Wednesday, December 3, 2014
I've tried
I know this might get old, but over at John's Dan continues to insist that I don't/won't answer his questions. I've repeatedly informed him that I have answered multitudes of his questions somewhere else. Now, why didn't I give him a link? Good question. I guess it boils down to a couple of things. 1. Dan knows I have a blog, knows where to find it, and should be able to assume that if I answered his questions somewhere else that it would be here. 2. I suspect that Dan is intentionally avoiding "finding" the answers to his questions because it allows him to avoid the reality that I am answering him and that his accusations of dodging are false.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I don't mean to try to speak for Dan, because as we all know, that's a mortal sin anyway, but he's been dealing with personal issues regarding family members. At least this is the claim I've seen made. In any case, he may not have thought to look here. I have a response to one of his concerns hanging at his blog in a post now about fiver or six down from the top. Don't know if he intends to carry on with it or let it lay there as is his practice. As I am also limited in time, I will soon begin listing more unanswered questions there and see what happens.
In the meantime, it seems I need to peek in here more often. You've got quite a bit more posts I've not seen before.
MA,
I know Dan has family issues, which is why I haven't really pressed him as far as answering promptly. I have told him repeatedly that I have addressed his questions and issues somewhere other than at Johns. He knows about this blog and has commented here before. If he really was interested he could have asked where I had responded to him, but he didn't. The bottom line is I've addressed/answered virtually everything he has whined about, and he isn't interested enough in the answers/responses to look for them.
I suspect it is more about giving himself the out by saying that he hasn't seen things. If he doesn't look for things he won't see them, and if he doesn't see them he doesn't have to deal with them.
I could be wrong about that, but I suspect that virtually everything here will never be answered, acknowledged, or responded to.
Thanks,
I did go through a spurt of posting.
Craig...
Dan knows I have a blog, knows where to find it, and should be able to assume that if I answered his questions somewhere else that it would be here.
As I've now pointed out elsewhere on your blog, that was a poor assumption on your part. Given that I had visited your blog enough to know that you rarely posted here, I had no inkling that you were referring to this blog.
A simple mistake on your part in assuming I would guess what you were hinting at. No problem, your mistake has now been clarified and we both know now that you were speaking of here.
In the future, direct communication is always the best way to actually, you know, communicate.
DT
I do appreciate the sensitivity on your all's part about my family concerns. My parents are just about to move to a place where they can get improved care and that will relieve some of my own responsibilities as it relates to them.
Thank you.
~Dan
Returning to this...
Now, why didn't I give him a link? Good question.
It IS a good question, one without a good answer. If the intent is to communicate, then a simple, "I answered your questions on my blog..." would have successfully communicated. This "no, I won't tell him... that's JUST what he'd be expecting!" approach just seems unhealthy.
NOTE: Yes, I know the quoted phrase is not yours. I'm playing to demonstrate a point about how silly it is to not just communicate directly rather than this cloak and dagger mindgame crap.
If you suspect that I am intentionally avoiding finding answers, then the obvious thing to do is to make it impossible for me to try that ploy.
Finally, given the literally thousands of answers to your collective questions involving, no doubt, tens of thousands of words on my part and a huge amount of time, "he's intentionally dodging questions..." is a guess on your part that is a bit silly.
Post a Comment