Be nice please on Tracy Whitney

Tracy Whitney wrote:the two of you, don't even see where you are and get all guththam guththa.

This thread is on me, but looks like it's still about CARU.

You (CARU's) surrogate, you!

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:this tactic of digging up past posts to discredit another poster is something the Akka has eagerly embraced. He has used it on quite a few occasions against me, but then had to stop because of this:

https://such.forumotion.com/t4164p50-pandit-nehru-was-against-caste-based-reservations#33954

Whenever you lie about the past -- as you have taken to doing rather often -- I will be happy to prove it to you with your own past posts. If your past posts discredit you, that's your problem not mine.

the question was not about lying

I dug up the old post to expose your duplicity on the matter of reservations, speaking from both sides of your mouth.

https://such.forumotion.com/t4164-pandit-nehru-was-against-caste-based-reservations#33861

you dug up various posts of mine and posted them in several threads which is why i bestowed the title of 'Dirt Digger' on you for your efforts. This title was given to you for your efforts to dig up my posts where i had used uncouth language in heated debates. you subsequently ran away from the thread after it was pointed out to you that your Gult Brothers had used similar language.

On your idiotic attempt to show that my position on reservation has changed because 5 years ago i had said i agreed with Seva that caste based reservations should be abolished and 4 years ago i had said that reservations for dalits can be continued for some time (i.e. temporarily) i had said that one's position on complex issues evolves over a period of time:

https://such.forumotion.com/t4164-pandit-nehru-was-against-caste-based-reservations#33900

This is another example of you trying your utmost to try and discredit me but only ending up with egg on your face once again.

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:to propagate that everything i say must be disbelieved and ridiculed.

Where did I say that? I readily agree with some things you say.

When you coined the phrase 'Rashmun Method', disparaged it, and kept using it again and again in your posts it is very evident what you were trying to propagate. You had no problem at all with the 'Rashmun Method'--which you disparaged and kept using again and again in your posts--when it was used to analyze history and philosophy on Sulekha for several years.

And all because you did not like my posts on Diggy Raja.

There is a fundamental misunderstanding here which is eating away at your psyche. I coined the term Rashmun Method as a short-hand for incorrect logic that you used often when we were talking about Diggy Raja and later. I said so clearly when I coined the term. I have no problem debating issues with you. If you use dubious logic, I will call you out on that -- like I will anyone. If you don't use dubious logic, there's a good chance I will agree with you. It's as simple as that. You seem to have taken personal offense to my critique of your methods (e.g. using crazy arguments like "if it was not true, Diggy would not have said it" to prove that what Diggy said was right, etc.)

charvaka wrote:There is a fundamental misunderstanding here which is eating away at your psyche. I coined the term Rashmun Method as a short-hand for incorrect logic that you used often when we were talking about Diggy Raja and later. I said so clearly when I coined the term. I have no problem debating issues with you. If you use dubious logic, I will call you out on that -- like I will anyone. If you don't use dubious logic, there's a good chance I will agree with you. It's as simple as that. You seem to have taken personal offense to my critique of your methods (e.g. using crazy arguments like "if it was not true, Diggy would not have said it" to prove that what Diggy said was right, etc.)

You have some patience!

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:to propagate that everything i say must be disbelieved and ridiculed.

Where did I say that? I readily agree with some things you say.

When you coined the phrase 'Rashmun Method', disparaged it, and kept using it again and again in your posts it is very evident what you were trying to propagate. You had no problem at all with the 'Rashmun Method'--which you disparaged and kept using again and again in your posts--when it was used to analyze history and philosophy on Sulekha for several years.

And all because you did not like my posts on Diggy Raja.

There is a fundamental misunderstanding here which is eating away at your psyche. I coined the term Rashmun Method as a short-hand for incorrect logic that you used often when we were talking about Diggy Raja and later. I said so clearly when I coined the term. I have no problem debating issues with you. If you use dubious logic, I will call you out on that -- like I will anyone. If you don't use dubious logic, there's a good chance I will agree with you. It's as simple as that. You seem to have taken personal offense to my critique of your methods (e.g. using crazy arguments like "if it was not true, Diggy would not have said it" to prove that what Diggy said was right, etc.)

The fundamental problem is that my refusal to get bullied by you and surrogates is devouring your psyche. The phrase 'Rashmun Method' was coined, disparaged, and used in post after post not only to criticize my views on Diggy Raja but there was a clear implication in the usage of this term that you were seeking to ridicule all my views. I had said this to you when you coined the phrase and had objected to your using it again and again. I do not agree with everything Diggy Raja says and many of the things i said with respect to him were in jest.
For instance, Diggy Raja is for caste based reservations for OBCs but i am a vociferous opponent of any reservations for OBCs. I do not recall ever using words like 'if it was not true, Diggy would not have said it' and even if i used these words it was in jest and not to be taken seriously.

doofus_maximus wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Impedimenta wrote:are you that jobless? seriously, most here have been trashed in the old forum. what is the point on bringing trash posts into this new forum?

absolutely not in good taste. even my web sense is flagging such nonsense R.

if multiple posters are ganging up against one poster then that one poster has the right to fight back in all possible ways. I did not start this fight; Charvaka did when he coined the phrase 'Rashmun Method', disparaged it, and then kept using it again and again in post after post.
Tracy had a choice: get involved in the fight or stay out of the fight. She chose the former. Every single time she jumps to pick sides, she always ends up attacking me directly or indirectly. So i have the right to hit back at her in whatever way i choose.

May i suggest that you stay out of this?

dude..seriously. are you that attached to your handle on an anonymous forum. You have been on this stupid crusade over something so trivial.

Maulana Rashmunullah Al-akbari Jehadi is suffering from Identity Disorder., not to forget Schizoid, personality D/O, Mogulitis, Narcisstic D/O, among others.

It is not at all nice for you to attack someone who is psychologically vulnerable.

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:to propagate that everything i say must be disbelieved and ridiculed.

Where did I say that? I readily agree with some things you say.

When you coined the phrase 'Rashmun Method', disparaged it, and kept using it again and again in your posts it is very evident what you were trying to propagate. You had no problem at all with the 'Rashmun Method'--which you disparaged and kept using again and again in your posts--when it was used to analyze history and philosophy on Sulekha for several years.

