Probably a silly question.

[Age]

So, how and why you made your assumption here, and came to your conclusion here, only you know. Your assumption and conclusion here could not be any further from what the actual and irrefutable Truth is here exactly.

Age, you've got me fair and square. Victory is yours.

So-called "victory" in relation to 'what', EXACTLY?

From my perspective there is, literally, absolutely NO 'thing' to win NOR lose, here.

[Age]

Maybe so, but it’s just as likely that he is on the spectrum.

Just so you are aware, as others are already, I was the one who first informed them that I AM 'on the spectrum'.

And it is because of 'this' that I look at and see most 'things' very differently, then 'you', adult human beings, do.

(Also, and by the way, another reason why I highlight and/or emphasize some words in capital letters, (so that those words were being, literally, more easily noticed, and Truly recognized, listened to, and heard is because it is absolutely far simpler, easier, and much more efficient for me to just hold down one button with one finger, while continually pressing the other keys with the other seven fingers and not having to stop at all, than it is to stop writing, hold the mouse down, slide the mouse across to highlight a word, then move up the screen to the underline button, let go of the mouse, then click the mouse again on the underline button, and then start writing again. So, it would really be appreciated if, all of you posters here, who find it, supposedly, "too much work" to just read some capitalized words, and stay concentrated on the actual message being conveyed instead, inform me that reading underlined words is "so much easier" for you. Thank you. Otherwise, I might resort back to the much quicker, simpler, easier, and more efficient way to write, and talk here.)

What 'spectrum'?

I think the 'spectrum' word came up here because in another thread "henry quirk" announced 'me' as being the "forum's STAR autist".

Isn't everyone on 'the spectrum' these days?

What 'spectrum' are you talking about and referring to, here?

And are 'you' on 'that spectrum', "vegetariantaxidermy"?

[Age]

Do 'you' have absolutely any idea or clue AT ALL as to what 'it' is that I want to learn, "skepdick"?

If yes, then what is 'that', EXACTLY?

Irrespective of what "it" is that you are trying to learn, you will actually learn it much faster after you learn to communicate with other people.

LOL
LOL
LOL

If you only KNEW what 'it' is, EXACTLY, that I want to learn here.

And when, and IF, you do, then I HOPE you will find this just as funny as I do.

Which you are incapable of learning.

Okay. As long as you BELIEVE WHOLEHEARTEDLY that 'I' am absolutely INCAPABLE of 'learning', absolutely ANY thing whatsoever AT ALL, then this is ONLY what you WILL RECOGNIZE and SEE, forever more.

[Iwannaplato]

So I took some liberties with your post.

So I see.

Either you get what I am driving at or you don't, and I can live with that. Especially if it means I don't have to produce a lengthy essay in precise philosophy language, which is probably beyond me anyway.

I wasn't expecting a lengthy essay in precise philosophy language and I sure didn't write one myself. I think the OP might make it harder for people to look at what they are doing than you likely intend. I mean few are going to answer, hey I wanna indoctrinate. since 'indoctrinate' is perjorative.

As a side note: I think we have reached a stage where everyone more or less thinks or unconsciously feels that the world's survival depends on shutting down dangerous morons.

[Age]

Because if you are Truly interested in continuing 'our conversation' in another thread, then I will not just 'try to' 'change' the way I write the words I do, I will actually do it. But i will have to apologize in advance if I 'slip up', now and then in that thread, as this would not be on purpose.

If you replace all instances of ALL CAPS with "putting things in quotes" or underlining them, then you haven't changed the way you write in a meaningful way.

Did you read about how much more time consuming it is to underline words?

And, I use single quotation marks and double quotation marks for other very specific reasons.

You only get so many words you can emphasize in a paragraph before you're talking down to people.

From my perspective, that seems like a very weird thing to just presume.

Since when has 'emphasizing' a word meant that one is so-called 'talking down' to "another".

It doesn't matter if they're in caps, in quotes, underlined.

I KNOW, and ALREADY KNEW this.

There's no reason to write 'you' in quotes like that.

There IS from my perspective, and if you ever sought 'clarification', BEFORE you JUMPED to making ASSUMPTIONS, and CONCLUSIONS, then you, also, would learn the ACTUAL reason to write 'you' like that is.

'try' to 'change', none of that.

But I do NOT quote the way you did here.

See, it is this, NOT NOTICING what I ACTUALLY WRITE and SAY, WHY my words get SO MISUNDERSTOOD, SO OFTEN.

