Grande
Full Member
Nobody in here owes anybody anything. People comment on various things they find worthy of commenting on or asking about for one reason or another. We are sitting safe in our own houses or workspaces and whatnot. You comment alot on Marcus Rashford, finding his whole saga interesting. That is perfectly allowed. And not because I say so. It’s the forum rules, what the forum is. Does that mean that others are not allowed to react to your comments, comment upon them or ask questions about them? No.what is demanded of us is to keep within the forum rules, which the mods do their best to keep track of. I try to abide by them. I also try to comment or discuss respectfully, which sometimes Ii slip up on to be sure, and which is why I apologized to you for the tone of my first responses to you.This is the only subject I’m aware of where the mindset of “I’m the arbiter of whether your interest in it demands an explanation” comes into play. I’m never sure who died and as a result a small number of posters have constantly tried to ration interest in the topic.
Maybe if I looked more at that counting thread in the General forum, you’re there with the others giving the opinion that some posters are counting too much and should move along.
I find the whole Rashford saga interesting. I don’t think that’s unclear. I don’t owe you or anyone else an explanation for that.
You have misconstrued the whole activity on here if you think I have any arbiterial power, or that you have some debt to anyone. I commented on the way you criticize Rashford because it happened to stick out to me like a sore thumb in the eye. I don’t sit around counting posters posts, and I don’t really believe you believe that either. It happens so that your serial posting about Rashford was striking to the eye, and drew attention. You probably don’t like it, it seems, then again, it’s just what happens if you write many posts on a forum about a topic in a way that sticks out. It’s the consequenses of your own actions, as well as the consequences of my attention.
What I find a bit funny, is that your interest in Rashford so clearly bears the print of annoyance or dislike, they don’t at all seem line a neutral curious interest about some topic, and resulted in a series of criticizing Rashford on your part. It both annoyed me and made me curious, leading me to criticizing you, and what I find kind of curious is how our ‘interests’ in this case has such a similar pattern to them, yet you don’t seem to see that at all. Your ‘interested critique’ seems to be a personal and private matter that deserves protection. My critque and questions are, however ‘attacks’ that must be defended, ‘demands’ that must be thwarted and ‘arbitership’ that must be opposed.
It would be a breath of fresh air, at least in this thread, if you either just wrote openly and sincerely answers to sincere questions, or perhaps in the other direction, owed up by saying that you in deed see youself as the arbiter of Marcus Rashford, and you demand the explanation he owes you, and you will attack him until you get it.
At least it would be less of a repetition than so many other posts in this thread.