLES ANSWERS people's answers) Missing apostrophe on possessive plural noun.

    KJames, "hanging off" PEOPLES ANSWERS is your interpretation, whatever "hanging off" is supposed to mean.  Perhaps it's something important to you, I don't know.  You then stressed that I correct "THEIR grammar", but have you also noticed that I also make comments about my own grammatical errors, and about other members pointed out my grammatical errors?  That's right, I not only commit errors just like every other infallible human being, I also comment on my commission of those errors, and I comment on having them pointed out by others!  Not once have I shed tears about that, I often thank the person and I often poke fun at myself for having screwed up!  I don't curl into the fetal position and jam a pistol at my temple because of it!  LOL.

      Do you want to discuss things that are not well received by ME, or am I excluded because you have decided that you're the only one who's right about anything?  If my grammar-policing is not well received, ignore it!  Ignore me!  You've spilled a lot of proverbial ink in some vain attempt to get me to realize the error of my ways, and not one word you've written has been nor will be effective in fomenting change.  As I stated before, you are neither the first nor probably the last who through verbose chastising and soap-boxing has decried me.  I'm not going to stop.  That may surprise you, shock you, anger you, disappoint you, egg you on more, whatever, but it's the simple truth.  It is up to you to continue a tirade that won't change anything or to move on in your life, I have no control over your decision-making.  Speaking of control, if and when you tell me you don't want me to post a particular thing, isn't that you attempting to control me?   Hmmmmm.  I'm seeing a pot and a kettle here . . . 

      I don't impose any of my will on anyone, in that I've never told anyone they have to change or edit an error.  If people get upset about a grammar notification, that's completely out of my control.  Revert to the paragraph above and they can ignore it.  End of upset.  I have wishes about certain content here that don't get granted, so as soon as you're ready to take up my case and have that transgression reversed, you're hired.  Even if no change takes place, the haranguing alone is effort enough.  Now that I know you think I have an odd way to want to "interact" on here, it won't interfere with my sleeping habits one bit, meaning that it causes little reaction in me.  You have the right to deem anything odd that you wish to deem that way.  Thanks for informing me, but it'll most likely be completely forgotten by me as soon as I reach the end of this line.  Wait, what were we discussing?  See, gone already.

      Applause are in order because ANSWERED the question, medals will be handed out at the exits.  You made a decision about what KJames writes, bravo!  As for notifying you of your grammatical error(s), you'll find I only do that when such errors exist*.  Had there been no error(s), there would be nothing for me to notify or not notify, as I see fit.  I don't see you having written me one word of praise or admiration here for those instances in which I wrote something other than a grammar notification.  Does that mean that you choose to only focus on what you see as negatives?  Gee, what a concept.  If a person only looks for negatives, that's most likely all he or she will find.

    [*I have to pause here and point out that notifying someone of an error that he or she has committed is not a 100% action on every single error that I see, it is discretionary in nature.  More on this below.]

      If you think I've crossed your supposed precious "boundaries", why are we still arguing?  Alll you do by continuing is give me more ammunition which which load up on.  Hey, as you can probably tell by now, you and I are alike in that we both love to argue.  Keep throwing it at me, and I keep throwing it right back at you.  Let me know when you're ready to acknowledge the boundaries of mine that you have crossed, and we'll see how quickly you acquiesce.  (I'm just being sarcastic there, I'm actually enjoying our little repartee.)

      Now we cover the problem you have with rebuttal.  Once again "we are not amused" that our words were not merely accepted as gospel and the peasants move on about their lowly lives, right?  Nothing you write can be challenged in any way, and especially not by the vile oaf Randall D!  Well, tweedle-dee-dee.  Please don't expound to me what you haven't done to me as if the only we anyone can make any decision in the world is to stop first and check to see if it's ok with KJames (that's not a command or an order, it is a request).  No one is going to tiptoe up to you and beg permission to respond to your post.  This website's main pages are a completely open public forum in which any person has the freedom and the right to post.  You posted content on the public forum and I responded to it.  This is not a federal offense, KJames, this is not a cardinal sin!  If you don't want anything written about your post, then maybe you could print a disclaimer at the end of it prohibiting any feedback that doesn't bow down to you and lavish you with gushing thanks for allowing others to partake of your smarts. I saw no such warning, so I proceeded.  Please don't send the palace guard after me.  (Shiver.)

