Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › South Carolina wants separate currency for state
- This topic has 135 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 10 months ago by
briansd1.
-
AuthorPosts
-
February 16, 2011 at 7:48 AM #668056February 16, 2011 at 1:41 PM #667023
urbanrealtor
Participant[quote=Rich Toscano]
…
As for the second part of your email, I really, really dislike it when people accuse me of being dishonest. Because I’m not dishonest. So it is offensive to me when people assume dishonesty rather than a simple miscommunication.
…Next time there is a disagreement, please, ask me about it before accusing me of being a liar.[/quote]
Wow.
This really went in a direction I did not intend.
I was intending to poke fun at a perceived inconsistency in your position.
The way I phrased it was poorly constructed and not well thought out.
Thus in the over-literal monotone of text my attempt a jocularity was both accusatory and generally dickish.
The fact that it was said with a grin did not convey and instead my post presented as literal and explicit denigration to your integrity in a public way.
That was not my intention at all and for the result I apologize sincerely.
It was quite foolish on my part to phrase it as I did in writing.
While I have enjoyed the few verbal joking debates that I have had with you, this is not the first time, I made a (written) joke with you that was taken very differently than I intended.
The fault is nobody’s but mine for misreading the social dynamic.
Apparently it takes me a few times of committing such errors to comprehend the pattern but it is very clear to me now.
From this point forward I shall undertake to keep my written communication with you very literal.
I do not think of you as a liar and I really did not mean to go in that direction.
I do not think that perceptual inconsistency denotes (or even necessarily connotes) dishonesty.
I take reputation as it regards personal integrity very seriously.
If someone accused me publicly of dishonesty (which, again, I did not mean to do but apparently did) I would take a very dim view of it (and likely address it with an attorney).
Again, my apologies.February 16, 2011 at 1:41 PM #667082Participant[quote=Rich Toscano]
…
As for the second part of your email, I really, really dislike it when people accuse me of being dishonest. Because I’m not dishonest. So it is offensive to me when people assume dishonesty rather than a simple miscommunication.
…Next time there is a disagreement, please, ask me about it before accusing me of being a liar.[/quote]
Wow.
This really went in a direction I did not intend.
I was intending to poke fun at a perceived inconsistency in your position.
The way I phrased it was poorly constructed and not well thought out.
Thus in the over-literal monotone of text my attempt a jocularity was both accusatory and generally dickish.
The fact that it was said with a grin did not convey and instead my post presented as literal and explicit denigration to your integrity in a public way.
That was not my intention at all and for the result I apologize sincerely.
It was quite foolish on my part to phrase it as I did in writing.
While I have enjoyed the few verbal joking debates that I have had with you, this is not the first time, I made a (written) joke with you that was taken very differently than I intended.
The fault is nobody’s but mine for misreading the social dynamic.
Apparently it takes me a few times of committing such errors to comprehend the pattern but it is very clear to me now.
From this point forward I shall undertake to keep my written communication with you very literal.
I do not think of you as a liar and I really did not mean to go in that direction.
I do not think that perceptual inconsistency denotes (or even necessarily connotes) dishonesty.
I take reputation as it regards personal integrity very seriously.
If someone accused me publicly of dishonesty (which, again, I did not mean to do but apparently did) I would take a very dim view of it (and likely address it with an attorney).
Again, my apologies.February 16, 2011 at 1:41 PM #667689Participant[quote=Rich Toscano]
…
As for the second part of your email, I really, really dislike it when people accuse me of being dishonest. Because I’m not dishonest. So it is offensive to me when people assume dishonesty rather than a simple miscommunication.
…Next time there is a disagreement, please, ask me about it before accusing me of being a liar.[/quote]
Wow.
This really went in a direction I did not intend.
I was intending to poke fun at a perceived inconsistency in your position.
The way I phrased it was poorly constructed and not well thought out.
Thus in the over-literal monotone of text my attempt a jocularity was both accusatory and generally dickish.
The fact that it was said with a grin did not convey and instead my post presented as literal and explicit denigration to your integrity in a public way.
That was not my intention at all and for the result I apologize sincerely.
It was quite foolish on my part to phrase it as I did in writing.
While I have enjoyed the few verbal joking debates that I have had with you, this is not the first time, I made a (written) joke with you that was taken very differently than I intended.
The fault is nobody’s but mine for misreading the social dynamic.
Apparently it takes me a few times of committing such errors to comprehend the pattern but it is very clear to me now.
From this point forward I shall undertake to keep my written communication with you very literal.
I do not think of you as a liar and I really did not mean to go in that direction.
I do not think that perceptual inconsistency denotes (or even necessarily connotes) dishonesty.
I take reputation as it regards personal integrity very seriously.
If someone accused me publicly of dishonesty (which, again, I did not mean to do but apparently did) I would take a very dim view of it (and likely address it with an attorney).
Again, my apologies.February 16, 2011 at 1:41 PM #667827Participant[quote=Rich Toscano]
…
As for the second part of your email, I really, really dislike it when people accuse me of being dishonest. Because I’m not dishonest. So it is offensive to me when people assume dishonesty rather than a simple miscommunication.
…Next time there is a disagreement, please, ask me about it before accusing me of being a liar.[/quote]
Wow.
This really went in a direction I did not intend.
I was intending to poke fun at a perceived inconsistency in your position.
The way I phrased it was poorly constructed and not well thought out.
Thus in the over-literal monotone of text my attempt a jocularity was both accusatory and generally dickish.