It has the same effect. You're trying to emphasize too many words, and you're talking down.

1. I am NOT so-called 'talking down'.

2. If you do NOT let your OWN past experiences, INTERFERE with the way you LOOK AT and SEE 'things' moving forward, then you CAN and WILL SEE and UNDERSTAND what thee ACTUAL and IRREFUTABLE Truth IS, EXACTLY. Far MORE SIMPLY and EASILY TOO, I will add.

3. What I call, 'APE thinking', is WHY you are PRESUMING here, which by the way is a False and Wrong PRESUMPTION.

4. I AGREE that I am 'emphasizing' too many words, for 'you', posters, here. But WHY I have chosen THE WORDS I do, will become CLEARER, later on.

If you want to try to change,

Even here is 'evidence' (and maybe 'PROOF'?) that 'you' are NOT LISTENING and HEARING what I am WRITING and SAYING here.

I specifically WROTE and SAID:
I will not just 'try to' 'change' the way I write the words I do, I will actually do it./b]

BUT, for reasons only you KNOW, you READ and HEARD some 'thing' COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.

I do NOT 'want' to 'try to' change. I SAID, and WROTE, I WILL ACTUALLY DO IT.

It is like it does NOT matter if I capitalize words, or do NOT capitalize words, the MESSAGE still does NOT get ACROSS, to 'you', posters, here.

I, specifically, wrote those two sentences without any capitalized words, just because of what you wrote, but yet you still completely misunderstood what I actually wrote and said.

limit yourself to at most one emphasized word or phrase per paragraph.

Are 'you', "flannel jesus", REALLY expecting 'me' or "others" to CHANGE our writing styles, to the ONE VERY PARTICULAR WAY that you LIKE and WANT?

Are you AWARE there are MORE than just 'you' READING THIS?

NEXT 'you' might be TELLING how many words I can use in a paragraph, and once you have done that, then you might start telling me what words to use, exactly.

For example, I could emphasis JUST THIS and nothing else, and it wouldn't be perceived as over agressive, just a way to emphasize the thing I'm emphasizing.

HOW MANY TIMES does a human being have to be informed that what 'they' PERCEIVE is NOT necessarily what thee actual and irrefutable Truth IS, EXACTLY?

Will you let us KNOW that you have READ and UNDERSTOOD the words I have used, which specifically POINT OUT and MEAN that absolutely EVERY thing I write and say here, in this forum, in the past, at the present, and in the future, is NEVER intended to be 'aggressive'?

So, what this LITERALLY MEANS IS; if you EVER 'perceive' absolutely ANY writing of mine to 'be aggressive', then that is of your OWN making and doing, which I now also POINT OUT and CLAIM, comes from your OWN past experiences, ONLY.

But if I write a paragraph where I emphasise not JUST THIS but ALSO THIS and THIS to YOU, do you UNDERSTAND how THIS comes across as MORE AGRESSIVE than THAT?

But it does NOT come across at all 'aggressive', to me.

But I DO UNDERSTAND and KNOW WHY capitalized words come across as 'aggressive', to you.

Do you understand THIS?

If you change the way you emphasize, but you aren't changing your pattern of emphasis, you haven't changed at all.

Talk about, TALKING DOWN.

Are you under some sort of PRESUMPTON or ASSUMPTION that 'I' HAVE TO CHANGE the way 'I write, for 'you', or that "others" are EXPECTED TO CHANGE, for 'you'?

Maybe the 'aggression' that 'you' SEE in 'my' writings is just a REFLECTION of what 'you' are REALLY like as a 'person', "flannel jesus".

See, it does NOT matter HOW MANY TIMES 'you' are INFORMED that there is absolutely NO 'aggression' absolutely ANYWHERE IN ANY OF MY WORDS, it appears that this 'aggression' still REMAINS as what you CAN SEE.

Which some term as a 'PROJECTION, of one's self'.

Now, I would like to POINT OUT and SHOW that DIRECTLY under what you quoted me as saying above I also wrote the words:

if you are still very keen and interested [in continuing 'our conversation', in another thread], then you will just have to inform me of how you want me to change my writing style, exactly, and inform me of what conversation are you talking about and referring to, exactly?

Considering that you have NOT YET informed me of what conversation that you were talking about and referring to here, exactly. I am so NOT ABLE TO go to that 'conversation' and CHANGE the way I write the words I do, for you. Unless, of course, I stumble across that 'conversation', somehow.