And all because you did not like my posts on Diggy Raja.

There is a fundamental misunderstanding here which is eating away at your psyche. I coined the term Rashmun Method as a short-hand for incorrect logic that you used often when we were talking about Diggy Raja and later. I said so clearly when I coined the term. I have no problem debating issues with you. If you use dubious logic, I will call you out on that -- like I will anyone. If you don't use dubious logic, there's a good chance I will agree with you. It's as simple as that. You seem to have taken personal offense to my critique of your methods (e.g. using crazy arguments like "if it was not true, Diggy would not have said it" to prove that what Diggy said was right, etc.)

The fundamental problem is that my refusal to get bullied by you and surrogates is devouring your psyche. The phrase 'Rashmun Method' was coined, disparaged, and used in post after post not only to criticize my views on Diggy Raja but there was a clear implication in the usage of this term that you were seeking to ridicule all my views. I had said this to you when you coined the phrase and had objected to your using it again and again. I do not agree with everything Diggy Raja says and many of the things i said with respect to him were in jest.
For instance, Diggy Raja is for caste based reservations for OBCs but i am a vociferous opponent of any reservations for OBCs. I do not recall ever using words like 'if it was not true, Diggy would not have said it' and even if i used these words it was in jest and not to be taken seriously.

The problem, as i see it, is not me or Diggy Raja. It stems from your pathological hatred for the Congress party which you have indicated again and again in your posts. Since i praised Diggy Raja, i must be a Congressman and someone you are obliged to attack!

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:

doofus_maximus wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Impedimenta wrote:are you that jobless? seriously, most here have been trashed in the old forum. what is the point on bringing trash posts into this new forum?

absolutely not in good taste. even my web sense is flagging such nonsense R.

if multiple posters are ganging up against one poster then that one poster has the right to fight back in all possible ways. I did not start this fight; Charvaka did when he coined the phrase 'Rashmun Method', disparaged it, and then kept using it again and again in post after post.
Tracy had a choice: get involved in the fight or stay out of the fight. She chose the former. Every single time she jumps to pick sides, she always ends up attacking me directly or indirectly. So i have the right to hit back at her in whatever way i choose.

May i suggest that you stay out of this?

dude..seriously. are you that attached to your handle on an anonymous forum. You have been on this stupid crusade over something so trivial.

Maulana Rashmunullah Al-akbari Jehadi is suffering from Identity Disorder., not to forget Schizoid, personality D/O, Mogulitis, Narcisstic D/O, among others.

It is not at all nice for you to attack someone who is psychologically vulnerable.

I believe you may be right. I think it is better to leave him alone for a while.

doofus_maximus wrote:

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:

doofus_maximus wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Impedimenta wrote:are you that jobless? seriously, most here have been trashed in the old forum. what is the point on bringing trash posts into this new forum?

absolutely not in good taste. even my web sense is flagging such nonsense R.

if multiple posters are ganging up against one poster then that one poster has the right to fight back in all possible ways. I did not start this fight; Charvaka did when he coined the phrase 'Rashmun Method', disparaged it, and then kept using it again and again in post after post.
Tracy had a choice: get involved in the fight or stay out of the fight. She chose the former. Every single time she jumps to pick sides, she always ends up attacking me directly or indirectly. So i have the right to hit back at her in whatever way i choose.

May i suggest that you stay out of this?

dude..seriously. are you that attached to your handle on an anonymous forum. You have been on this stupid crusade over something so trivial.

Maulana Rashmunullah Al-akbari Jehadi is suffering from Identity Disorder., not to forget Schizoid, personality D/O, Mogulitis, Narcisstic D/O, among others.

It is not at all nice for you to attack someone who is psychologically vulnerable.

I believe you may be right. I think it is better to leave him alone for a while.

Duffer i mean Doffus oops Doofus is eying the post of Secretary of the Gult Tribal Loyalty Club. This club is open only to Gults and also to those non-Gults who have no self-respect and who are eager to be a part of the Gult clique.

Rashmun wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:Where did I say that? I readily agree with some things you say.

When you coined the phrase 'Rashmun Method', disparaged it, and kept using it again and again in your posts it is very evident what you were trying to propagate. You had no problem at all with the 'Rashmun Method'--which you disparaged and kept using again and again in your posts--when it was used to analyze history and philosophy on Sulekha for several years.

And all because you did not like my posts on Diggy Raja.

There is a fundamental misunderstanding here which is eating away at your psyche. I coined the term Rashmun Method as a short-hand for incorrect logic that you used often when we were talking about Diggy Raja and later. I said so clearly when I coined the term. I have no problem debating issues with you. If you use dubious logic, I will call you out on that -- like I will anyone. If you don't use dubious logic, there's a good chance I will agree with you. It's as simple as that. You seem to have taken personal offense to my critique of your methods (e.g. using crazy arguments like "if it was not true, Diggy would not have said it" to prove that what Diggy said was right, etc.)

The fundamental problem is that my refusal to get bullied by you and surrogates is devouring your psyche. The phrase 'Rashmun Method' was coined, disparaged, and used in post after post not only to criticize my views on Diggy Raja but there was a clear implication in the usage of this term that you were seeking to ridicule all my views. I had said this to you when you coined the phrase and had objected to your using it again and again. I do not agree with everything Diggy Raja says and many of the things i said with respect to him were in jest.
For instance, Diggy Raja is for caste based reservations for OBCs but i am a vociferous opponent of any reservations for OBCs. I do not recall ever using words like 'if it was not true, Diggy would not have said it' and even if i used these words it was in jest and not to be taken seriously.

The problem, as i see it, is not me or Diggy Raja. It stems from your pathological hatred for the Congress party which you have indicated again and again in your posts. Since i praised Diggy Raja, i must be a Congressman and someone you are obliged to attack!

Okay this has gone on too long..

Rashmun wrote:On your idiotic attempt to show that my position on reservation has changed ... i had said that one's position on complex issues evolves over a period of time

I am confused. Was my attempt idiotic because you agreed with it?

Rashmun wrote:

doofus_maximus wrote:

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:

doofus_maximus wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

if multiple posters are ganging up against one poster then that one poster has the right to fight back in all possible ways. I did not start this fight; Charvaka did when he coined the phrase 'Rashmun Method', disparaged it, and then kept using it again and again in post after post.
Tracy had a choice: get involved in the fight or stay out of the fight. She chose the former. Every single time she jumps to pick sides, she always ends up attacking me directly or indirectly. So i have the right to hit back at her in whatever way i choose.

