Let's look at and talk about "age", again.

[Age]

But, obviously I am giving it a small 'a'. you, obviously rebelling, are giving it a capital 'a'.

No, a few times, it seems, you refer to yourself as 'age'. However every post, because of a choice you made and choose not to undo - such as you undid your choice to no longer use 'Ken' - has 'Age' with a capital A twice. For example, the post I am responding to now has Age above the post, to the left
by Age » Fri Jun 21, 2024 11:21 pm
and to the right of the post.

and then up to the right of the post

Age
Posts: 20863
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am
Contact: Contact Age

Oh, look a third time, though that one was only visible when I copied the speech bubble along with the rest.

But now that I know how much this matters to you,

I will try to remember to refer to you as 'age', with a lower case 'a'.

There is not a single word, letter, nor phrase that 'you' could call 'me' that would concern 'me' at all.

Look "iwannaplato" you can call 'me' whatever you want to. If you feel "age" deserves a capital 'a', or if you want to give "age" a capital 'a', then by all means, again, feel absolutely free to.

I may forget at times, given how long Age has been on all your posts. Well, since your posts had Ken, also with a capital letter.

It's fine with me if you want to continue avoiding taking responsibility here for choosing to participate in this forum primarily with the label Age and the way this will encourage others to refer to you.

Have you taken responsibility and responded to me, already, regarding if you had any information on how to change it or not?

Or, will you just add that one to your very, very long list of completely ignored questions asked to you for clarification?

Now you know why I accepted the name you chose

LOL This one really cannot get past its own unverified beliefs, after it has chosen to believe some thing is true.

and which you keep choosing to have on all your posts despite your preference for a different name: 'age'.

Are you some kind of idiot?

I have already informed of why that name is still there, and I have already asked you a question about this.

'We', however, are, still, waiting your response and answer. But, 'we' do understand that this may be another one of the many, many things, which you just completely miss and overlook, here.

This one. 'age' has a hard time accepting even the slightest responsibility for some of its easily demonstrable acts. This one likes to try to put this responsibility on others.

Oh, look, it's also 'Age' in the thread display for those threads that 'age' starts.

This one asked a very stupid question when he 'age' asked why I referred to him as 'Age'

But at least this issue is resolved.

Hopefully.

[Iwannaplato]

But, obviously I am giving it a small 'a'. you, obviously rebelling, are giving it a capital 'a'.

No, a few times, it seems, you refer to yourself as 'age'. However every post, because of a choice you made and choose not to undo - such as you undid your choice to no longer use 'Ken' - has 'Age' with a capital A twice. For example, the post I am responding to now has Age above the post, to the left
by Age » Fri Jun 21, 2024 11:21 pm
and to the right of the post.

and then up to the right of the post

Age
Posts: 20863
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am
Contact: Contact Age

Oh, look a third time, though that one was only visible when I copied the speech bubble along with the rest.

But now that I know how much this matters to you,

I will try to remember to refer to you as 'age', with a lower case 'a'.

There is not a single word, letter, nor phrase that 'you' could call 'me' that would concern 'me' at all.

Look "iwannaplato" you can call 'me' whatever you want to. If you feel "age" deserves a capital 'a', or if you want to give "age" a capital 'a', then by all means, again, feel absolutely free to.

What a strange word to introduce - deserve - even in a conditional sentence, given what I wrote. And these sentences...it's as if I didn't already tell you I was going to call you 'age' and, in fact, had started calling you 'age' in the previous post. But, if you want to keep gnawing an old bone, I'm not interested. I get it. You prefer 'age' because you think using a large case first letter would mean you consider "yourself" above all other animals, creatures, and things. I'll call you 'age', age.

[Age]

No, a few times, it seems, you refer to yourself as 'age'. However every post, because of a choice you made and choose not to undo - such as you undid your choice to no longer use 'Ken' - has 'Age' with a capital A twice. For example, the post I am responding to now has Age above the post, to the left
by Age » Fri Jun 21, 2024 11:21 pm
and to the right of the post.

and then up to the right of the post

Age
Posts: 20863
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am
Contact: Contact Age

Oh, look a third time, though that one was only visible when I copied the speech bubble along with the rest.

