Am I the only conservative here?

[Davin]

Some of your posts do seem a little angry, Davin[...]

I get that, what I don't get is why some people's internal seeming is wrong.

Because we don't know you personally, and the usual indicators that evolved as part of our communication system (body language, voice inflection/volume, facial expression, etc.) are absent.  So when we read words, we project - "If I had said that, I probably would have some anger behind it").  Then we find we were wrong when the poster tells us he wasn't angry. It's just a process of getting to know another person's emotional state when we don't have the usual tools.

Why would it surprise someone that another person doesn't do things the same way or for the same reason at they do? I think the better assumption to make is that different people are different.

[Davin]

I suppose liberal sprinklings of emoticons helps indicate the mood. But that means no emoticons at all if you are being serious - even     usually inficates a bit of fun or irony.

Perhaps we need a new protocol, really seriously meant things having two asterisks at each end or something.

Meh, I think emoticons are perfectly valid even when a person is being serious, depending of the context and the emoticon though.

[Dave]

. . . but actually criminalize natural miscarriages including the normal shedding of fertilized eggs during a period in the process.

I probably do not have to ask but, which moron came up with that one, PC?

Still, twisted logic (or twisted people), might think that natural miscarriages might actually be induced by those evil, murderous  abortionist doctors!

Sick, sick, sick.

[Ecurb Noselrub]

Some of your posts do seem a little angry, Davin[...]

I get that, what I don't get is why some people's internal seeming is wrong.

Because we don't know you personally, and the usual indicators that evolved as part of our communication system (body language, voice inflection/volume, facial expression, etc.) are absent.  So when we read words, we project - "If I had said that, I probably would have some anger behind it").  Then we find we were wrong when the poster tells us he wasn't angry. It's just a process of getting to know another person's emotional state when we don't have the usual tools.

Why would it surprise someone that another person doesn't do things the same way or for the same reason at they do? I think the better assumption to make is that different people are different.

I didn't say it surprised me.  You asked why internal "seeming" can be wrong, and I simply gave my take on it.  I assume that people are different, but I don't know different in what way until I interact a little.  First I projected and thought you were angry at times.  Now I understand differently since you've explained yourself.  It's just a process.  No big deal.

[Davin]

. . . but actually criminalize natural miscarriages including the normal shedding of fertilized eggs during a period in the process.

I probably do not have to ask but, which moron came up with that one, PC?

Still, twisted logic (or twisted people), might think that natural miscarriages might actually be induced by those evil, murderous  abortionist doctors!

Sick, sick, sick.

Mike Pence, Trump's VP when he signed HB 1337 into law.

[Dave]

. . . but actually criminalize natural miscarriages including the normal shedding of fertilized eggs during a period in the process.

I probably do not have to ask but, which moron came up with that one, PC?

Still, twisted logic (or twisted people), might think that natural miscarriages might actually be induced by those evil, murderous  abortionist doctors!

Sick, sick, sick.

Mike Pence, Trump's VP when he signed HB 1337 into law.

Yup, didn't need to ask.

[Bad Penny II]

Some of your posts do seem a little angry, Davin[...]

I get that, what I don't get is why some people's internal seeming is wrong.

I don't get it either, my internal seeming is exhaustively calibrated before I do anything social.
They're probably just wrong in the head.

[Davin]

Some of your posts do seem a little angry, Davin[...]

I get that, what I don't get is why some people's internal seeming is wrong.

Because we don't know you personally, and the usual indicators that evolved as part of our communication system (body language, voice inflection/volume, facial expression, etc.) are absent.  So when we read words, we project - "If I had said that, I probably would have some anger behind it").  Then we find we were wrong when the poster tells us he wasn't angry. It's just a process of getting to know another person's emotional state when we don't have the usual tools.

Why would it surprise someone that another person doesn't do things the same way or for the same reason at they do? I think the better assumption to make is that different people are different.

I didn't say it surprised me.

So you didn't think that I was angry and expected me to not be angry even though you said I seemed angry to you? That doesn't make sense.

You asked why internal "seeming" can be wrong, and I simply gave my take on it.  I assume that people are different, but I don't know different in what way until I interact a little.  First I projected and thought you were angry at times.  Now I understand differently since you've explained yourself.  It's just a process.  No big deal.