      So you say, "And this is what you do often, someone can post a great question on here, and there can be some great content, and you spend your time not engaging in the conversation, but just hang off peoples answers correcting their grammar, that is NOT what this SITE is designed for, ALL it requires of a person is to ASK and ANSWER QUESTIONS."  Well, let's pick apart your flaws and outright lies here.  If you already know it's what I do often, then why are you so surprised?  If a snake bites you ever time you handle it, and you don't want to get bitten any longer, yet continue to handle it, you'll continue to get bitten.  The site is for asking and answering questions, you're right, and in asking and answering, it open up conversation, feedback, input, etc.  This is not a multiple-choice only site, nor is it a just-fill-in-the-blanks site.  Case in point, this ongoing conversation in which you and I are engaged has evolved into much more than just a simple question and a simple answer.  You yourself keep it alive (well, not alone, because I keep coming back to it also), and even you I believe would admit it's gone far beyond just Q&A.  If you want to glorify your opinion of what can or can't or should or shouldn't be posted here, are million-word arguments allowed or not allowed?  (Be careful how you answer; you may invalidate your own points, LOL.) [Can ya tell how much fun I'm having with this, folks?]

      KJames, personally, I'm not a proponent of either SpellCheck or AutoInCorrect (that's what I call it), and I'll explain why.  As a word-nerd, I recognize how bad, ineffective, and often outright wrong those crutches can be.  That's not bad enough on its own, because in addition to those factors, people who do rely on them or use them are being done a disservice when they assume that the suggestions are carved-in-stone correct.  They're being duped into accepting that if a computer said it, it must be true.  It's really handicapped people from thinking on their own, from being able to recognize for themselves that spelling or syntax, or tense, or word usage is appropriate or inappropriate for what they are writing or saying.  As such, the fact that this website doesn't employ them can actually be a plus.  Furthermore, there are many people who do not care whether or not their writing is correct, and would/might ignore SpellCheck or AutoInCorrect anyway.  Those are the folks to whom I also suggest that they could or should ignore me when I grammar-police.  That's fine with me.

      Antisocial Randy D.  This is just as delicious as the rest of your babblings.  Well, sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but the site moderators hasn't taken action is that I've been reported and complained about many times, and the final analysis is that I actually remain within the parameters of the Terms of Service (TOS).  You're not the first person to whine that a lot of people have left this site because of me, and that some of them have made it VERY CLEAR how they feel about my "controlling and stifling" (your words) behavior.  Yep, I've also been through this argument with others in the past, but I'll go through it again with you here: it's true, many people have made the conscious decision on their own to leave this website precisely because of me, I am aware of that.  You'll be glad to know that it did have a positive effect leaning more toward your stance than toward mine, and I'll share that with you here.  Remember a few paragraphs ago I stated I would revisit the matter of discretion.  What happened was that I had been more of a 100% notification of people's grammatical errors when it was pointed out to me that some of the people who had left and some of the people who were considering leaving were not native English speakers.  Hmmmm, interesting.  I agreed with those who wrangled with me about this that it wasn't fair for a person who is not proficient in English to be grammar-policed in the same manner as people for whom English is their first language.  There were many instances in which I was unaware of a person's first language, which I remedied by either waiting to get to know some things about new members, or in other cases, the member himself or herself would inform me, or a friend of his or hers would inform me.  I backed off completely in those instances wherein I knew or had reason to believe English is not their language.  COMPLETELY.  Now, just in case you haven't seen it, in my profile, I posted several years ago that English language speakers are in a wholly different category, and it's explained there what my motivations are.  In addition to those people I no longer touch are certain other members who may have cognitive or educational factors that play into the way they write; I do not notify them of their grammar-related slights.  I've already covered the control issue, it's an incorrect assumption.  Lastly here, you wrote "and it has been them that who have been unfairly removed from the site.  [The word 'that' refers to inanimate objects, the word 'who' refers to people.]  Well, this is just plain incorrect as being attributed to me.  No person has been removed from this site against his or her will due to any grammar notifications that I made.  People have made the decision (albeit in anger or frustration with me) to leave on their own, but not tossed out.  