But now that I know how much this matters to you,

I will try to remember to refer to you as 'age', with a lower case 'a'.

There is not a single word, letter, nor phrase that 'you' could call 'me' that would concern 'me' at all.

Look "iwannaplato" you can call 'me' whatever you want to. If you feel "age" deserves a capital 'a', or if you want to give "age" a capital 'a', then by all means, again, feel absolutely free to.

What a strange word to introduce - deserve - even in a conditional sentence, given what I wrote. And these sentences...it's as if I didn't already tell you I was going to call you 'age' and, in fact, had started calling you 'age' in the previous post.

you, once again, seem to have completely missed what I meant. your ability to 'read between the lines', as some call it, is not the sharpest I have noticed "iwannaplato".

It was 'for the very reason' that you told me that you were going to use the word "age", that I wrote what I did.

And, not because you had not.

In other words, I could not care one iota whatever 'you' called 'me', "iwannaplato".

But, if you want to keep gnawing an old bone, I'm not interested. I get it. You prefer 'age' because you think using a large case first letter would mean you consider "yourself" above all other animals, creatures, and things.

This is False and Wrong, also.

I'll call you 'age', age.

Even 'now' you are still getting this Wrong.

[Iwannaplato]

In other words, I could not care one iota whatever 'you' called 'me', "iwannaplato".

Look at that. A perfectly simple and direct formulation. One that does not introduce 'deserve' as if this was a response to my posts in some way. One that does not conditionally bring up my possible wanting to call you 'Age' with the large case A, for reasons unknown.

Now we have a clear formulation without extra hallucinations (presented in a conditional form or otherwise).

And all this started because 'age' asked me 'Why would 'you' give 'me' a capital 'a'?'

This was made clear in earlier posts and now 'age's' simple formulation of what he doesn't care about is like a cherry on top of that discussion.

[Iwannaplato]

LOL Imagine the amount of further negative 'feedback', 'criticism', 'presumptions, and/or 'ridicule' 'i' would receive from 'you' if I did change that name to another name, going on and by you previously posts and, imagined, claims from changing names here, previously

If you changed your name on your posts from Age to 'age', this is not how I would react. You consider it Wrong and False when human beings use a capital letter at the beginning of our names. I would see this as you putting in a little effort to eliminate a pattern you consider wrong and false. I would see this as you acting in line with what you consider moral and true. Why did 'age' here like some people, back in the days when this was written, make so many assumptions instead of just asking?

Of course, he might not know how a sentence beginning with imagine can still have assumptions in it that are not true as 'age's' does here. But asking would of course have been better than his poor attempt at precognitive mindreading.

[Age]

LOL Imagine the amount of further negative 'feedback', 'criticism', 'presumptions, and/or 'ridicule' 'i' would receive from 'you' if I did change that name to another name, going on and by you previously posts and, imagined, claims from changing names here, previously

If you changed your name on your posts from Age to 'age', this is not how I would react. You consider it Wrong and False when human beings use a capital letter at the beginning of our names. I would see this as you putting in a little effort to eliminate a pattern you consider wrong and false.

1. What 'pattern'?

2. The 'pattern' stopped when I eliminated it, before. It has not returned.

2. I have already informed you of other things also here. But, once again, you appear to have completely and utterly missed them, as well.

I would see this as you acting in line with what you consider moral and true.

If this is what you 'see', then you are far more blind than I first realized.

Why did 'age' here like some people, back in the days when this was written, make so many assumptions instead of just asking?

What are even on about here, 'now'.

Also, you are, still, getting it Wrong. How can you not 'see' this?

Of course, he might not know how a sentence beginning with imagine can still have assumptions in it that are not true as 'age's' does here. But asking would of course have been better than his poor attempt at precognitive mindreading.

There is not a person here who has a clue as to what you are even on about here. As will be proved True.

