Free Step Dodge

this is an internet forum and not a high school club, so i skip the sugary and sunshine language. the world would also be a stagnant place if everyone nodded to everything.
criticism usually is hard to read, yes, but not any more poorly constructed than attacks from behind the safety of the profile wall and staff member card.
i usually only manipulate responses when i need to expose a flawed point of view

Safety of the profile wall?

How is he attacking you exactly? He was stating his opinion about you and stated a solution to his problem. Nobody was attacking you, so don’t play the victim.

@Brute meaning if anybody's bothered by words on the screen they're welcome to post in the thread(s) in question instead of taking potshots behind their profile page because they're afraid of direct confrontation.

@Onryoki if i called you a dumb fuck out of the blue, is that a personal attack? yes, it is.
and in an argument it would be classified under this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

But is he wrong though... I’m gonna be honest with you, I don’t like you either.

yes, it's easy to tell. but if you can't resist letting your own emotions get in the way of recognizing poor etiquette, i think you should sit out of the conversation.

I’m not really letting my own emotions get in the way to recognize some flaws DOA has. Just because I personally dislike you does not mean I can’t agree with some points you make.

So, he publicly posted a status that will be seen by everyone (you included) where he called you out by name, but didn't set his profile to private (as in, you can respond to the post in question yourself), yet somehow that's being afraid of confrontation? He literally brought the confrontation to his doorstep in the most bombastic way possible.

Remember, he thinks you intentionally derail threads and that your responses are often "hard to read and are poorly constructed." Were that true, engaging you directly on each point in each thread would only further contaminate the respective threads with more of the same content he considers objectionable. Here, everyone is focused solely on the subject he wanted to address.

Furthermore, I'd be cautious about referring to ad hominems in a damning fashion, since you're prone to strawmen when criticized. Instead of simply providing rebuttals to the criticism, you almost invariably add a "but look what you're doing; that's worse." And maybe it is, but it's also intended solely to attack the credibility of the other party rather than address the original concern itself.

it's not a confrontation if it occurs at his doorstep, because had i not been around during a specific window where the post is visible in the news feed, i would have missed it completely.

there's simply no point in addressing a concern along the lines of "words hurt my feelings" because it's completely subjective. a "hey, many people are fine with it and you just need to grow thicker skin/get better taste" is as close to a valid rebuttal for this as it gets unless there's a post that pissed off the entire world or violated the rules.

and you can't really pin "attack the credibility of the other party rather than address the original concern itself" on me when the original concern started off with exactly that. i'm simply describing what it is.

can we get more words per comment yet

You two are gonna end up being good friends over time.

The "original concern" was about you. Accusing someone else of something is exactly what I just described. So yes, I can "pin" that.

As for the subjective thing, just because something is subjective doesn't mean it's not valid. Hell, even your proposed "need thicker skin" argument is very subjective. So is the definition of "poor etiquette." If subjective opinions are backed by sound reasoning, you can address them.

Think about this as a critique: "People don't see that you have a point because you present your points in such a dickish way they don't see your point immediately and don't care to give it a second glance." Perfectly valid criticism, even if you disagree with the conclusion. You could say "those people need thicker skin," but then they could say the same about you.

As for the profile thing, this follows a bizarre logic that people have where they feel like they're entitled to receive an invitation to every discussion about them. But they aren't. Saying something behind someone's back (ie: trying to hide it from them) is a different matter than simply not giving a damn whether they hear it when your principle concern is informing others of your perspective.

This conversation, here, on this status, is no more "safe" than anywhere else. Not to mention that this criticism spawns from "pinned" response.

TL;DR: DOAN thinks you're a dick. You think DOAN's dismissive of you and your posts because you don't use "sugary sunshine language." I haven't seen any evidence to suggest either of these claims is untrue. I did think the part about you being stupid was uncalled for.

in most places outside of 4chan and gamefaqs "poor etiquette" covers attacks on the person (and not ideals).
although i'm partially at fault here for believing all this time it's against the rules.

i don't disagree with the conclusion because as i said, criticism is hard to eat. but people skipping over what i write is not my concern, because the right minds will see them anyway. since my criticism is usually directed at imaginary wives and inanimate objects i do believe there's some skin volume needed if it makes someone extremely hot and bothered.