“I'll answer your questions later, Craig, when I get around to it but given your serious reading comprehension problems, what good will it do if I answer them? You'll only fail to understand the answers.”
Dan
It’s been a week, Dan posts on FB, has plenty of comments in moderation here, and a few aborted, but no answer to the question he said he’d answer. I guess he theoretically could still answer the question and fulfill his obligation, but it seems unlikely that helll do so without being publicly shamed.
Maybe integrity and doing what you say you will do aren’t that important to some people.
Too bad any comment Dan makes here will stay in moderation because he’s too proud and arrogant to fulfill one simple request.
7 comments:
It doesn't make sense to me that not answering a question is a rational option if one wishes to present as an honorable person. It strongly suggests one recognizes one's position is terribly flawed and to answer it would expose those flaws which would reflect on one badly.
In the first instance Dan insisted that I had not answered one specific, critical, and vitally important question. I believed that I had answered every question he'd asked, so I asked him to provide me with the question I might have missed along with the date/time stamp of the comment where the question was originally asked because I wanted to be able to see the context and whether or not I'd answered it. I told Dan that failure to provide me with the information would result in him being put in time out until he did. He didn't, and is in time out.
As for the second instance, he was clear that he would answer the question at some point and he's chosen not to.
He's active on FB, he's posted a bunch of comments (in moderation or aborted) on other posts, so the "I don't have time" excuse isn't valid. Likewise, he could easily have simply explained the delay.
For someone who spends so much time complaining that we don't answer his questions, you'd think he'd be very attentive to modeling the behavior he demands of others.
He's rolled this way for a long, long time. But this is actually worse. By your explanation, it's not that he's not answering a question, but instead choosing not to ask one of his own (of which he claims you never answered) a second time. Doesn't he often admonish us to be more humble? If your position is exposed as untrue or illogical or simply wrong and immoral, isn't it as least a display of humility to concede? Instead, it seems he'll cling to whatever he prefers would/should be true because he finds it more personally pleasing.
No, Dan, you did not answer the question I’m referring to here. I know this because you literally stopped commenting after the above quote.
By all means, prove this claim.
Just went back and confirmed that you made no comments after you made the statement I quoted.
C
It’s both of those.
He refuses to reveal what question he asked that I didn’t answer, I the way I asked him to.
Then he made statement quoted in the post and stopped commenting in the thread at your blog
Now he’s got his panties in a wad because he’s being called out for the choices he made.
He’s more than welcome to prove the graceless lies in his comment and I’ll gladly apologize and delete this. But the chances he does anything but bitch are low.
C
The fact that there’s a written record should make Dan consider what he says in anger, but it doesn’t.
C
Post a Comment