Not providing 'that conversation' of 'ours' could be a sure way of just saying, 'I really do not want to continue it anyway'.

[Flannel Jesus]

Since when has 'emphasizing' a word meant that one is so-called 'talking down' to "another".

I explained that here:

"when you read words on a screen, do you hear the words in your mind, or do you have some other experience of reading?"

what an excellent question. i hear an inaudible voice with no sound that reads the words to me as i look at them.

i hear the sound of myself without a voice, iow. i know, makes no sense, but honest phenomenology permits us no other way to describe it. the experience produces a very peculiar kind of qualia it's difficult to talk about clearly. Ergo, the nonsensical way I described it.

I can relate to that. I'm not sure how explicit or clear my head voice is.

The reason I ask is because it's possible that Age doesn't read with that verbal-mental side. I know speed readers don't.

So for me, and I think most other people, when you see a word in all caps, that voice in my head is reading it to me slightly louder and much slower. To emphasize it, right?

And doing that every now and then, maybe one word per paragraph, that's totally cool. Some words are worth emphasizing, no problem with that at all.

But when you're doing it EVERY FIVE FUCKING WORDS, it starts to feel like... well, like exactly what it would feel like if someone were speaking loudly and slowly to you in real life. You're being spoken down to, treated like a naughty child, at best.

When you SLAM the DOOR it DISTURBS everyone else in the HOUSE.

If Age doesn't have that auditory experience as he's reading, maybe he just literally can't relate.

There was a point where I thought it was because Age didn't understand that, but there's some evidence that he understands but just doesn't care. There's an off chance that reading some of this might bring him a new layer of understanding here, maybe he would care if he really understood, I'm not sure.

[Age]

So I took some liberties with your post.

So I see.

Either you get what I am driving at or you don't, and I can live with that. Especially if it means I don't have to produce a lengthy essay in precise philosophy language, which is probably beyond me anyway.

I wasn't expecting a lengthy essay in precise philosophy language and I sure didn't write one myself. I think the OP might make it harder for people to look at what they are doing than you likely intend. I mean few are going to answer, hey I wanna indoctrinate. since 'indoctrinate' is perjorative.

As a side note: I think we have reached a stage where everyone more or less thinks or unconsciously feels that the world's survival depends on shutting down dangerous morons.

But just about ALL of 'you' think or BELIEVE that it is "others" who are the so-called "dangerous morons".

Have ANY of 'you', adult human beings, REALLY LOOKED AT "your" OWN 'selves'?

[Iwannaplato]

But just about ALL of 'you' think or BELIEVE that it is "others" who are the so-called "dangerous morons".

Have ANY of 'you', adult human beings, REALLY LOOKED AT "your" OWN 'selves'?

I have no idea who 'you' refers to. IOW I don't understand why that word is in citation marks.

[Age]

Since when has 'emphasizing' a word meant that one is so-called 'talking down' to "another".

I explained that here:

"when you read words on a screen, do you hear the words in your mind, or do you have some other experience of reading?"

what an excellent question. i hear an inaudible voice with no sound that reads the words to me as i look at them.

i hear the sound of myself without a voice, iow. i know, makes no sense, but honest phenomenology permits us no other way to describe it. the experience produces a very peculiar kind of qualia it's difficult to talk about clearly. Ergo, the nonsensical way I described it.

I can relate to that. I'm not sure how explicit or clear my head voice is.

The reason I ask is because it's possible that Age doesn't read with that verbal-mental side. I know speed readers don't.

So for me, and I think most other people, when you see a word in all caps, that voice in my head is reading it to me slightly louder and much slower. To emphasize it, right?

And doing that every now and then, maybe one word per paragraph, that's totally cool. Some words are worth emphasizing, no problem with that at all.

But when you're doing it EVERY FIVE FUCKING WORDS, it starts to feel like... well, like exactly what it would feel like if someone were speaking loudly and slowly to you in real life. You're being spoken down to, treated like a naughty child, at best.

When you SLAM the DOOR it DISTURBS everyone else in the HOUSE.

If Age doesn't have that auditory experience as he's reading, maybe he just literally can't relate.

There was a point where I thought it was because Age didn't understand that, but there's some evidence that he understands but just doesn't care. There's an off chance that reading some of this might bring him a new layer of understanding here, maybe he would care if he really understood, I'm not sure.