May i suggest that you stay out of this?

dude..seriously. are you that attached to your handle on an anonymous forum. You have been on this stupid crusade over something so trivial.

Maulana Rashmunullah Al-akbari Jehadi is suffering from Identity Disorder., not to forget Schizoid, personality D/O, Mogulitis, Narcisstic D/O, among others.

It is not at all nice for you to attack someone who is psychologically vulnerable.

I believe you may be right. I think it is better to leave him alone for a while.

Duffer i mean Doffus oops Doofus is eying the post of Secretary of the Gult Tribal Loyalty Club. This club is open only to Gults and also to those non-Gults who have no self-respect and who are eager to be a part of the Gult clique.

lets see: ppl who disagree with me and belong to the gult group - no explanation needed, they just attack me due to tribal loyalties. ppl who disagree with me but are outside the main circe can be grouped under another venn circle of "ppl that are eager to join the clique and by extension share the same tribal loyalty". there! I have a tidy explanation of why disparate groups of ppl are making fun of me. the third group of ppl that are silent are largely comprised of sane and normal ppl - again, self evident truth coz no attack on rashmun means sane and normal with no agendas.

this must be part of what they mean by rashmun method.

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:On your idiotic attempt to show that my position on reservation has changed ... i had said that one's position on complex issues evolves over a period of time

I am confused. Was my attempt idiotic because you agreed with it?

Your attempt was idiotic because you were digging up four year and five year old posts of mine on a complex issue, not taking into account that one's position on complex issues evolves over a period of time. Besides, it is not as if there is a radical change in my position. Five years ago, i said that all caste based reservations must come to an end. Four years ago i said reservations for dalits can continue for some more time. I have been consistent about the fact that caste based reservations for OBCs must be abolished. You thought you had me cornered and were inviting me to start attacking you in long posts when all it took was a single sentence to refute your idiotic attempt.

Propagandhi711 wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

doofus_maximus wrote:

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:

doofus_maximus wrote:


dude..seriously. are you that attached to your handle on an anonymous forum. You have been on this stupid crusade over something so trivial.

Maulana Rashmunullah Al-akbari Jehadi is suffering from Identity Disorder., not to forget Schizoid, personality D/O, Mogulitis, Narcisstic D/O, among others.

It is not at all nice for you to attack someone who is psychologically vulnerable.

I believe you may be right. I think it is better to leave him alone for a while.

Duffer i mean Doffus oops Doofus is eying the post of Secretary of the Gult Tribal Loyalty Club. This club is open only to Gults and also to those non-Gults who have no self-respect and who are eager to be a part of the Gult clique.

lets see: ppl who disagree with me and belong to the gult group - no explanation needed, they just attack me due to tribal loyalties. ppl who disagree with me but are outside the main circe can be grouped under another venn circle of "ppl that are eager to join the clique and by extension share the same tribal loyalty". there! I have a tidy explanation of why disparate groups of ppl are making fun of me. the third group of ppl that are silent are largely comprised of sane and normal ppl - again, self evident truth coz no attack on rashmun means sane and normal with no agendas.

this must be part of what they mean by rashmun method.

the same Rashmun Method which was used to write history and philosophy posts which the Akka repeatedly praised over the course of several years?

Propagandhi711 wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

doofus_maximus wrote:

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:

doofus_maximus wrote:


dude..seriously. are you that attached to your handle on an anonymous forum. You have been on this stupid crusade over something so trivial.

Maulana Rashmunullah Al-akbari Jehadi is suffering from Identity Disorder., not to forget Schizoid, personality D/O, Mogulitis, Narcisstic D/O, among others.

It is not at all nice for you to attack someone who is psychologically vulnerable.

I believe you may be right. I think it is better to leave him alone for a while.

Duffer i mean Doffus oops Doofus is eying the post of Secretary of the Gult Tribal Loyalty Club. This club is open only to Gults and also to those non-Gults who have no self-respect and who are eager to be a part of the Gult clique.

lets see: ppl who disagree with me and belong to the gult group - no explanation needed, they just attack me due to tribal loyalties. ppl who disagree with me but are outside the main circe can be grouped under another venn circle of "ppl that are eager to join the clique and by extension share the same tribal loyalty". there! I have a tidy explanation of why disparate groups of ppl are making fun of me. the third group of ppl that are silent are largely comprised of sane and normal ppl - again, self evident truth coz no attack on rashmun means sane and normal with no agendas.

this must be part of what they mean by rashmun method.

Indeed! Perfect illustration of the famous method.

Rashmun wrote:the Akka repeatedly praised over the course of several years?

Yeah, I actually said "thanks" and "thanks for the explanation" to you a few times that you were able to find after months of googling. That is certainly high praise coming from me.

charvaka wrote:Yeah, I actually said "thanks" and "thanks for the explanation" to you a few times that you were able to find after months of googling. That is certainly high praise coming from me.

All hail the great glut Admin!

Propagandhi711 wrote:lets see: ppl who disagree with me and belong to the gult group - no explanation needed, they just attack me due to tribal loyalties. ppl who disagree with me but are outside the main circe can be grouped under another venn circle of "ppl that are eager to join the clique and by extension share the same tribal loyalty". there! I have a tidy explanation of why disparate groups of ppl are making fun of me. the third group of ppl that are silent are largely comprised of sane and normal ppl - again, self evident truth coz no attack on rashmun means sane and normal with no agendas.

this must be part of what they mean by rashmun method.

Dear SUCH'ers,

A surrogate just dared picking a side. You WILL be bombarded with 10-15 posts about "death threats" in next 24 hours.

Thanks!

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:the Akka repeatedly praised over the course of several years?

Yeah, I actually said "thanks" and "thanks for the explanation" to you a few times that you were able to find after months of googling. That is certainly high praise coming from me.

can u point out a single history or philosophy post of mine on sulekha where you have disagreed with me (to the extent that you have started quarreling with me)? LOL @ 'months of googling'.

charvaka wrote:

Propagandhi711 wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

doofus_maximus wrote:

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:

Maulana Rashmunullah Al-akbari Jehadi is suffering from Identity Disorder., not to forget Schizoid, personality D/O, Mogulitis, Narcisstic D/O, among others.