The fact that it was said with a grin did not convey and instead my post presented as literal and explicit denigration to your integrity in a public way.
That was not my intention at all and for the result I apologize sincerely.
It was quite foolish on my part to phrase it as I did in writing.
While I have enjoyed the few verbal joking debates that I have had with you, this is not the first time, I made a (written) joke with you that was taken very differently than I intended.
The fault is nobody’s but mine for misreading the social dynamic.
Apparently it takes me a few times of committing such errors to comprehend the pattern but it is very clear to me now.
From this point forward I shall undertake to keep my written communication with you very literal.
I do not think of you as a liar and I really did not mean to go in that direction.
I do not think that perceptual inconsistency denotes (or even necessarily connotes) dishonesty.
I take reputation as it regards personal integrity very seriously.
If someone accused me publicly of dishonesty (which, again, I did not mean to do but apparently did) I would take a very dim view of it (and likely address it with an attorney).
Again, my apologies.February 16, 2011 at 1:41 PM #668169Participant[quote=Rich Toscano]
…
As for the second part of your email, I really, really dislike it when people accuse me of being dishonest. Because I’m not dishonest. So it is offensive to me when people assume dishonesty rather than a simple miscommunication.
…Next time there is a disagreement, please, ask me about it before accusing me of being a liar.[/quote]
Wow.
This really went in a direction I did not intend.
I was intending to poke fun at a perceived inconsistency in your position.
The way I phrased it was poorly constructed and not well thought out.
Thus in the over-literal monotone of text my attempt a jocularity was both accusatory and generally dickish.
The fact that it was said with a grin did not convey and instead my post presented as literal and explicit denigration to your integrity in a public way.
That was not my intention at all and for the result I apologize sincerely.
It was quite foolish on my part to phrase it as I did in writing.
While I have enjoyed the few verbal joking debates that I have had with you, this is not the first time, I made a (written) joke with you that was taken very differently than I intended.
The fault is nobody’s but mine for misreading the social dynamic.
Apparently it takes me a few times of committing such errors to comprehend the pattern but it is very clear to me now.
From this point forward I shall undertake to keep my written communication with you very literal.
I do not think of you as a liar and I really did not mean to go in that direction.
I do not think that perceptual inconsistency denotes (or even necessarily connotes) dishonesty.
I take reputation as it regards personal integrity very seriously.
If someone accused me publicly of dishonesty (which, again, I did not mean to do but apparently did) I would take a very dim view of it (and likely address it with an attorney).
Again, my apologies.February 16, 2011 at 3:34 PM #667089
Rich ToscanoKeymasterOh boy, well now I’m embarrassed for flying off the handle like that. Sorry if I misread the point of your post. (In my possible defense, I have the flu or something so my brain is running at less than half speed today). Thanks for writing that nice followup… for my part I will try to imbue your posts with a jocular tone as I read them so I am less likely to make the mistake of misunderstanding the point. It’s not as easy when you don’t specifically mention sharks.
Rich
February 16, 2011 at 3:34 PM #667150Rich ToscanoKeymasterOh boy, well now I’m embarrassed for flying off the handle like that. Sorry if I misread the point of your post. (In my possible defense, I have the flu or something so my brain is running at less than half speed today). Thanks for writing that nice followup… for my part I will try to imbue your posts with a jocular tone as I read them so I am less likely to make the mistake of misunderstanding the point. It’s not as easy when you don’t specifically mention sharks.
Rich
February 16, 2011 at 3:34 PM #667756Rich ToscanoKeymasterOh boy, well now I’m embarrassed for flying off the handle like that. Sorry if I misread the point of your post. (In my possible defense, I have the flu or something so my brain is running at less than half speed today). Thanks for writing that nice followup… for my part I will try to imbue your posts with a jocular tone as I read them so I am less likely to make the mistake of misunderstanding the point. It’s not as easy when you don’t specifically mention sharks.
Rich
February 16, 2011 at 3:34 PM #667895Rich ToscanoKeymasterOh boy, well now I’m embarrassed for flying off the handle like that. Sorry if I misread the point of your post. (In my possible defense, I have the flu or something so my brain is running at less than half speed today). Thanks for writing that nice followup… for my part I will try to imbue your posts with a jocular tone as I read them so I am less likely to make the mistake of misunderstanding the point. It’s not as easy when you don’t specifically mention sharks.
Rich
February 16, 2011 at 3:34 PM #668238Rich ToscanoKeymasterOh boy, well now I’m embarrassed for flying off the handle like that. Sorry if I misread the point of your post. (In my possible defense, I have the flu or something so my brain is running at less than half speed today). Thanks for writing that nice followup… for my part I will try to imbue your posts with a jocular tone as I read them so I am less likely to make the mistake of misunderstanding the point. It’s not as easy when you don’t specifically mention sharks.
Rich
February 16, 2011 at 9:17 PM #667198patb
ParticipantWhat would they call it the?
The BuckTooth?
The Hilbilly?
The Redneck Credit?
February 16, 2011 at 9:17 PM #667259ParticipantWhat would they call it the?
The BuckTooth?
The Hilbilly?
The Redneck Credit?
February 16, 2011 at 9:17 PM #667867ParticipantWhat would they call it the?
The BuckTooth?
The Hilbilly?
The Redneck Credit?
February 16, 2011 at 9:17 PM #668005ParticipantWhat would they call it the?
The BuckTooth?
The Hilbilly?
The Redneck Credit?
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.