[Iwannaplato]

1. What 'pattern'?

2. The 'pattern' stopped when I eliminated it, before. It has not returned.

Here we see that this one does not even pay attention to himself and what he writes, let alone the people he responds to. Or perhaps doesn't really notice what he thinks.
He asks What 'pattern' ? in 1., but then goes on to assert things as if he knows what 'pattern' in number 2.
This kind of lack of awareness explains a lot of what has been going on when 'age' tries to communicate with and interact with human beings at the time this was being written.

[Age]

1. What 'pattern'?

2. The 'pattern' stopped when I eliminated it, before. It has not returned.

Here we see that this one does not even pay attention to himself and what he writes, let alone the people he responds to. Or perhaps doesn't really notice what he thinks.
He asks What 'pattern' ? in 1., but then goes on to assert things as if he knows what 'pattern' in number 2.
This kind of lack of awareness explains a lot of what has been going on when 'age' tries to communicate with and interact with human beings at the time this was being written.

There is no wonder, now, why this one keeps missing so, so much in what I say, write, and mean here.

This one does not even know what I was talking about and referring to here, exactly, but believes it does, which explains why this one has missed so much here.

[Iwannaplato]

1. What 'pattern'?

2. The 'pattern' stopped when I eliminated it, before. It has not returned.

Here we see that this one does not even pay attention to himself and what he writes, let alone the people he responds to. Or perhaps doesn't really notice what he thinks.
He asks What 'pattern' ? in 1., but then goes on to assert things as if he knows what 'pattern' in number 2.
This kind of lack of awareness explains a lot of what has been going on when 'age' tries to communicate with and interact with human beings at the time this was being written.

There is no wonder, now, why this one keeps missing so, so much in what I say, write, and mean here.

This one does not even know what I was talking about and referring to here, exactly, but believes it does, which explains why this one has missed so much here.

This is so sad: either this one still cannot see the obvious problem with following his 1 with his 2 in that post or this one continues to blame others for the weaknesses in this one's communication.

[Age]

Here we see that this one does not even pay attention to himself and what he writes, let alone the people he responds to. Or perhaps doesn't really notice what he thinks.
He asks What 'pattern' ? in 1., but then goes on to assert things as if he knows what 'pattern' in number 2.
This kind of lack of awareness explains a lot of what has been going on when 'age' tries to communicate with and interact with human beings at the time this was being written.

There is no wonder, now, why this one keeps missing so, so much in what I say, write, and mean here.

This one does not even know what I was talking about and referring to here, exactly, but believes it does, which explains why this one has missed so much here.

This is so sad: either this one still cannot see the obvious problem with following his 1 with his 2 in that post or this one continues to blame others for the weaknesses in this one's communication.

So, this one, still, does not yet know what 'the pattern' is, but, laughingly, believes it does. Which speaks volumes about beliefs, themselves.

These people could not know some thing at all, but if they believed they did, then they could not be informed otherwise.

[Iwannaplato]

So, this one, still, does not yet know what 'the pattern' is, but, laughingly, believes it does. Which speaks volumes about beliefs, themselves.

This one draws conclusions based on inadequate evidence. One cannot logically conclude what he does in his sentence beginning 'So'. It could be the case, but it might not be. And it happens not to be the case. But the first issue is more important. This one is often concluding or saying that something proves something, when the grounds are not there for this. We can only hope that he re-looks at what he drew his conclusion from and sees if he can notice some other possibilities.

Ironically "age" has just demonstrated irrefutable proof of the power and control over himself the words he says and uses actually has.

[Age]

So, this one, still, does not yet know what 'the pattern' is, but, laughingly, believes it does. Which speaks volumes about beliefs, themselves.

This one draws conclusions based on inadequate evidence.

Concluding that I concluded some thing here, based on inadequate evidence, is you, "yourself', once again, doing the exact same thing, by presuming, concluding, and believing some thing is true without without first obtaining and having adequate evidence and proof.

One cannot logically conclude what he does in his sentence beginning 'So'. It could be the case, but it might not be. And it happens not to be the case.

