DaveDodo007... I mean... Rationalskepticism,lol.

[Beatsong]

So I just went back to see whether Cito had actually said what you're ascribing to him, and saw where the whole to do with Metatron started. You wrote:

"Soundbites" to Metatron's disagreement? He appealed to chemophobia and "think of the children" emotional reasoning, and I responded with substantial rebuttals. When he had no other argument he relied on the idea that there is a conspiracy of clinicians drugging children to line their pockets - that is a conspiracy theory.

And then Metatron responded all prickly like, for the very understandable reason that he never actually said ANYTHING REMOTELY LIKE what you claimed he said. You basically just made it up.

And then despite seven more pages of him explaining what he DID actually think, and saying NOTHING of any such money making conspiracy, you come here with your sweet little innocent face all "What? ME misrepresenting?" and just repeat the lie.

And you wonder why you're running out of friends there.

[Mr.Samsa]

I disagree with the above.

[JimC]

I like being a wily reprobate...

[aspire1670]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Townhouse

Happy to dream.

Dear Pooter, I fixed it for you. No need to thank me.

[pErvinalia]

Regina has (apparently) quit the forum. Pulsar blames the goings on here

Just a short note to whom it may concern.
I'm outta here.

I wouldn't worry too much if I were you, Doug.

She's been gone before for some little while, and then returned again....

Don't count on it, Helen. Bridges have been burned, and I'm afraid some damage is irreversible. There are certain members here who've found a loophole in the FUA. They're using Rationalia to write what they really think about several Ratskep members. Attacking members on Ratskep isn't allowed, but attacking Ratskep members on other forums is without consequence. Or so they think, because of course there are consequences. I don't know what goes on in their mind, perhaps they don't realise that everyone can read their venomous attacks, perhaps they just don't care. Or perhaps they're fully aware of the damage they're causing, and this is exactly what they want. I find their behaviour cowardly, revolting, and extremely disappointing, even more so because it involves people who I thought had higher standards than mudslinging.

What is he talking about?? I'm the only one who has slagged off Frau Regina. I'd do it there if I had a sock or my original account. No one else has attacked her. Probably because we attacked Herr Surrender.

[Beatsong]

I disagree with the above.

Cool. You shouldn't have any problem quoting where he said something about Big Pharma drugging children for money then. Unless you're just lying of course, and Metatron's complaint of misrepresentation is entirely justified.

You know it pisses people off when you make up arguments they never made and ascribe those arguments to them. Doing it deliberately, and persisting in doing it when the error has been pointed out, is against the forum rules. If they ban you, you'll have noone to blame but yourself.

Not that that'll stop you whining about it of course.

[pErvinalia]

why should someone get banned for misrepresentation??

[Fallible]

Most don't. You have to be special.

[Mr.Samsa]

why should someone get banned for misrepresentation??

And of course there was no misrepresentation, that's why Beatsong can't show any misrepresentation.

[aspire1670]

So I just went back to see whether Cito had actually said what you're ascribing to him, and saw where the whole to do with Metatron started. You wrote:

"Soundbites" to Metatron's disagreement? He appealed to chemophobia and "think of the children" emotional reasoning, and I responded with substantial rebuttals. When he had no other argument he relied on the idea that there is a conspiracy of clinicians drugging children to line their pockets - that is a conspiracy theory.

And then Metatron responded all prickly like, for the very understandable reason that he never actually said ANYTHING REMOTELY LIKE what you claimed he said. You basically just made it up.

And then despite seven more pages of him explaining what he DID actually think, and saying NOTHING of any such money making conspiracy, you come here with your sweet little innocent face all "What? ME misrepresenting?" and just repeat the lie.

The Metatron made a whole series of posts that may be fairly interpreted as arguing some clinicians were drugging children for other than clinical reasons. He even wondered aloud what Mr Samsa stood to gain from supporting drug treatment for some children with ADHD. I found these posts by using the search terms "drugging children". If you can't find Metatron's explicit and implicit references to drugging for gain then you need to hone your search skills and pay more attention to reading for comprehension.
And you wonder why you're running out of friends there.

[rachelbean]

I am clearly the master troll

TL;DR in regards to the thread, but this image is wonderful

[DaveDodo007]

Regina has (apparently) quit the forum. Pulsar blames the goings on here

Just a short note to whom it may concern.
I'm outta here.

I wouldn't worry too much if I were you, Doug.

She's been gone before for some little while, and then returned again....

Don't count on it, Helen. Bridges have been burned, and I'm afraid some damage is irreversible. There are certain members here who've found a loophole in the FUA. They're using Rationalia to write what they really think about several Ratskep members. Attacking members on Ratskep isn't allowed, but attacking Ratskep members on other forums is without consequence. Or so they think, because of course there are consequences. I don't know what goes on in their mind, perhaps they don't realise that everyone can read their venomous attacks, perhaps they just don't care. Or perhaps they're fully aware of the damage they're causing, and this is exactly what they want. I find their behaviour cowardly, revolting, and extremely disappointing, even more so because it involves people who I thought had higher standards than mudslinging.

Wow! Sounds like ratskep is going full atheism+ were you are not allowed to discuss the forum outside the forum, you never go full atheism+.

[rainbow]

Wow! Sound like ratskep is going full atheism+ were you are not allowed to discuss the forum outside the forum, you never go full atheism+.

Quite sensible.

[Fallible]

My current theory is that there was some internet event that consisted of signals sent through the screen hypnotising any members who were online at the time leading to them wildly exaggerating everything they see happen.

[Beatsong]

why should someone get banned for misrepresentation??

And of course there was no misrepresentation, that's why Beatsong can't show any misrepresentation.

You're fucking hilarious.

When he had no other argument he relied on the idea that there is a conspiracy of clinicians drugging children to line their pockets - that is a conspiracy theory.

Oh hang on, let me help your failing eyesight even more:

When he had no other argument he relied on the idea that there is a conspiracy of clinicians drugging children to line their pockets - that is a conspiracy theory.

Never, not in one single place anywhere in the thread up to that point, did Metatron express such an idea. And I'm not being overly literal or pedantic or hair splitting. At no point did he express anything REMOTELY LIKE that idea. Because of course, if he had done, you'd be able to quote the place where he'd done so, wouldn't you?

That quote of yours was only on page 3 of the thread, so it's the work of a moment for you, or anyone else, to go back, read the few posts Metatron had made up to that point, and confirm that they don't contain anything that could possibly be construed as meaning what you are claiming. If that's not misrepresentation, then I'd be interested in what it is. Maybe a banana, or an astronaut. God knows what concept of language you're working from where making up a statement somebody has never made and saying they've made it, doesn't count as misrepresentation.

Although you may have a point. "Misrepresentation" suggests twisting something with a conceivable element of truth to wring an untruth out of it. What you're doing here would be better described as "lying".