You assume people are different but then project yourself onto them? I guess I don't understand what the purpose of that would be, seems like it would lead to more misinterpretations than just taking what a person says as what they say. Then you can get to know them based on what they say instead of casting them through the lens if yourself, which I think would lead to more bias and therefor a more inaccurate understanding of who they actually are. At least instead of an Ecrub Noseerub tinted person.

[Davin]

Some of your posts do seem a little angry, Davin[...]

I get that, what I don't get is why some people's internal seeming is wrong.

I don't get it either, my internal seeming is exhaustively calibrated before I do anything social.
They're probably just wrong in the head.

I don't assume whether they are wrong or not and I am open the idea that I might be able to adjust my behavior to help. But I can't with useless statements of that kind.

[Ecurb Noselrub]

So you didn't think that I was angry and expected me to not be angry even though you said I seemed angry to you? That doesn't make sense.

Sure it does.  I made an assessment, then when I found out I was wrong I recalibrated.  Very simple.  Some of your posts seem angry to me, whether I'm right or wrong.  Now you have explained that you are not angry.  I take you at your word.

You assume people are different but then project yourself onto them? I guess I don't understand what the purpose of that would be, seems like it would lead to more misinterpretations than just taking what a person says as what they say. Then you can get to know them based on what they say instead of casting them through the lens if yourself, which I think would lead to more bias and therefor a more inaccurate understanding of who they actually are. At least instead of an Ecrub Noseerub tinted person.

OK, not trying to start an argument, just explaining an impression I had.  Maybe I do it wrong. 

[Davin]

So you didn't think that I was angry and expected me to not be angry even though you said I seemed angry to you? That doesn't make sense.

Sure it does.  I made an assessment, then when I found out I was wrong I recalibrated.  Very simple.  Some of your posts seem angry to me, whether I'm right or wrong.  Now you have explained that you are not angry.  I take you at your word.

Then it should be fair to say that you were surprised that reality is not as you erroneously assumed.

You assume people are different but then project yourself onto them? I guess I don't understand what the purpose of that would be, seems like it would lead to more misinterpretations than just taking what a person says as what they say. Then you can get to know them based on what they say instead of casting them through the lens if yourself, which I think would lead to more bias and therefor a more inaccurate understanding of who they actually are. At least instead of an Ecrub Noseerub tinted person.

OK, not trying to start an argument, just explaining an impression I had.  Maybe I do it wrong.

I said a while ago, "Well, if there is nothing useful then I guess that's the end of it." and you continued after that. I was fine with ending it there and really at any point since you can't provide anything useful beyond which I'm already aware.

[Ecurb Noselrub]

Then it should be fair to say that you were surprised that reality is not as you erroneously assumed.

No, you are simply wrong. Deciding that reality was not like I assumed does not make me "surprised."  It just educates me and leads to me changing my mind.  I allowed you to inform me of your emotional state - I accepted it when you said you were not angry.  You should allow me to inform you of my emotional state - you should accept it when I say that I was not "surprised."

[Davin]

Then it should be fair to say that you were surprised that reality is not as you erroneously assumed.

No, you are simply wrong. Deciding that reality was not like I assumed does not make me "surprised."  It just educates me and leads to me changing my mind.  I allowed you to inform me of your emotional state - I accepted it when you said you were not angry.  You should allow me to inform you of my emotional state - you should accept it when I say that I was not "surprised."

That you incorrectly assumed I was angry, then to unexpectedly discover that I wasn't is a fair and reasonable application of one of the definitions of "surprised." That simply means that I am simply not wrong, simply.

[xSilverPhinx]

I suppose liberal sprinklings of emoticons helps indicate the mood.

I agree.

[Ecurb Noselrub]

That you incorrectly assumed I was angry, then to unexpectedly discover that I wasn't is a fair and reasonable application of one of the definitions of "surprised." That simply means that I am simply not wrong, simply.

Now you are projecting on me.  Discovering that one is wrong does not necessitate surprise.

I am politely withdrawing from this interminable conversation.  Neither of us convinced the other, so we are at an impasse.  Good day.