Originally Posted by 1997gtx
Not enlightened? Apparently, we can add "not knowing what 'enlightened' means" to the list of things you don't know or understand.
I re-read what you had said in the referenced post. I hadn't originally taken it defensively, and in rereading it, I should not have now.
I over-reacted in my reply to what's his name because in the other thread I thought he was quoting himself, where he had been quoting you, and rudely so.
My original response of not providing a response was where I would rather have been. Really, I didn't respond for the same reason you had mentioned in your reply, that it would be too lenghty
It is best, and actually more interesting, to argue one point at a time. Generally, when people put out a whole laundry list of topics shallowly covered, then they get little response. The poster thinks their list is tremendous. Many others don't bother to read the long list. The thing isn't focused, and certainly not welcoming of discussion, except perhaps as an original post to set the framework for a new thread.
Blather can be by accident or by design, and it still ends in silence.
If it is interesting, it would be best discuss one point at a time when there is disagreement. This reduces the likelihood of misinterepreting one anothers points. And it is best to put those points in their appropriate threads when they would otherwise stray too far off topic.
I don't remember many of your posts, but you seem to be a reasonable writer, whereas someone would rather make personal attacks. The other guy is into personal attack. I had responded to him in that vein.