Jonny turned and grinned when he saw the familiar green eyes.
"That's exactely what I was about to ask you."
"Jess, it's way too early in the morning to start mind games. what the heck are
you talking about?"
oh. ok. yeah, you're a writer.
2) I've actively tried to engage you in private conversations about this, and was not even granted the simple respect of a reply,
Yes the reason for this is that I don't take well to you lying in public.
ah... so that's your logic for ignoring attempts to talk to you about this privately... because you don't like me lying in public...
you're making even less sense than I am, Jason... and that takes some doing...
The substantive, corrective criticisms I've offered are in the first post, which you've spent the entire thread trying to pretend don't exist
oh... your critique that consisted of 'here's where your facts are wrong', despite the fact that IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE FACTUALLY OFF THE MARK, DEPICTING THE MEDIA'S KNEE-JERK REACTIONS TO THE END OF THE WORLD ETC ETC... satire, my dear boy, takes many a varied forms.
I'll admit it wasn't my best piece to date, if that'll placate you to the point where you're actually talking about the writing
rather than me...
trying to deflect from, and a second article worming your way out of. The second post containing substantive constructive criticism is this one, in this clause: grow a pair.
Jason... I'm pretty sure you see it as 'worming' for a couple of reasons...
first of all, it's because you've made a judgment call on the article without waiting for the explanation. yes, I know you 'predicted' that an explanation might be forthcoming, but predicting it as 'worming' rather than waiting for the explanation has effectively seen you pre-judge the whole episode...
and, given that you've approached this with a completely inflexible idea of the truth of the matter, without arming yourself with all of the facts, your argument is necessarily flawed - badly and, it would seem, irreversibly.
like I said - I don't have a problem with you not liking my writing, or me for that matter (although I'm not entirely sure what
I've done to deserve that... but meh - you can't make everyone
happy all the time, right?)
I do have a problem with is that your 'critique' so far has been little short of a personal attack (whatever the motivation) - without having all of the facts at your disposal.
it's sad, you know - like I said in the last PM I sent you, I value your opinion, as you're clearly a smart chap... but, for whatever petty reason it is this time, you've decided that I've stepped on your toes or over the line or something...
constructive criticism would be fine. a broadside about how shit my writing is just doesn't cut it...
sorry Jason - it's not good enough.