It is not at all nice for you to attack someone who is psychologically vulnerable.

I believe you may be right. I think it is better to leave him alone for a while.

Duffer i mean Doffus oops Doofus is eying the post of Secretary of the Gult Tribal Loyalty Club. This club is open only to Gults and also to those non-Gults who have no self-respect and who are eager to be a part of the Gult clique.

lets see: ppl who disagree with me and belong to the gult group - no explanation needed, they just attack me due to tribal loyalties. ppl who disagree with me but are outside the main circe can be grouped under another venn circle of "ppl that are eager to join the clique and by extension share the same tribal loyalty". there! I have a tidy explanation of why disparate groups of ppl are making fun of me. the third group of ppl that are silent are largely comprised of sane and normal ppl - again, self evident truth coz no attack on rashmun means sane and normal with no agendas.

this must be part of what they mean by rashmun method.

Indeed! Perfect illustration of the famous method.

ha ha @ 'famous Method'. are you scared that i will start using the phrase 'PP Method' if you continue using the phrase 'Rashmun Method'?

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:the Akka repeatedly praised over the course of several years?

Yeah, I actually said "thanks" and "thanks for the explanation" to you a few times that you were able to find after months of googling. That is certainly high praise coming from me.

can u point out a single history or philosophy post of mine on sulekha where you have disagreed with me (to the extent that you have started quarreling with me)? LOL @ 'months of googling'.

for years and years not only did you agree with me, not only did you shower praise on me, but you even asked me to write on certain specific topics. Like certain aspects of the Nyaya-Vaisesika and Sankhya. After reading my posts on svabhava-vada you claimed that you found this view very appealing. After my numerous posts on the Charvakas, you even changed your handle name to 'Charvaka'.

When Seva and sandilya attacked my historical and philosophical posts you invariably came to my defense.

The fact remains that your hostility towards me only developed after my praise of Diggy Raja. The reason for this hostility was your pathological hatred for the Congress party which you have revealed on quite a few occasions.

doofus_maximus wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

When you coined the phrase 'Rashmun Method', disparaged it, and kept using it again and again in your posts it is very evident what you were trying to propagate. You had no problem at all with the 'Rashmun Method'--which you disparaged and kept using again and again in your posts--when it was used to analyze history and philosophy on Sulekha for several years.

And all because you did not like my posts on Diggy Raja.

There is a fundamental misunderstanding here which is eating away at your psyche. I coined the term Rashmun Method as a short-hand for incorrect logic that you used often when we were talking about Diggy Raja and later. I said so clearly when I coined the term. I have no problem debating issues with you. If you use dubious logic, I will call you out on that -- like I will anyone. If you don't use dubious logic, there's a good chance I will agree with you. It's as simple as that. You seem to have taken personal offense to my critique of your methods (e.g. using crazy arguments like "if it was not true, Diggy would not have said it" to prove that what Diggy said was right, etc.)

The fundamental problem is that my refusal to get bullied by you and surrogates is devouring your psyche. The phrase 'Rashmun Method' was coined, disparaged, and used in post after post not only to criticize my views on Diggy Raja but there was a clear implication in the usage of this term that you were seeking to ridicule all my views. I had said this to you when you coined the phrase and had objected to your using it again and again. I do not agree with everything Diggy Raja says and many of the things i said with respect to him were in jest.
For instance, Diggy Raja is for caste based reservations for OBCs but i am a vociferous opponent of any reservations for OBCs. I do not recall ever using words like 'if it was not true, Diggy would not have said it' and even if i used these words it was in jest and not to be taken seriously.

The problem, as i see it, is not me or Diggy Raja. It stems from your pathological hatred for the Congress party which you have indicated again and again in your posts. Since i praised Diggy Raja, i must be a Congressman and someone you are obliged to attack!

Okay this has gone on too long..

Poll : Top Debaters on CH
started by mf02 4 yrs ago
So, who are the most persistent debaters on CH in your opinion, those who could debate till the cows came home? Here are my top three : - Rashmun - Seva -Carvaka P.S. I am just keeping to the current crop of posters, feel free to add the ones from the past like - Sitaram, Ibrahim etc..

http://forums.sulekha.com/forums/fun/poll-top-debaters-on-ch-228676.htm

-----
i actually had every intention of desisting from taking this forward, but i knew Charvaka was going to continue the discussion despite your appeal.

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:Charvaka's claim was that my real character shines through in these heated discussions.

It does.

You ran away from the thread when i pointed out that your Gult Brothers Propagandhi and Truthbetold have used similar language but we have never seen you questioning their character. Is it because they are fellow Gults, and i am not?

https://such.forumotion.com/t4164p50-pandit-nehru-was-against-caste-based-reservations#33954

I have said the same things about their use of that kind of language that I have said to you. They didn't whine about it. You do. I made all the points I needed to make on that thread.

You did not. Not when TBT abused Merlot's mom. Not when Propa gave Luke a death threat. Never. So quit lying.

Rashmun wrote:You did not. Not when TBT abused Merlot's mom. Not when Propa gave Luke a death threat. Never. So quit lying.

You are the one who is lying. I have told both TBT and Propa that I dislike the use of such language, as I did with you many years ago as well. You were not listening though, focused on interpreting my "thanks" statements as "constant praise."

Isn't it queen bee who's this 'be nice please' character? Gutter mouth! I'm glad she isn't here.

Rashmun wrote:can u point out a single history or philosophy post of mine on sulekha where you have disagreed with me (to the extent that you have started quarreling with me)? LOL @ 'months of googling'.

I disagreed with you about the Nizams. I disagreed with you about hero-worshiping Akbar and his clan.

Rashmun wrote:for years and years not only did you agree with me, not only did you shower praise on me

If saying "thanks" when you respond to a question is "showering praise," I am happy to oblige.

Rashmun wrote:After reading my posts on svabhava-vada you claimed that you found this view very appealing.

Correct. Are you claiming that you invented svabhava-vada? If not, how does my appreciation of svabhava-vada amount to "showering praise" on you, when you are just the copy-paster, not the original writer?

