-----

A) Assuming ignorance... Naruki

Can you explain why you feel the words "first" and "post" to be singly or collectively annoying? Also, what other words do you declare to be so? And how are we to keep up with the growing list?

B) Assuming stupidity by xcheopis

or malice... The moderators have made it clear that "First Post" threads will be moderated, the fact of which, of course, you were already aware. Can you explain why you feel that your question needed to be directed to Adiplomat instead of a moderator?

C) Absolutely, bug. by Naruki

adiplomat is the one who expressed annoyance at the words "First Post". Now, can YOU explain why you think I should direct my question about his annoyance to a third party?

While we're on the subject, is there some reason you bring a side track to the line of questioning about what adiplomat finds annoying? Also, you would do well to choose which of the two conditions you are actually assuming about me. I believe you knew to assume the latter, but put the former in the subject just to tweak me. You should know better. If not, I shall have to adjust my assumptions...

D) Knowing how exacting you are about by xcheopis

terms, I feel obliged to point out that the correct designation is Insect.

It was hardly a side-track. One of the regular reminds someone of long-standing board rule, a fact with which you take issue... for some reason. I'm uncertain as to why you feel this need to be malicious towards adiplomat. Kinda sad, really, he's a pretty fun fellow.

Gosh, how nice to have a choice! Let's see now.... what to choose, what to choose...

E) Bug will do nicely. by Naruki

It's sort of generic, so it speaks on a couple levels as insect just wouldn't do.

It was clearly a side-track. To remind someone you say, "By the way, there's this long standing rule blah blah blah" or words to that effect. To express one's own personal feelings is, how to say this so it finally sinks in, not the same thing.

In fact, the initial response did not mention the long-standing rule at all.

adiplomat wrote:

Must you tweak the moderators? This post has content, why not leave it at that, and not include the "First Post" that is so annoying?

Now, despite the evidence, you claim he was doing a service to himoq. His use of the words "tweak" and "annoying" do not convey the idea that there is a rule in place. But they do convey the idea that adiplomat personally objects to himoq's post. How nice a service!

Of course, adiplomat sarcastically claims later that he was "teaching" himoq the rule, and apparently at least you believed him. Either he's very persuasive (clearly not the case) or you are very gullible (not likely) or you have personal reasons for accepting his defense (gonna fess up?).

Now, when I ask him to explain his complaint, you take offense! My my my... Is he your wittle doggie? There must be something here that I am not privy to. You are not normally this foolish.

Moving on to your insulting reply, I have already explained that your assertion was wrong, and you not-so-deftly ignore the facts again. Just what has crawled up your backside?

Finally, you actually ask why I'm malicious towards a very malicious poster? Are you mad? (For those unaware of the double meaning of 'mad', I want to clarify that I think she is insane, not angry. Clearly she's already angry, but the point is she's acting crazy, too.)

So, if you wish to attack me for meeting fire with fire, well, you know that I've got plenty of fuel. If you wish to address me logically, I can do that too. I may not be able to touch my toes, but I'm still flexible.