Total Posts:51|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Making people look stupid

YYW
Posts: 36,342
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 12:23:04 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I had dinner not long ago with some friends of mine. We all went out, and among other things the George Zimmerman case, Paula Dean, and Barack Obama all came up. Compared to some of my friends, I'm a radically left-leaning liberal. Compared to others, I might as well be the more youthful reincarnation of George W. Bush. I know that may sound odd, but here's the situation.

We had a discussion about the extent to which George Zimmerman profiled Trayvon Martin, whether or not Paula Dean was a racist, etc. I had been drinking before we went out (there was about ten of us) -but I say that only to illustrate the fact that when I've been drinking, I'm quire a bit less likely to hold my tongue when people say insurmountably stupid things.

So, one friend of mine made the argument that George Zimmerman was more or less an innocent person, framed the case as an issue of second amendment rights and self defense rights, and concluded that the only justifiable outcome was to let Zimmerman go. He spent, to the best of my recollection, about three and a half minutes voicing his opinion. I thought it best not to say anything then because, after all, this was nothing more than a social gathering. So, I went out for a cigarette.

Two others followed me out, one of them gay, and we talked about both how attractive Christian Bale was, how fantastic the Dark Knight was, etc. We went back in, and the old friend of mine continued to express his thoughts on the nuances of the case once I returned. Another friend who I was really close with in college changed the subject. She and I were both getting pissed, and she was trying to politely pacify the situation in the most amicable way possible. The other guy either missed the social cue, or didn't give a single fvck. Others started to weigh in, after we placed our order. The conversation probably went on for about ten minutes after I returned from my smoke break... at which point I'd had enough.

I folded my hands, looked across the table, and said something to the effect of "Alright then. Let's explore some of the finer points of the argument you've been advancing." I calmly dissected his argument, before the entire table, and point by point broke down everything he said, and refuted it in such a way that whether he thought I agreed with his conclusion or not, there was no possible way he could have come back -all of this after having been fairly quiet during the meal. He tried to interrupt me about three or four times, and failed. I cut him off every time, and continued to rip his argument apart.

When I was done, I said, again, something to the effect of "In all fairness, I don't expect someone with no legal experience, no noteworthy expertise on legal procedure, no grounding in constitutional law, no practical ethical experience, and no properly informed understanding of the facts in question to be able to form a coherent opinion about this case. So, it's all good. Just carry on." The table turned and looked at me, and the guy I was talking to was dumbfounded.

His literal response was "If you would stop trying to make me look stupid and listen..."

I said that making him look stupid was hardly my objective, that even if that was the effect of my rebutting his idiotic series of claims, that making him look stupid was not my intent, and that if he felt offended by what I said, that I sincerely apologized.

Another person at the table asked me why, whenever someone says something that's obviously in error, that I feel the need to point it out when it doesn't make a bit of difference. I was blamed for ruining the tone of the dinner, as well, by two of the lot in attendance. I was the one, not the blundering jackass who went on and on about how Zimmerman was a hero... but me. I stated, perhaps louder than I should, that I had forgotten why I hadn't been out with those lot since freshman year in college but now the memory no longer escaped me.

Half of the group went downtown for more drinks after the meal was over (the half that agreed with me). Half of the lot went their separate ways. Drinking afterward was fine. That which preceded it, less so. Even still, one of the other people in the group took me to task for having opened my mouth, for having essentially humiliated another person we were out with, etc. They thought it was personal. It wasn't about the other person. It was about the bullsh!t that came out of his mouth. While it was not my intention, apparently I made him look quite stupid...

I regret nothing.

Anyone else ever had an experience like that?
Tsar of DDO
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 8:23:14 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Well, I'm assuming you do want to hear opinions on this, so I'll bite.

His position is held by some people who would have that educational background. So the opinions themselves don't exist by virtue of ignorance. As far as that's concerned, pointing out what he doesn't have did more to demean him than the argument he forwarded (which is why I don't buy that you meant no harm and your apology was sincere). Also, maybe I'm missing some context, but your presentation of the exact gravity of your comment and resulting "axis of humiliation" in that conversation seems to me a bit skewed. My friend group is a lot less mature than yours, but nevertheless if someone said something like that, true or not, he'd be the one humiliating himself. So, that's my take on it.