WHY can 'you', posters, NOT just WRITE your answers instead of TELLING "others" to GO READ and LOOK for "yourselves"

The question WAS: Since WHEN has just 'emphasizing' a word MEANT that one is so-called 'talking down' to "another"?

So, IS 'your answer', WHEN so-called "every five fucking words" are in capital letters?

Is this WHEN just 'emphasizing' A word MEANS that one is so-called 'talking down' to "another"?

If yes, then this does NOT answer the ACTUAL QUESTION I posed, and asked.

But if no, then WHAT is 'your answer' to the ACTUAL QUESTION I posed, and asked 'you', "flannel jesus"?

[Age]

But just about ALL of 'you' think or BELIEVE that it is "others" who are the so-called "dangerous morons".

Have ANY of 'you', adult human beings, REALLY LOOKED AT "your" OWN 'selves'?

I have no idea who 'you' refers to.

LOL
LOL
LOL

I even put the word 'you', in single quotation marks, and IMMEDIATELY AFTER, PROVIDE the ACTUAL REFERENCE to WHO the 'you' is REFERRING TO, EXACTLY, and then I STILL get the reply back:

I have no idea who 'you' refers to.

This is becoming MORE and MORE HILARIOUS as we so-call "progress".

IOW I don't understand why that word is in citation marks.

Okay.

And, in other words, if some one REALLY wants some 'thing' CLARIFIED, or UNDERSTOOD, then they WILL ask the Right CLARIFYING QUESTION, which when answered Honestly and OPENLY WOULD provide them with the ANSWER they are SEEKING.

But SEEING as, ONCE AGAIN, NO ACTUAL CLARIFYING QUESTION is posed, NOR ASKED, then this is a pretty sure SIGN that one is NOT REALLY SEEKING CLARITY.

If one ever does REALLY WANT to UNDERSTAND WHY that word is in citation marks, then they can either READ BACK through my writings, as I have EXPLAINED this PREVIOUSLY, OR, they could just ask me a CLARIFYING QUESTION as to WHY.

But as can be CLEARLY SEEN, all we have here is A 'comment' about how this one does NOT understand some 'thing'. Which, Truthfully, is NOT REALLY that exciting READING.

[Iwannaplato]

LOL

Could you clarify who 'you' referred to in your response to my post?

Or, could you explain why that word was in quotes?

[Flannel Jesus]

WHY can 'you', posters, NOT just WRITE your answers instead of TELLING "others" to GO READ and LOOK for "yourselves"

The question WAS: Since WHEN has just 'emphasizing' a word MEANT that one is so-called 'talking down' to "another"?

So, IS 'your answer', WHEN so-called "every five fucking words" are in capital letters?

Is this WHEN just 'emphasizing' A word MEANS that one is so-called 'talking down' to "another"?

If yes, then this does NOT answer the ACTUAL QUESTION I posed, and asked.

But if no, then WHAT is 'your answer' to the ACTUAL QUESTION I posed, and asked 'you', "flannel jesus"?

I have no idea what you're trying to say Age. I've explained there why I think your style of writing is perceived as being talked down to. There's pretty wide agreement that other people here are also irritated by the way you write - I don't know if they perceive it the same way I do, or if they're irritated for a different reason, but one thing's clear: your writing style is causing a negative reaction from all these people here.

You don't have to care, but if you do care, and if you do want to get better engagement, I'm presenting you a path towards that.

Emphasize few words. Don't put 'you' in quotes. Don't underline, bold, capitalize or put in quotes any word or phrase that you wouldn't say slowly and loudly if you were speaking to another mentally capable adult. If you stop trying to emphasize 1/5 of your words, you'll get better engagement from everyone.

You can even do an experiment. Don't emphasize any word at all for a week, see what difference in engagement you see. I haven't emphasized a single word in this entire post, but I bet you understood it.

Run the experiment, see if anything interesting happens. You might be surprised.

[Age]

LOL

Could you clarify who 'you' referred to in your response to my post?

Yes.

[Age]

WHY can 'you', posters, NOT just WRITE your answers instead of TELLING "others" to GO READ and LOOK for "yourselves"

The question WAS: Since WHEN has just 'emphasizing' a word MEANT that one is so-called 'talking down' to "another"?

So, IS 'your answer', WHEN so-called "every five fucking words" are in capital letters?

