Seriously, that's not what I mean

April 20, 2006 10:14 PM

Two people have assumed, incorrectly, that I don't think DUI offenders are criminals. I would like to vent without further derailing the thread. (more inside)
posted by mullacc to Etiquette/Policy at 10:14 PM (28 comments total)

I think their interpretations of my comments are absurd. My first comment, an actual attempt to address the question, simply conveyed my brother’s experience and opinions as delivered to me. I put “real criminals” in quotes because I did not want it to seem like I endorsed his definition – I obviously do not.

Maybe my use of quotes was too subtle, because tiamat did not get it. I thought his comment was inflammatory and his attitude sanctimonious. So I responded angrily and I should not have done so (I even emailed jessamyn afterwards to confess). I have no idea how blenderfish managed to so misread my response to tiamat, but he came up with this wonderful comment:

“The rest of us not wanting you or your friend to kill us or the people we love is not sanctimony. If you can't see the difference, you deserve to be jailed and yelled at until you do.“

I think tiamat’s attitude was sanctimonious, not his actual beliefs. In fact, it should be obvious that I share his beliefs. It’s incredibly infuriating to have misinterpreted comments thrown in my face like this. I’d have vented via email, but blenderfish does not have one posted. And if it still isn’t painful obvious, I do think DUI offenders are real criminals and would never knowingly express anything less.
posted by mullacc at 10:16 PM on April 20, 2006

(Good on you for taking this here (since email was not an option), rather than further stinking up the thread in question).
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:18 PM on April 20, 2006

I retract my post. If I could delete it, I would. It is not relevant to the AskMe thread, and I will be more mindful of such relevance in the future.
posted by blenderfish at 10:19 PM on April 20, 2006

"If I could delete it, I would. It is not relevant to the AskMe thread, and I will be more mindful of such relevance in the future."

I don't understand this metaphor.
posted by klangklangston at 10:23 PM on April 20, 2006

This is how the system should work, good on you, mullacc.

(I considered MeTa'ing those comments when I read them, but was waiting for someone to mention seatbelts.)
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 10:24 PM on April 20, 2006

Thanks for the retraction, blenderfish.
posted by mullacc at 10:29 PM on April 20, 2006

awww, group hug!
posted by blue_beetle at 10:33 PM on April 20, 2006

tiamat wins this month's award for "biggest dipshit with lowest user number." I love it when newbs make a good showing of themselves no less than I love it when old timers come out of the wood work to deepthroat their own boots.

Of course, I have never glanced over someone's words half-drunk and 2/3 stupid and misinterpreted what they meant. Never.
posted by scarabic at 10:57 PM on April 20, 2006

wow, I'd forgotten there were good reasons to read MeTa besides flameout entertainment. good on everyone in here!
posted by shmegegge at 11:18 PM on April 20, 2006

now that that's out of the way, can we get into some sort of fight about drunk driving?

me, personally, i don't think it's all that bad.
posted by Hat Maui at 2:43 AM on April 21, 2006

drunk driving? I can never get the damn drunk started (where does the key go?)
posted by patricio at 3:25 AM on April 21, 2006

mullacc, I apologize for misinterpreting your statements, and any offensive doing so has caused you. Upon rereading your post it is somewhat ambiguous, I certainly was not trying to paste an opinion there that you did not hold, I'll take you at your word that I read your comment wrong. It was my mistake.
posted by tiamat at 4:01 AM on April 21, 2006

Metafilter: When old timers come out of the wood work to deepthroat their own boots

[too long?]
posted by tiamat at 4:08 AM on April 21, 2006

Not for a mouth like that. Wait, what?
posted by Loto at 4:17 AM on April 21, 2006

I was being sanctimonious, no question. Given the point I wanted to make, I choose the method of how to make it. In addition, I hide it in sub tags to avoid a total derail, and apologized at either end of the comment for the derailish nature of said comment.

Your comment is much the same. Given the point you wanted to make, you choose a method of how to make it, including the very dialectic line: "I say fuck off with your sanctimonious bullshit."

At least I can argue that the insult I paid you was accidental, not intended personally, and has since been apologized for.
posted by tiamat at 4:21 AM on April 21, 2006

I got mullacc's email last night and didn't think anything needed to be done with the thread at the time but the blenderfish/mullah derail/misunderstanding was way OT and removed.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 4:36 AM on April 21, 2006

Thanks, tiamat. Apologies for the fit of angry in my reponse.
posted by mullacc at 6:01 AM on April 21, 2006

er, anger not angry
posted by mullacc at 6:01 AM on April 21, 2006

"I have no idea how blenderfish managed to so misread my response to tiamat"

I keep giggling when I get to this part.
posted by fleacircus at 6:38 AM on April 21, 2006

Goddamnit, everybody is being far too apologetic and polite in here.
It's the end of metafilter, I tell you. Where are the flameouts of yore?

Also, "the fit of angry" is a much cooler expression.
posted by CunningLinguist at 6:55 AM on April 21, 2006

MetaFilter: Fit of Angry
MetaFilter: Er, anger not angry
posted by Eideteker at 7:21 AM on April 21, 2006

Yeah, I like "fit of angry" too.
posted by spaghetti at 7:32 AM on April 21, 2006

WHAT.
THE.
FUCK.
EIDETEKER?

Who do you think you are? I'll surrender my right hand before I let you push me around. You'll have my bloody stump on your conSCIENCE!

If you aren't banned in the next 5 minutes, I'll ban myself!

um....!!!

Eh, I can't get worked up enough to really flame-out...sorry, folks.
posted by mullacc at 7:41 AM on April 21, 2006

He was doing so well, too.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 9:05 AM on April 21, 2006

Where are the flameouts of yore?

You mean "yore" as in last week? Ahhhh memories!
posted by KevinSkomsvold at 9:22 AM on April 21, 2006

I must confessed that I'm pissed and slightly baffled.
posted by Astro Zombie at 11:14 AM on April 21, 2006

Astro Zombie, if you where British instead of Minnesotan that would have a different meaning.
Where are the flameouts of yore?, oh I'm sure a certain someone will be called out or call someone out in a day or two... might have to wait till monday tho'.
posted by edgeways at 11:30 AM on April 21, 2006

Yeah, I think, as a take-away from all this, great care should be exercised when using "fuck off" in an argument, since ever-grosser misunderstandings are fairly likely to follow.

Glad this got all cleared up, though.
posted by blenderfish at 12:36 AM on April 23, 2006