The artificial intelligence MEGATHREAD

[Limnor]

Sure!
IHQ, Marcus, sock puppet, Wang Chang, malkie, Limnor, Shulem, malkie (you seemed to want it that way).

malkie asks MG who is on MG’s ignore list. MG in reply to malkie, explains that malkie is on MG’s ignore list. Farcical.

You simply couldn’t make this up.

Schrodinger’s Ignore List: both ignoring and replying at the same time.

[Marcus]

malkie asks MG who is on MG’s ignore list. MG in reply to malkie, explains that malkie is on MG’s ignore list. Farcical.

You simply couldn’t make this up.

Schrodinger’s Ignore List: both ignoring and replying at the same time.

Well, Malkie was on the list twice...

[MG 2.0]

Hey malkie you made the list twice! Congrats!

Thanks! I appreciate having MG recognize how special I am

OTOH, I'm not sure if the second one is me, or is a poster called "malkie (you seemed to want it that way)". If the former, I'm not sure what made MG decide I "seemed to want it that way". In any case, it seems to me to be best for him to choose whether to put me on his "Foes" list, or just continue to ignore me old school.

Hi malkie, if you're not opposed to it I would like to take you off of ignore and be able to read and respond to you now and then. Truthfully, you don't have the same pattern(s) of behavior as the others listed in the ignore list that I find impossible to do any kind of a 'work-a-round' with.

If you are opposed to that, let me know. I'd like to give it another shot. Up to you. I know you may have issues with my posting style, etc., but if you don't find it too disconcerting...we can keep the channel open.

Regards,
MG

[Limnor]

Why would you need permission to stop ignoring someone?

[malkie]

Why would you need permission to stop ignoring someone?

Perhaps you might ask permission if you didn't understand that the ignore function is one way?

[I Have Questions]

Why would you need permission to stop ignoring someone?

Perhaps you might ask permission if you didn't understand that the ignore function is one way?

Or if you’d been conditioned your whole life to defer taking responsibility for your own decisions and need to be told what to do and what not to do by someone in authority over you. I guess that means MG sees us all as having authority over his decisions.

[malkie]

Thanks! I appreciate having MG recognize how special I am

OTOH, I'm not sure if the second one is me, or is a poster called "malkie (you seemed to want it that way)". If the former, I'm not sure what made MG decide I "seemed to want it that way". In any case, it seems to me to be best for him to choose whether to put me on his "Foes" list, or just continue to ignore me old school.

Hi malkie, if you're not opposed to it I would like to take you off of ignore and be able to read and respond to you now and then. Truthfully, you don't have the same pattern(s) of behavior as the others listed in the ignore list that I find impossible to do any kind of a 'work-a-round' with.

If you are opposed to that, let me know. I'd like to give it another shot. Up to you. I know you may have issues with my posting style, etc., but if you don't find it too disconcerting...we can keep the channel open.

Regards,
MG

MG, I really, really don't get it. What is your issue here, and how does it become my decision?

A couple of pages ago I noted that I suspected you already had me on ignore, because you were not responding to my replies to you. Not that this was anything new, but since the topic of this part of the thread was your choices of who to ignore, I thought it was relevant.

You concluded from this comment, or some other information, that I wanted you to put me on ignore, and you did so, somewhat to my surprise. Perhaps it was my suggestions about how you might make the decision, which I intended to be helpful: either go with your gut before the coin-toss makes the choice for you, or you turn to a trusted AI friend and ask for an evaluation of the relationship. Either way, the final decision is still, rightly, yours.

But since I can never tell whether I'm on your ignore list or not, and you can choose to see my posts even if I am, I'm puzzled. But ... what the hey, right? You pays your money and you takes your chances.

[Limnor]

MG, I really, really don't get it. What is your issue here, and how does it become my decision?

If you put some meta into it, MG is just acting in line with his stated philosophy. Namely that God cannot be God without relationships. MG just wants to control the terms of the relationship through the ignore list while allowing you your agency.

[MG 2.0]

Why would you need permission to stop ignoring someone?

Perhaps you might ask permission if you didn't understand that the ignore function is one way?

After a long period of time I’ve decided that my preference is to ‘channel in’ or talk with those people who are not so focused on ad hominem and/or personal insults as the primary modus operandi. I realize that we all fail at times to be understanding and show grace towards others. When it becomes the norm with some individuals, however, I’m not as into that. It simply devolves into a slug fest. I’ve been subject to failure at times in showing empathy and grace to others.

I’ve been consciously trying to move away from that for a while now even though it’s not too difficult to get sucked into the ‘drama’ that some individuals seem eager to create by throwing out words and insults that aren’t true. Being the minority population of ‘one’ adds to the dilemma I often find myself in. Fight fire with fire or back off. That’s why I began with the TTOC response.

Anyway, in your case I don’t want to put myself out there as I did with Limnor and then find out that from the very beginning I wasn’t trusted. Good communication cannot take place under those circumstances. I would just as well communicate about the church, my place in it, and my beliefs with those that at the outset have a modicum of trust in me as a person. Some will SAY I lost that trust. I SAY that is part of their modus operandi to simply muddy the waters across the board.

THAT is why, in your case, I’m asking whether you are open to honest dialogue without a hidden agenda. Sharing ideas. Disagreeing but not being disagreeable. Truthfully? Up to this point I’ve trusted that you might be someone that can have an honest discussion in the same way two people might do if they were sharing a meal together.

There are some folks here that I would be fairly confident would embarrass themselves and me if we were at lunch. No more food fights for me.

Regards,
MG

[malkie]

MG, I really, really don't get it. What is your issue here, and how does it become my decision?

If you put some meta into it, MG is just acting in line with his stated philosophy. Namely that God cannot be God without relationships. MG just wants to control the terms of the relationship through the ignore list while allowing you your agency.

Excellent analysis - I'd never have thought of that!