Rashmun wrote:After my numerous posts on the Charvakas, you even changed your handle name to 'Charvaka'.

Chronologically, it is true that my handle name change happened after your numerous posts on Charvakas. Chronologically, it is also true that my name handle name change happened AFTER your MORE numerous posts on Akbar. I did not change my name to Akbar, however. Chronologically, it is also true that the Gujarat riots happened after your numerous posts on the Mughals.

Rashmun wrote:When Seva and sandilya attacked my historical and philosophical posts you invariably came to my defense.

I believe in arguing about substance. If Seva, Sandilya, you, or anyone else for that matter, makes a valid point, I will agree with them. If they don't and I have the time to spare, I will argue with them. If you happened to be on the same side of some arguments as I was back then, but are not on other arguments, don't take that as a personal betrayal and lose your balance over it. Get a grip.

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:You did not. Not when TBT abused Merlot's mom. Not when Propa gave Luke a death threat. Never. So quit lying.

You are the one who is lying. I have told both TBT and Propa that I dislike the use of such language, as I did with you many years ago as well. You were not listening though, focused on interpreting my "thanks" statements as "constant praise."

--> u told me that u were uncomfortable with the usage of uncouth language in heated debates. you also told this to Seva when he was using similar language against me. but i defy you to give the link to a single post where you said this to either Propa or TBT.

this man can flog a dead horse like no other. the said horse can be long dead, maggots completely digested the flesh leaving only skeleton behind and he'll still be all over it like a deranged tom hanks in that cast away movie and be flogging away nonstop like it were a wild horse roaming the plains. uniquely disturbed character.

Charvaka,
chevitivadi moondu shankham voodinatloo
vemana "isuka nundi tailamu "
"Murkhuni manasu ranjinparade"

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:can u point out a single history or philosophy post of mine on sulekha where you have disagreed with me (to the extent that you have started quarreling with me)? LOL @ 'months of googling'.

I disagreed with you about the Nizams. I disagreed with you about hero-worshiping Akbar and his clan.

i never expressed any categorical personal opinion about the Nizams. i recall telling you that i had discussed the Nizams with a senior telugu friend of mine who had a positive view of them. i may have also expressed highly tentative views on the Nizams based on the very little i know about them. But i certainly never argued with you or anybody else over the Nizams for the simple reason that i don't know enough about them.

with respect to Akbar you in fact agreed with my praise of Akbar to the extent that you would even defend me when people would attack me for them. you applauded the fact when i narrated that Akbar got one mullah bumped off in a boat accident when he issued a fatwah against the emperor and many similar people were asked to go on a pilgrimage to Mecca. Furthermore, the fact that you agreed with me on the mughals becomes evident when one notices that you yourself made a post claiming that during the mughal reign, India's share of the world GDP was very high. you never criticized my admiration for Akbar because you yourself expressed admiration for him. you wondered how it was that the orthodox muslims of the time (his courtiers, etc.) did not bump him off somehow for holding the views he did after you read my posts.

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:for years and years not only did you agree with me, not only did you shower praise on me

If saying "thanks" when you respond to a question is "showering praise," I am happy to oblige.

not just "thanks", but also words like "Great post" for various posts of mine. furthermore, the fact that you would come to my defense when people like sandilya and seva would attack me (for my philosophy and history posts), and would never attack me yourself for these same posts indicates the respect you once had for me and my views. I am prepared to give the links to these posts where you have not only said 'Thanks' but have also said "Great post" . Some of these posts may have been written under your purported real name. Are you claiming that your words "Great post" for various posts of mine should not be taken as appreciation and praise for those posts.

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:After reading my posts on svabhava-vada you claimed that you found this view very appealing.

Correct. Are you claiming that you invented svabhava-vada? If not, how does my appreciation of svabhava-vada amount to "showering praise" on you, when you are just the copy-paster, not the original writer?

the svabhava-vada views were not copy pasted; rather the posts were made after i had studied various books on Indian philosophy. not every philosophy writer praises svabhava-vada and it is possible to present a negative view of svabhava-vada which i did not do. i gave the svabhava-vada example because it is another case where you were in agreement with what i was saying.

a good example of the fact that i was not copy pasting is the fact that Adi Sankara's views on the sudras was not available anywhere on the internet at the time i posted them. Seva and sandilya refused to even accept that the words i was imputing to Adi Sankara were correct. But you did believe me and used my CH post as a reference in your blog. Many years later you ridiculed sandilya and Seva when i gave the link to Thibaut's translation of Adi Sankara's commentary on the Brahma Sutra which had by then been posted online and from which i had extracted his words on sudras.

i would also like to remind you that you have asked me specifically to write on a few aspects of Indian philosophy (and i have obliged). For instance, certain aspects of Nyaya-Vaisesika and Sankhya. Clearly, if this is information was freely available, you could have googled it yourself.

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:After my numerous posts on the Charvakas, you even changed your handle name to 'Charvaka'.

Chronologically, it is true that my handle name change happened after your numerous posts on Charvakas. Chronologically, it is also true that my name handle name change happened AFTER your MORE numerous posts on Akbar. I did not change my name to Akbar, however. Chronologically, it is also true that the Gujarat riots happened after your numerous posts on the Mughals.

my Charvaka posts predate my Akbar posts. the vast majority of the Akbar posts were made after the handle change. the vast majority of the Charvaka posts were made before the handle change. Furthermore, i would like to point out that you never wrote a single CH post on the Charvakas yourself. in fact i recall you telling me on CH that having my read my Charvaka posts you would be asking your father about the Charvakas when you next visit India. My understanding is that i introduced you to Charvaka philosophy. you may have heard of it before, but you were clearly not acquainted with the details as was clear by your response to my posts. For instance, this is what you wrote (using your purported real name which is why i do not give the link) on reading about Adi Sankara's analysis of the Charvaka view on consciousness in one of my CH posts:

Yes, this is exactly what we have evidence for today. There is no evidence for a soul that is independent of a body; there is no evidence that Shankara himself could have "entered the body of a king" and such other assorted nonsense.Here is a real example of something which ancient Indians glimpsed millennia before other cultures did. And to show this, there is no need to resort to any cheap tactics like deliberately misusing a "scientific" word (relativity) in its non-scientific meaning.