      Would it interest you to know that more people have stated on review websites that they left this website due to the political content than have left because of grammar-policing in general or because of my grammar-policing specifically?  It's true!  I have been mentioned by name on those review sites, grammar-policing in general has been mentioned, but not to the depth nor degree of the Trump-hatred/left-wing/right-wing/who-hates-more-than-opponent, etc?  Yet I don't see you excising half a million words about how that crap scares people away!  If you're such a crusader about not getting people sent away because of standing members with poor behavior, why not go and jump down their throats?  Merely by quantity, they bypass me in leaps and bounds with their vitriol.

      I'm not taking advantage of you.  Case in point: if I tell you that I don't want you to write a particular thing, are you going to stop writing it?  You probably won't answer that because I used your own words and your own points against you, and as soon as you read it, you'll realize I'm right.  We shall see.  Sorry, what's good for the goose is good for the gander.  Please don't try to impose unequal aspirations on me.  If you're going to demand something yet not comply with it yourself, that's just bad form.  I have wishes also, so when you're ready to respect them as much as you want me to respect yours, we can meet in the middle.

      You wrote: "I have even given your questions a wide berth in order to avoid you, because of your behavior."  See?  That's exactly what I've been saying!  YOU make the conscious decision to ignore my questions, and there's no problem!  You're exercising your right to respond to or not respond to posts as you see fit!  I am also exercising your right to respond to or not respond to posts as you see fit!  Finally we are meeting in the middle!

    So all I can say is, that if I ever reach a point in my life, [no comma] where I feel the need to TROLL the comment section of a QUESTION AND ANSWER website in order to correct people's grammar, then please feel free to shoot me.



    • "Grammar police," these are not normally people that who are working in a job as an editor, librarian or school English teacher. Neither are they well-meaning grammar lovers whose sole aim is to be helpful when giving grammatical feedback, in private, by "modelling."  You're right, I have never worked as not stated that I worked as editor, librarian or school English teacher.  So what's your point?  (LOL.)

    • These are individuals who cross the line by dishing out public corrections, with the intent of making themselves feel superior while putting others down. Such pedants seek out opportunities to brandish their grammar skills in an attempt to embarrass or humiliate anyone who commits a grammatical blunder. Not surprisingly, then, the grammar police are commonly perceived as rude, annoying, and even bullying by others.  Meh, you call them 'corrections', I call them 'notifications.  The difference is the control issue.  I have no expectation whatsoever that anyone alter or edit anything about which I have notified them as being an error.  As such, there is no penalty nor negative consequence that befalls anyone of they ignore me.  Nope, no control at all.  I don't set out to humiliate or embarrass anyone, if that's an emotion or a reaction to a notification, they're probably taking the website too seriously.  It's just not that big of a deal.  Let's move on.


      The research study and its finding.  So you found something that might indicate to you something about my supposed traits.  For someone who was so all-fired up in arms against the embarrassment or humiliation of others, what's your point?  Once again, it's been tried on me and failed miserably.  [As an aside, some people have even used the "size of genitals" jabs; all of it falls off of me like water off of a duck's back.  I'm not so insecure as to give pseudo-science disguised as concrete proof of something any credence.]  I'm neither embarrassed not humiliated that some people find some internet link or other source to "diagnose" me.  Let's see, what if I am either extroverted or introverted or any other buzzwords that you'll come up with in an attempt to shame me?  Fine, it's not going to make me change the way I interact (there's that word again that you tried in vain to use to beat me down) on here.  I'm not out I'm not kidnapping people or axe-murdering people, or bilking old ladies of their life savings or torturing animals in the canyon behind the house.  Into which life are there absolutely no mental disorders?  Heck, while you're at it, diagnose yourself and report back to us on your findings.  If you're honest enough to expose all the ugly parts, it might be something interesting to you, but it means nothing to me whatsoever.


      Whew.  In conclusion, I'd really like to know what you hope to accomplish here.  Between you and I, there appears to be only one person (you) truly wanting a change in the other's behavior.  I have read what you have written, and informed you that I will not be able to comply with your demands.  You and I both keep repeating ourselves, going in circles, and I'll gladly stay for the next dance if you play the music, I just won't change my steps.  Knowing that you are getting through to me but that you won't not get what you want, please let me know what you plan to get out of all this.

    [If I have committed any typos, please feel free to notify me if you so desire.  I can't stand it when I screw up like that.  Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.]






    ~

      September 30, 2020 5:59 PM MDT
    1

  • 1232
    That last part about grammar Nazi's wasn't mine, it was copied from a research study into those who are self appointed grammar Nazis, and their psychological profile, certainly telling, and so I don't expect any better from you as I've said before.
      October 2, 2020 2:54 PM MDT
    1

  • 37775

     

      (Nazi’s Nazis) The apostrophe does not pluralize a singular noun, it makes it a singular possessive noun, as in belonging to a Nazi.)