Is this WHEN just 'emphasizing' A word MEANS that one is so-called 'talking down' to "another"?

If yes, then this does NOT answer the ACTUAL QUESTION I posed, and asked.

But if no, then WHAT is 'your answer' to the ACTUAL QUESTION I posed, and asked 'you', "flannel jesus"?

I have no idea what you're trying to say Age.

Okay, and you appear to NOT want to GAIN ANY idea EITHER.

I've explained there why I think your style of writing is perceived as being talked down to.

But that was NOT in the ACTUAL QUESTION, which I asked to be CLARIFIED.

Can you REALLY STILL NOT YET SEE this?

There's pretty wide agreement that other people here are also irritated by the way you write - I don't know if they perceive it the same way I do, or if they're irritated for a different reason, but one thing's clear: your writing style is causing a negative reaction from all these people here.

From 'ALL'?

HOW MANY, and WHO, EXACTLY are in this 'ALL'?

As for what you call 'negative reactions', from 'you', posters, here, then these are some of the EXACT 'responses' I intended to GET from 'you' here.

See, what you call 'negative reactions', I call 'Honesty', and it is this Honesty, from 'you', posters, that I am USING as PROOF, for my targeted audience.

You don't have to care, but if you do care, and if you do want to get better engagement, I'm presenting you a path towards that.

In WHAT 'world' would make you ASSUME that I want a so-called 'better engagement', from 'you', posters, here?

The 'engagement', which 'you' are ALL PROVIDING here is NOTHING but the BEST 'you' could PROVIDE for 'me' here.

Absolutely EVERY thing you are SAYING and WRITING is working, and has worked, in PERFECTLY, for my INTENDED OUTCOME.

Emphasize few words. Don't put 'you' in quotes. Don't underline, bold, capitalize or put in quotes any word or phrase that you wouldn't say slowly and loudly if you were speaking to another mentally capable adult. If you stop trying to emphasize 1/5 of your words, you'll get better engagement from everyone.

LOL

I wrote using just about NO 'emphasizing', yet 'you', "flannel jesus", STILL completely MISCONSTRUED and TWISTED my words, and MEANINGS, around completely. Therefore, what you would class as 'engagement', 'you' FAILED IN completely.

You can even do an experiment. Don't emphasize any word at all for a week, see what difference in engagement you see.

LOOK, 'the engagement' that you THINK or ASSUME I want, is absolutely NOTHING LIKE the ACTUAL 'engagement' I REALLY WANT.

Is this understood, by you?

I haven't emphasized a single word in this entire post, but I bet you understood it.

And, even when I do emphasize words in my posts, you still do not understand my posts, do you?

Run the experiment, see if anything interesting happens. You might be surprised.

Okay, and just like I said, previously, WHEN you inform me of what 'our conversation' IS, in another thread, THEN I will go there, and do this.

We have just been WAITING, for you.

Oh, and by the way, we DID NOTICE that I asked you FOUR CLARIFYING QUESTIONS above, which you FAILED TO ANSWER ANY of them.

[Iwannaplato]

Yes.

I guess you don't understand that the question I ask is a request question. They are common in English. Opening a question with 'Could you' is consider a polite way to formulate a request. You explained that I would have been better if I had asked a clarifying question, in a rather long post. So, I asked a question. You answered like a surly teenager. Fine, ok. You're very angry and you seem very angry at a lot of people.

You think that

Have ANY of 'you', adult human beings, REALLY LOOKED AT "your" OWN 'selves'?

explains what 'you' means and I should have known. But it doesn't because if 'adult human beings' is what is meant by 'you' it wouldn't need the citation marks. Have any of you, adult human being, really......? is much more clear and in fact you don't even need the commas. And further, interpersonally, it makes more sense just to ask me if I have looked at my self, rather than getting me to weigh on people whose introspective abilities I don't know much about. And then the strange 'your'......

But you seem interested in shaming people in very confusing ways. Hey, look. I get angry also. But generally I find most of your posts outraged AND confusing.

Perhaps you learn from feedback like this - thinking of the OP topic now - perhaps not.

I do put people on 'foe' so I can't see their posts if I find interacting with the person useless. Nearly always I check back, now and then, to see if I have changed my mind or judged incorrectly or to see if something has changed in the other person.

But I see no reason to interact with you. The combination or poor communication and anger is truly a waste of my time. But the internet is diverse. I am sure you will find your people.