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:When Seva and sandilya attacked my historical and philosophical posts you invariably came to my defense.

I believe in arguing about substance. If Seva, Sandilya, you, or anyone else for that matter, makes a valid point, I will agree with them. If they don't and I have the time to spare, I will argue with them. If you happened to be on the same side of some arguments as I was back then, but are not on other arguments, don't take that as a personal betrayal and lose your balance over it. Get a grip.

Personal betrayal does come in when you start attacking someone in a personal manner when you have known that person for a long time, and when you have enjoyed cordial relations with that person over a period of several years. We had even written to each other through Sulekha notes on several occasions. I put it to you that after my posts on Diggy Raja you coined the phrase 'Rashmun Method', disparaged it, and keep using it again and again in a bid to discredit me because of your pathological hatred for the Congress party and because you felt that i was or had turned into a Congress propagandist. Because there is no other rational explanation for why you would wish to undermine my credibility completely to the extent that you would want everyone to question and disbelieve whatever i would say when you have yourself expressed complete support for many of my views in the past.

truthbetold wrote:Charvaka,
chevitivadi moondu shankham voodinatloo
vemana "isuka nundi tailamu "
"Murkhuni manasu ranjinparade"

Nijam. veedoka pedda murkhudu. Veedito vaadinchatam kanna bewaarsu pani inkokati ledu. Veedini ignore cheyatam better.

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:can u point out a single history or philosophy post of mine on sulekha where you have disagreed with me (to the extent that you have started quarreling with me)? LOL @ 'months of googling'.

I disagreed with you about the Nizams. I disagreed with you about hero-worshiping Akbar and his clan.

i never expressed any categorical personal opinion about the Nizams. i recall telling you that i had discussed the Nizams with a senior telugu friend of mine who had a positive view of them. i may have also expressed highly tentative views on the Nizams based on the very little i know about them. But i certainly never argued with you or anybody else over the Nizams for the simple reason that i don't know enough about them.

with respect to Akbar you in fact agreed with my praise of Akbar to the extent that you would even defend me when people would attack me for them. you applauded the fact when i narrated that Akbar got one mullah bumped off in a boat accident when he issued a fatwah against the emperor and many similar people were asked to go on a pilgrimage to Mecca. Furthermore, the fact that you agreed with me on the mughals becomes evident when one notices that you yourself made a post claiming that during the mughal reign, India's share of the world GDP was very high. you never criticized my admiration for Akbar because you yourself expressed admiration for him. you wondered how it was that the orthodox muslims of the time (his courtiers, etc.) did not bump him off somehow for holding the views he did after you read my posts.

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:for years and years not only did you agree with me, not only did you shower praise on me

If saying "thanks" when you respond to a question is "showering praise," I am happy to oblige.

not just "thanks", but also words like "Great post" for various posts of mine. furthermore, the fact that you would come to my defense when people like sandilya and seva would attack me (for my philosophy and history posts), and would never attack me yourself for these same posts indicates the respect you once had for me and my views. I am prepared to give the links to these posts where you have not only said 'Thanks' but have also said "Great post" . Some of these posts may have been written under your purported real name. Are you claiming that your words "Great post" for various posts of mine should not be taken as appreciation and praise for those posts.

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:After reading my posts on svabhava-vada you claimed that you found this view very appealing.

Correct. Are you claiming that you invented svabhava-vada? If not, how does my appreciation of svabhava-vada amount to "showering praise" on you, when you are just the copy-paster, not the original writer?

the svabhava-vada views were not copy pasted; rather the posts were made after i had studied various books on Indian philosophy. not every philosophy writer praises svabhava-vada and it is possible to present a negative view of svabhava-vada which i did not do. i gave the svabhava-vada example because it is another case where you were in agreement with what i was saying.

a good example of the fact that i was not copy pasting is the fact that Adi Sankara's views on the sudras was not available anywhere on the internet at the time i posted them. Seva and sandilya refused to even accept that the words i was imputing to Adi Sankara were correct. But you did believe me and used my CH post as a reference in your blog. Many years later you ridiculed sandilya and Seva when i gave the link to Thibaut's translation of Adi Sankara's commentary on the Brahma Sutra which had by then been posted online and from which i had extracted his words on sudras.

i would also like to remind you that you have asked me specifically to write on a few aspects of Indian philosophy (and i have obliged). For instance, certain aspects of Nyaya-Vaisesika and Sankhya. Clearly, if this is information was freely available, you could have googled it yourself.

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:After my numerous posts on the Charvakas, you even changed your handle name to 'Charvaka'.

Chronologically, it is true that my handle name change happened after your numerous posts on Charvakas. Chronologically, it is also true that my name handle name change happened AFTER your MORE numerous posts on Akbar. I did not change my name to Akbar, however. Chronologically, it is also true that the Gujarat riots happened after your numerous posts on the Mughals.

my Charvaka posts predate my Akbar posts. the vast majority of the Akbar posts were made after the handle change. the vast majority of the Charvaka posts were made before the handle change. Furthermore, i would like to point out that you never wrote a single CH post on the Charvakas yourself. in fact i recall you telling me on CH that having my read my Charvaka posts you would be asking your father about the Charvakas when you next visit India. My understanding is that i introduced you to Charvaka philosophy. you may have heard of it before, but you were clearly not acquainted with the details as was clear by your response to my posts. For instance, this is what you wrote (using your purported real name which is why i do not give the link) on reading about Adi Sankara's analysis of the Charvaka view on consciousness in one of my CH posts:

Yes, this is exactly what we have evidence for today. There is no evidence for a soul that is independent of a body; there is no evidence that Shankara himself could have "entered the body of a king" and such other assorted nonsense.Here is a real example of something which ancient Indians glimpsed millennia before other cultures did. And to show this, there is no need to resort to any cheap tactics like deliberately misusing a "scientific" word (relativity) in its non-scientific meaning.

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:When Seva and sandilya attacked my historical and philosophical posts you invariably came to my defense.

I believe in arguing about substance. If Seva, Sandilya, you, or anyone else for that matter, makes a valid point, I will agree with them. If they don't and I have the time to spare, I will argue with them. If you happened to be on the same side of some arguments as I was back then, but are not on other arguments, don't take that as a personal betrayal and lose your balance over it. Get a grip.

