I would like nothing more than civil discourse. Go have a look at my 1st ever post, #1 on this thread. Go and see the anatagonistic responses. This is the same for every CTer who comes on the forum- the d'uhs know that their position has no place in reason, so they choose to be truculent about their faith. This is absolutely fine for me- but I will give it back.
To take your example, you took comments I had made, blithely stated that they were something they werent, and then went on a rambling disquisition about something to do with the problem of something or other. I then pointed out the imbecilic error you had made, and you again refused to renege, instead repeating your accusation of something nonsensical. So I think you have renounced any claim to civility or to other people's patience, hence why you merit the tone I take with you.
The first paragraph is mere childishness. Everyone who is a parent recognizes the statement; "daddy/ mommy, he hit me first!" And sometimes we say, "try to rise above it." We roll our eyes with little hope that we will be listened to, but we try.
In general, though, I'm pleased. You obviously took some time with this. Your views are clear, though often awkwardly expressed, and you frequently use words wrongly. I'd advise checking a standard dictionary before you actually post.
Please avoid insults. "Imbecilic" does not belong in civilized discourse. Except when applied to a third party behind his or her back, of course.
You make too much use of awkward and pompous phrases. "Renounce any claim..." "Merit the tone..." These phrases slow your statements down and make them lumber across the landscape. They are correct, but they should generally be avoided. The same is true for a word like "blithely." It's a favorite of mine, too, but it should be used very rarely. "Truculent," too.
"No place in reason..." I'm sorry, that phrase does not make sense. In fact, you meant to say, I believe, that they are not at all reasonable. "No place in reason," while I understand what you are trying to say, just does not make sense as a construction.
"Werent..." In standard, written English, this is a contraction of two words, "were" and "not." As such, it should be written "weren't." You are correct that it is pronounced "werent" (or even "wernt"), but I hope all can agree that here the rules of written expression should apply.
"Rambling disquisition..." According to Webster's, a "disquisition" is an intense inquiry or investigation. Clearly, you didn't mean to say that. I think you meant to say "digression," which is taking a discussion off on a tangent. Anyone who knows me well will agree with you on that. I am prone to digressions -- god help me, I love the things -- often in languages other than English. But, you know, "Khata s krayu, nichevo nye znayu," "[My] hut is on the edge [of town], and I know nothing [about it]." I learned that as a Russian expression, though I most recently heard it from a Ukrainian speaker, so it may be common to both languages. They are closely related, of course.
"Renege..." I had my doubts, but I checked Webster's, and it can be used for "retract." (And I don't retract anything, by the way. If I was wrong in my comment, I will argue that your statements are often so confused and so lumbering, in part due to the tendencies outlined above, that I often have trouble following them.) But more frequently, "renege" is used to mean to go back on an agreement, deal, or break a promise. You probably shouldn't have used it in this instance.
In conclusion, please accept my thanks. I've had a very enjoyable morning romp with grammar and with Webster's. A fine way to begin a day.
