To refuse to engage with anyone who uses of instead of have?

[ExitPursuedByAKoalaBear]

That's it.

cruel humour when addressing strangers online? I would leave that to the likes of King Joffrey....

"And I think you know you're trying to make me feel shit by implying that I'm not up to the job."

Yes I agree that is what Cote is trying to do. It takes a certain type of person to sit down infront of a computer an do that to someone on more than one thread. Please try to ignore this thread now LRD.

"What's funny about LRD using the word 'disablist'"

It is funny because all OP said was that she won't debate with people who write could of instead of could have, the vast majority of whom will have no disability whatsoever. LRD calling her "disablist" is ridiculous.

Going by that line, it is disablist to criticise any behaviour, since in every population there will be a few people who genuinely can't do it even if they try.

Even more ridiculous is her falsely accusing me of laughing at disablism because she apparently thinks "disablist" (in quotation marks) is the same thing as disablism (a different word, without quotation marks). And this is apparently a "disagreement" in her world

I know you want to be on her side because you are fellow FWR regulars, but seriously...

"her intellectual honesty"

Like refusing to admit she misunderstood my post and falsely accused me of laughing at disablism. Yes, I'm sure her undergrad students will love that.

Not that it matters, but I don't think I called the OP 'disablist', though you've claimed many times that I did. I think I said took issue with the judgement, not the poster.

I do feel there is a fair bit of disablism.

And I don't think buffy is 'on my side' because of FWR. You are currently a FWR regular, and I've nodded along to many of your recent posts, but that doesn't mean you and I agree.

"I think laughing at me calling out the OP's disablism is laughing at disablism."

Good grief, woman. And I was laughing at you, not disablism. The very word "disablist" was in quotation marks. How many times do you need to be told this?

And you weren't "calling it out", because it wasn't true. OP said nothing about disabilities.

Cote, with respect, you might as well joke about nazis. You dont heckle somebody like that over their typos, or spellings, in whatever manner you arf, whether at disablism or disablist, when commenting on somebodys post. It is cruel, it is unnecessary, and with such a good level of English, you should ensure to communicate clearly, even if you give a tinkly little laugh at somebodys point of view. Why not just state that you disagree with what was said, rather than arf? What are you, a dog?

I'm not a "fellow FWR regular"

Lowest of the low to try that one!

Hi everyone,

Any chance you could take a squizz at the (grammatically faultless) talk guidelines, particularly the part about being deliberately inflammatory.

Thanks.

• LRDtheFeministDragon Sun 31-Aug-14 22:46:23

Yes, the 'disablist card'.

Excuse me for calling you out on being disablist, so very unfair of me. hmm*

Think you did call the OP disablist, LRD.

You're correct, prof, and I apologize for that.

"I don't think I called the OP 'disablist'"

Are you serious?

Let me refresh your memory:

LRDtheFeministDragon Sun 31-Aug-14 22:46:23
Yes, the 'disablist card'. Excuse me for calling you out on being disablist, so very unfair of me.

And that was a reply to OP's post mentioning "disablist card". So yes, you called OP "disablist".

Quintessentially - "You dont heckle somebody like that over their typos, or spellings, in whatever manner you arf, whether at disablism or disablist, when commenting on somebody's post"

I didn't laugh at typos or spellings. I laughed at LRD calling OP "disablist" out of the blue.

"What are you, a dog?"

Perhaps, in an earlier life. I certainly find it hard to let go when I find a good bone to chew

The spelling is different on draw and drawer but the pronunciation is the same.

It most definitely is not.

Anyway, LRD, I forgive you for misrepresenting what I have said, accusing me of disablism, refusing to accept you misunderstood, and various other mishaps. See you around

I think any sarcasm or arfs can be applied to the full picture, and you are heckling a poster who is upset at people being dismissive of typos and spellings. You take a very superior attitude. That arf at "disablist" points to more than just one post, in my opinion. Thats how I saw it, a culmination.

I'm not totally sure that's what MNHQ meant when they suggested being inflammatory is against the Talk Guidelines.

I did not misunderstand you.

I do feel some of your posts are quite disablist - because they are.

Passive aggressive much? Whatever floats your world....

That was to Cote

I figured.