Personal betrayal does come in when you start attacking someone in a personal manner when you have known that person for a long time, and when you have enjoyed cordial relations with that person over a period of several years. We had even written to each other through Sulekha notes on several occasions. I put it to you that after my posts on Diggy Raja you coined the phrase 'Rashmun Method', disparaged it, and keep using it again and again in a bid to discredit me because of your pathological hatred for the Congress party and because you felt that i was or had turned into a Congress propagandist. Because there is no other rational explanation for why you would wish to undermine my credibility completely to the extent that you would want everyone to question and disbelieve whatever i would say when you have yourself expressed complete support for many of my views in the past.

Wow...
unplug the computer.
Switch on the Telly. Watch some good movie. Or Go hit the gym.
I will send you money for the gym membership, netflix or hulu subscription.

doofus_maximus wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:can u point out a single history or philosophy post of mine on sulekha where you have disagreed with me (to the extent that you have started quarreling with me)? LOL @ 'months of googling'.

I disagreed with you about the Nizams. I disagreed with you about hero-worshiping Akbar and his clan.

i never expressed any categorical personal opinion about the Nizams. i recall telling you that i had discussed the Nizams with a senior telugu friend of mine who had a positive view of them. i may have also expressed highly tentative views on the Nizams based on the very little i know about them. But i certainly never argued with you or anybody else over the Nizams for the simple reason that i don't know enough about them.

with respect to Akbar you in fact agreed with my praise of Akbar to the extent that you would even defend me when people would attack me for them. you applauded the fact when i narrated that Akbar got one mullah bumped off in a boat accident when he issued a fatwah against the emperor and many similar people were asked to go on a pilgrimage to Mecca. Furthermore, the fact that you agreed with me on the mughals becomes evident when one notices that you yourself made a post claiming that during the mughal reign, India's share of the world GDP was very high. you never criticized my admiration for Akbar because you yourself expressed admiration for him. you wondered how it was that the orthodox muslims of the time (his courtiers, etc.) did not bump him off somehow for holding the views he did after you read my posts.

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:for years and years not only did you agree with me, not only did you shower praise on me

If saying "thanks" when you respond to a question is "showering praise," I am happy to oblige.

not just "thanks", but also words like "Great post" for various posts of mine. furthermore, the fact that you would come to my defense when people like sandilya and seva would attack me (for my philosophy and history posts), and would never attack me yourself for these same posts indicates the respect you once had for me and my views. I am prepared to give the links to these posts where you have not only said 'Thanks' but have also said "Great post" . Some of these posts may have been written under your purported real name. Are you claiming that your words "Great post" for various posts of mine should not be taken as appreciation and praise for those posts.

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:After reading my posts on svabhava-vada you claimed that you found this view very appealing.

Correct. Are you claiming that you invented svabhava-vada? If not, how does my appreciation of svabhava-vada amount to "showering praise" on you, when you are just the copy-paster, not the original writer?

the svabhava-vada views were not copy pasted; rather the posts were made after i had studied various books on Indian philosophy. not every philosophy writer praises svabhava-vada and it is possible to present a negative view of svabhava-vada which i did not do. i gave the svabhava-vada example because it is another case where you were in agreement with what i was saying.

a good example of the fact that i was not copy pasting is the fact that Adi Sankara's views on the sudras was not available anywhere on the internet at the time i posted them. Seva and sandilya refused to even accept that the words i was imputing to Adi Sankara were correct. But you did believe me and used my CH post as a reference in your blog. Many years later you ridiculed sandilya and Seva when i gave the link to Thibaut's translation of Adi Sankara's commentary on the Brahma Sutra which had by then been posted online and from which i had extracted his words on sudras.

i would also like to remind you that you have asked me specifically to write on a few aspects of Indian philosophy (and i have obliged). For instance, certain aspects of Nyaya-Vaisesika and Sankhya. Clearly, if this is information was freely available, you could have googled it yourself.

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:After my numerous posts on the Charvakas, you even changed your handle name to 'Charvaka'.

Chronologically, it is true that my handle name change happened after your numerous posts on Charvakas. Chronologically, it is also true that my name handle name change happened AFTER your MORE numerous posts on Akbar. I did not change my name to Akbar, however. Chronologically, it is also true that the Gujarat riots happened after your numerous posts on the Mughals.

my Charvaka posts predate my Akbar posts. the vast majority of the Akbar posts were made after the handle change. the vast majority of the Charvaka posts were made before the handle change. Furthermore, i would like to point out that you never wrote a single CH post on the Charvakas yourself. in fact i recall you telling me on CH that having my read my Charvaka posts you would be asking your father about the Charvakas when you next visit India. My understanding is that i introduced you to Charvaka philosophy. you may have heard of it before, but you were clearly not acquainted with the details as was clear by your response to my posts. For instance, this is what you wrote (using your purported real name which is why i do not give the link) on reading about Adi Sankara's analysis of the Charvaka view on consciousness in one of my CH posts:

Yes, this is exactly what we have evidence for today. There is no evidence for a soul that is independent of a body; there is no evidence that Shankara himself could have "entered the body of a king" and such other assorted nonsense.Here is a real example of something which ancient Indians glimpsed millennia before other cultures did. And to show this, there is no need to resort to any cheap tactics like deliberately misusing a "scientific" word (relativity) in its non-scientific meaning.

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:When Seva and sandilya attacked my historical and philosophical posts you invariably came to my defense.

I believe in arguing about substance. If Seva, Sandilya, you, or anyone else for that matter, makes a valid point, I will agree with them. If they don't and I have the time to spare, I will argue with them. If you happened to be on the same side of some arguments as I was back then, but are not on other arguments, don't take that as a personal betrayal and lose your balance over it. Get a grip.

Personal betrayal does come in when you start attacking someone in a personal manner when you have known that person for a long time, and when you have enjoyed cordial relations with that person over a period of several years. We had even written to each other through Sulekha notes on several occasions. I put it to you that after my posts on Diggy Raja you coined the phrase 'Rashmun Method', disparaged it, and keep using it again and again in a bid to discredit me because of your pathological hatred for the Congress party and because you felt that i was or had turned into a Congress propagandist. Because there is no other rational explanation for why you would wish to undermine my credibility completely to the extent that you would want everyone to question and disbelieve whatever i would say when you have yourself expressed complete support for many of my views in the past.