      (self-appointed) Missing the hyphen. 




      October 2, 2020 3:35 PM MDT
    0

  • 1232

    Fact is Randy, you and Stu are the only people on this site to feel the need to "troll" the comments section, correcting people's grammar mistakes, everyone else is more relaxed, more forgiving, and obviously know how easy it is to make mistakes when you want to enthusiastically answer or ask questions, I'd take enthusiasm over stiltedness any day.  I appreciate content, passion and humour more than grammar, after all this is a question and answer site only.  And even after they've politely asked you not to troll their answers, you ignore them, which says a lot about your character.

    As you have already made clear, you also like to feel better than other people, having the ignorance to think that only non-native speakers get offended by your antisocial behaviour and leave, that is not true, in fact many people have sworn at you for correcting their grammar when you've ignored their request not to, and Just Asking has chosen to remove them from the site and not you, which I think is bad moderating, because it is your behaviour that is antisocial, as I said you cross peoples boundaries by not respecting their wishes regarding how they type their own answers. However, if you wish to take non-native speakers into account, then yes, I'm sure your intolerant behaviour is not well received, since despite not being able to write the English language as well as their own, they still share the same social cues and etiquette which most people would forward to a social media site, and most non-native speakers write our language far better than we can theirs.  Your behaviour isn't antisocial when only aimed at non-native speakers, but antisocial because it is intolerant, and unwanted by many.

    And so your behaviour is that of a Troll, a troll behaves in a way where their behaviour is unwanted, but continues anyway, and even enjoys the upset they cause, as much as the control they impose, and is therefore bullying.

    Whenever I come on this site there is probably eight people tops, the numbers are not growing, and I'm sure grammar police are not helping, and since the moderator cares not to do anything about the unwanted behaviour, and others have just become accepting off it, or sit on the fence, then I expect the numbers will not grow, and the self-appointed grammar police will control the board, which is their goal.

    I was confused as to whether it was some obsessive compulsion, some mental illness that compelled you to troll the comments section as other people’s grammar mistakes offend you so much, or cause you so much mental torment, but from your response, it is because you are intolerant of other people's mistakes, and it makes you feel greater than they are when you correct them, and as I said you enjoy the controlling aspect of it.  And when you have people such as I, who come here to relax, who are more at ease with mistakes, and do not like people imposing themselves on myself or others, to feed their egos, then it does not make for a relaxing or enjoyable time. And after all this isn't the only site I frequent, however, it is unfortunately the only site that has, not just one, but two people who refer to themselves as grammar police.  Your behaviour is not the normal behaviour, as most people do not feel the need to act as yourself, and also see it as antisocial.  

    But I have accepted you will continue to troll the comments section, as you enjoy it so much, and care not for how others feel, or their boundaries, you’ve made that crystal clear.

     

    And I chose to look into the psychological profile of an individual who refers to themselves or acts as yourself, in order to see what the psychological make-up was, and the motivation behind it, and I thought it worth copying here, so others can read it for themselves and make up their own minds as to whether they wish to stay and tolerate it.





    This post was edited by kjames at October 12, 2020 12:35 PM MDT
      October 3, 2020 5:31 PM MDT
    2

  • 37775
    Ok.
    ~
      October 3, 2020 5:49 PM MDT
    0

  • 37775

    But you haven't posted like other people do Randy, in fact you haven't even answered this question”

    But you haven't posted like other people do Randy, in fact you haven't even answered this question”

    But you haven't posted like other people do Randy, in fact you haven't even answered this question”

    But you haven't posted like other people do Randy, in fact you haven't even answered this question”

    But you haven't posted like other people do Randy, in fact you haven't even answered this question”

    But you haven't posted like other people do Randy, in fact you haven't even answered this question”

    “But you haven't posted like other people do Randy, in fact you haven't even answered this question”


    How is this NOT dictating how you believe I should post on here?  

    (P.S. Comma after the word “do”.)

      September 29, 2020 6:53 PM MDT
    0

  • 11026
    Can I help?

      September 29, 2020 5:48 PM MDT
    3

  • 37775

     

      LOL.
    ~

      September 29, 2020 6:48 PM MDT
    0