What you presume or believe and claim that I have concluded her is nothing like what I said, and was concluding and meaning. So, once more, you are completely and utterly 'missed the mark', here.

But, if what I already have 'actually concluded' is True and Right, then, actually, what else you say, claim, and believe here is also False and Wrong.

So, let 'us' 'see' what the, actual Truth is here.

What is 'the pattern' here, exactly?

Let 'us' find out if you, actually, 'knew' what 'the pattern' is, or, if you just 'believed' you did?

If you ever OPEN up, enough, and be Honest here, then 'we' can find out, for sure, if you did 'know' 'the pattern', or not.

But the first issue is more important. This one is often concluding or saying that something proves something, when the grounds are not there for this.

How could this one, logically and rationally, 'know' if 'the grounds' are 'there' or not, when it never seeks out any information about even where 'there' is, exactly, nor even what 'the grounds', themselves, are, exactly?

Once again "iwannaplato", because you do not seek out actual clarification, then you will never 'know', for sure, if 'the proof' and/or 'the grounds' are even 'there', or not, nor 'where' 'the grounds and proof' even is, exactly.

This one seems to be under some sort of delusion that 'the grounds' have to be in this forum somewhere, already.

We can only hope that he re-looks at what he drew his conclusion from and sees if he can notice some other possibilities.

Why is 'this' the, only, thing that you and some others can hope for, here?

Also, why, exactly, are you even 'hoping: for 'this', anyway?

Also, and LOL "iwannaplato", you have absolutely no idea nor clue as to 'where', exactly, I drew my conclusion from anyway. So, not that you will ever answer and clarify, but 'where' do you 'believe' I drew my conclusion from, exactly, and, what are the, supposed, 'other possibilities', at 'that place' that you are talking about and referring to, here, now?

Ironically "age" has just demonstrated irrefutable proof of the power and control over himself the words he says and uses actually has.

So, you do, now, agree with me and accept that 'this' does happen to human beings. I wondered how long it would take you to, finally, learn, and understand, here?

Oh, and by the way, are you willing to provide the, actual, words and/or phrases here, which you believe I have said, and how 'they' have had power and control 'over me', exactly?

If no, then why not?

Are you afraid of some thing he=? Or, is there something else going on 'fir you:, here?

[Iwannaplato]

So, this one, still, does not yet know what 'the pattern' is, but, laughingly, believes it does. Which speaks volumes about beliefs, themselves.

This one draws conclusions based on inadequate evidence.

Concluding that I concluded some thing here, based on inadequate evidence, is you, "yourself', once again, doing the exact same thing, by presuming, concluding, and believing some thing is true without without first obtaining and having adequate evidence and proof.

Concluding that I concluded some thing here, based on inadequate evidence, is you, "yourself', once again, doing the exact same thing, by presuming, concluding, and believing some thing is true without without first obtaining and having adequate evidence and proof.

[Age]

This one draws conclusions based on inadequate evidence.

Concluding that I concluded some thing here, based on inadequate evidence, is you, "yourself', once again, doing the exact same thing, by presuming, concluding, and believing some thing is true without without first obtaining and having adequate evidence and proof.

Concluding that I concluded some thing here, based on inadequate evidence, is you, "yourself', once again, doing the exact same thing, by presuming, concluding, and believing some thing is true without without first obtaining and having adequate evidence and proof.

Really?

So, you have deteriorated 'this far', 'now'.

[Iwannaplato]

Concluding that I concluded some thing here, based on inadequate evidence, is you, "yourself', once again, doing the exact same thing, by presuming, concluding, and believing some thing is true without without first obtaining and having adequate evidence and proof.

Concluding that I concluded some thing here, based on inadequate evidence, is you, "yourself', once again, doing the exact same thing, by presuming, concluding, and believing some thing is true without without first obtaining and having adequate evidence and proof.

Really?

So, you have deteriorated 'this far', 'now'.

I understand that you may not be able to get the point of what I did there, but since I am not necessarily communicating with you, I am not necessarily concerned about your lack of understanding.