Wow...
unplug the computer.
Switch on the Telly. Watch some good movie. Or Go hit the gym.
I will send you money for the gym membership, netflix or hulu subscription.

tell this to Charvaka. he was the one who insisted that this discussion should continue despite your appeal to both of us to stop.

really. can you count?
Count the number of your replies and the length of your posts.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out who needs to stop.

Getting you to stop, takes more skills than pacifying my 2 year old son.

doofus_maximus wrote:really. can you count?
Count the number of your replies and the length of your posts.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out who needs to stop.

Getting you to stop, takes more skills than pacifying my 2 year old son.

you are free to ignore my posts.

Rashmun wrote:

doofus_maximus wrote:really. can you count?
Count the number of your replies and the length of your posts.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out who needs to stop.

Getting you to stop, takes more skills than pacifying my 2 year old son.

you are free to ignore my posts.

I hate to say this...but can you go back to your Synthesis posts. That way it was easy to ignore them.
Buhbye.

doofus_maximus wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

doofus_maximus wrote:really. can you count?
Count the number of your replies and the length of your posts.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out who needs to stop.

Getting you to stop, takes more skills than pacifying my 2 year old son.

you are free to ignore my posts.

I hate to say this...but can you go back to your Synthesis posts. That way it was easy to ignore them.
Buhbye.

why are these posts difficult to ignore?

"
Nijam. veedoka pedda murkhudu. Veedito vaadinchatam kanna bewaarsu pani inkokati ledu. Veedini ignore cheyatam better.[/quote

one way to end this misery is to raise funds to pay for professional help.

another hint to C: "when Sutti Velu walks in, you run"

This thread reminds me of Amber, birbal and child pacification. You can decide who is who in that drama.

Rashmun wrote:Personal betrayal does come in when you start attacking someone in a personal manner when you have known that person for a long time, and when you have enjoyed cordial relations with that person over a period of several years.

I am sorry you feel betrayed. That was not my intent. I have nothing more to say on this topic.

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:Personal betrayal does come in when you start attacking someone in a personal manner when you have known that person for a long time, and when you have enjoyed cordial relations with that person over a period of several years.

I am sorry you feel betrayed. That was not my intent. I have nothing more to say on this topic.

Coining the phrase 'Rashmun Method', disparaging it, and then using it again and again in your posts when you have enjoyed cordial relations with me for several years, when you have exchanged sulekha notes with me, when you have praised my history and philosophy posts using words like 'Great post' was certainly bizarre behavior on your part. And the only logical explanation is your pathological hatred for the Congress party--which you have demonstrated on several occasions--combined with my posts on Diggy Raja which made you think i was or had become a Congress propagandist made you behave in this bizarre fashion.

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:Personal betrayal does come in when you start attacking someone in a personal manner when you have known that person for a long time, and when you have enjoyed cordial relations with that person over a period of several years.

I am sorry you feel betrayed. That was not my intent. I have nothing more to say on this topic.

Coining the phrase 'Rashmun Method', disparaging it, and then using it again and again in your posts when you have enjoyed cordial relations with me for several years, when you have exchanged sulekha notes with me, when you have praised my history and philosophy posts using words like 'Great post' was certainly bizarre behavior on your part. And the only logical explanation is your pathological hatred for the Congress party--which you have demonstrated on several occasions--combined with my posts on Diggy Raja which made you think i was or had become a Congress propagandist made you behave in this bizarre fashion.

thanks for the recap Rashmun.
Move along now..

doofus_maximus wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:Personal betrayal does come in when you start attacking someone in a personal manner when you have known that person for a long time, and when you have enjoyed cordial relations with that person over a period of several years.

I am sorry you feel betrayed. That was not my intent. I have nothing more to say on this topic.

Coining the phrase 'Rashmun Method', disparaging it, and then using it again and again in your posts when you have enjoyed cordial relations with me for several years, when you have exchanged sulekha notes with me, when you have praised my history and philosophy posts using words like 'Great post' was certainly bizarre behavior on your part. And the only logical explanation is your pathological hatred for the Congress party--which you have demonstrated on several occasions--combined with my posts on Diggy Raja which made you think i was or had become a Congress propagandist made you behave in this bizarre fashion.

thanks for the recap Rashmun.
Move along now..

Doffus, do you always enjoy intervening when two people who have known each other for a long time are having an argument?

Rashmun wrote:

doofus_maximus wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:Personal betrayal does come in when you start attacking someone in a personal manner when you have known that person for a long time, and when you have enjoyed cordial relations with that person over a period of several years.

I am sorry you feel betrayed. That was not my intent. I have nothing more to say on this topic.

Coining the phrase 'Rashmun Method', disparaging it, and then using it again and again in your posts when you have enjoyed cordial relations with me for several years, when you have exchanged sulekha notes with me, when you have praised my history and philosophy posts using words like 'Great post' was certainly bizarre behavior on your part. And the only logical explanation is your pathological hatred for the Congress party--which you have demonstrated on several occasions--combined with my posts on Diggy Raja which made you think i was or had become a Congress propagandist made you behave in this bizarre fashion.

thanks for the recap Rashmun.
Move along now..

Doffus, do you always enjoy intervening when two people who have known each other for a long time are having an argument?

Argument??!!! I thought the whole thread was about a spurned lover's lament.

doofus_maximus wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

doofus_maximus wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:I am sorry you feel betrayed. That was not my intent. I have nothing more to say on this topic.

Coining the phrase 'Rashmun Method', disparaging it, and then using it again and again in your posts when you have enjoyed cordial relations with me for several years, when you have exchanged sulekha notes with me, when you have praised my history and philosophy posts using words like 'Great post' was certainly bizarre behavior on your part. And the only logical explanation is your pathological hatred for the Congress party--which you have demonstrated on several occasions--combined with my posts on Diggy Raja which made you think i was or had become a Congress propagandist made you behave in this bizarre fashion.

thanks for the recap Rashmun.
Move along now..

Doffus, do you always enjoy intervening when two people who have known each other for a long time are having an argument?

Argument??!!! I thought the whole thread was about a spurned lover's lament.

1.doffus
An idiot.

A klutz.
Oh man - I'm such a doffus, I just cut my leg off.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=doffus