04 Feb 16
2 edits
Originally posted by FMFOnce again you demonstrate little insight and instead seek simply to vilify the person rather than address the issue. Its almost obligatory for you.
I think the only thing underpinning your thinking and posting here is that you're trying to be funny and scornful at the same time, and the subject matter does not matter one whit.
Why would divesgeester or anyone for that matter be hypersensitive to their own sensibilities and insensitive to the sensibilities of others.
04 Feb 16
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThe word string "you're hypersensitive to your own sensibilities" translates to: I don't agree with you. The word string "you're insensitive to the sensibilities of others" also translates to: I don't agree with you. It has no other traction apart from that coming from posters like yourself and Grampy Bobby.
Why would divesgeester or anyone for that matter be hypersensitive to their own sensibilities and insensitive to the sensibilities of others.
04 Feb 16
Originally posted by FMFNo I don't think it does translate to, 'I don't agree with you' and nor does your attempt to once again explain it away with reference to some kind of alleged attempt to gain traction. The seventy or so pages of feigned indignation in response to some teasing about an overtly amorous post would rule this out. Clearly divesgester is hypersensitive to his own sensibilities.
The word string [b]"you're hypersensitive to your own sensibilities" translates to: I don't agree with you. The word string "you're insensitive to the sensibilities of others" also translates to: I don't agree with you. It has no other traction apart from that coming from posters like yourself and Grampy Bobby.[/b]
04 Feb 16
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWell we disagree about what the whatnot about hypersensitivity & sensibilities means and we disagree about what went on for those "70 or so pages".
No I don't think it does translate to, 'I don't agree with you' and nor does your attempt to once again explain it away with reference to some kind of alleged attempt to gain traction. The seventy or so pages of feigned indignation in response to some teasing about an overtly amorous post would rule this out. Clearly divesgester is hypersensitive to his own sensibilities.
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyI think it may be because some posters don't like him. I think your suggestion that the OP is offensive holds no water - so much so, even you are not willing to make any argument to that effect.
There may well be others with serious medical issues or genetic predispositions who are frequent contributors to this and other RHP Public Forums who are expressing their personal displeasure with your flippant attitude and insensitivity toward their overweight conditions with Thumbs Down.
04 Feb 16
Originally posted by FMFIts difficult to explain why the negativity to such an allegedly benign post. Either it was not benign as you have alleged or it was and divesgeesters reputation simply proceeded him and people were immediately reminded of what an unsavory proposition he can be and simply thumbed him down on past experience.
That wasn't the theory Grampy Bobby proffered. Take it up with him.
04 Feb 16
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI agree that the OP is benign. As for the thumbs, I am not concerned by the ones I got for my post about Food Combining.
Its difficult to explain why the negativity to such an allegedly benign post. Either it was not benign as you have alleged or it was and divesgeesters reputation simply proceeded him and people were immediately reminded of what an unsavory proposition he can be and simply thumbed him down on past experience.
Do you have a favourite slimming idea that you know or think works?