By the way, why didn't you just tell him that no one cared about his conversation outright (in a lighthearted way of course), instead of dishing out subtle hints that leave room for its continuance?

and also
So, I went out for a cigarette.
smh

I regret nothing.
smh

That is all :)
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Eitan_Zohar
Posts: 2,697
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 9:00:24 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 12:23:04 AM, YYW wrote:
I had dinner not long ago with some friends of mine. We all went out, and among other things the George Zimmerman case, Paula Dean, and Barack Obama all came up. Compared to some of my friends, I'm a radically left-leaning liberal. Compared to others, I might as well be the more youthful reincarnation of George W. Bush. I know that may sound odd, but here's the situation.

We had a discussion about the extent to which George Zimmerman profiled Trayvon Martin, whether or not Paula Dean was a racist, etc. I had been drinking before we went out (there was about ten of us) -but I say that only to illustrate the fact that when I've been drinking, I'm quire a bit less likely to hold my tongue when people say insurmountably stupid things.

So, one friend of mine made the argument that George Zimmerman was more or less an innocent person, framed the case as an issue of second amendment rights and self defense rights, and concluded that the only justifiable outcome was to let Zimmerman go. He spent, to the best of my recollection, about three and a half minutes voicing his opinion. I thought it best not to say anything then because, after all, this was nothing more than a social gathering. So, I went out for a cigarette.

Two others followed me out, one of them gay, and we talked about both how attractive Christian Bale was, how fantastic the Dark Knight was, etc. We went back in, and the old friend of mine continued to express his thoughts on the nuances of the case once I returned. Another friend who I was really close with in college changed the subject. She and I were both getting pissed, and she was trying to politely pacify the situation in the most amicable way possible. The other guy either missed the social cue, or didn't give a single fvck. Others started to weigh in, after we placed our order. The conversation probably went on for about ten minutes after I returned from my smoke break... at which point I'd had enough.

I folded my hands, looked across the table, and said something to the effect of "Alright then. Let's explore some of the finer points of the argument you've been advancing." I calmly dissected his argument, before the entire table, and point by point broke down everything he said, and refuted it in such a way that whether he thought I agreed with his conclusion or not, there was no possible way he could have come back -all of this after having been fairly quiet during the meal. He tried to interrupt me about three or four times, and failed. I cut him off every time, and continued to rip his argument apart.

When I was done, I said, again, something to the effect of "In all fairness, I don't expect someone with no legal experience, no noteworthy expertise on legal procedure, no grounding in constitutional law, no practical ethical experience, and no properly informed understanding of the facts in question to be able to form a coherent opinion about this case. So, it's all good. Just carry on." The table turned and looked at me, and the guy I was talking to was dumbfounded.

His literal response was "If you would stop trying to make me look stupid and listen..."

I said that making him look stupid was hardly my objective, that even if that was the effect of my rebutting his idiotic series of claims, that making him look stupid was not my intent, and that if he felt offended by what I said, that I sincerely apologized.

Another person at the table asked me why, whenever someone says something that's obviously in error, that I feel the need to point it out when it doesn't make a bit of difference. I was blamed for ruining the tone of the dinner, as well, by two of the lot in attendance. I was the one, not the blundering jackass who went on and on about how Zimmerman was a hero... but me. I stated, perhaps louder than I should, that I had forgotten why I hadn't been out with those lot since freshman year in college but now the memory no longer escaped me.

Half of the group went downtown for more drinks after the meal was over (the half that agreed with me). Half of the lot went their separate ways. Drinking afterward was fine. That which preceded it, less so. Even still, one of the other people in the group took me to task for having opened my mouth, for having essentially humiliated another person we were out with, etc. They thought it was personal. It wasn't about the other person. It was about the bullsh!t that came out of his mouth. While it was not my intention, apparently I made him look quite stupid...

I regret nothing.

Anyone else ever had an experience like that?

No, I'm very bad at debating in real life. When I open my mouth all my skills and memory flush down the toilet. I can't think at all unless I can type the words in front of me.

Comments/questions/concerns:

1. This was an awesome story.

2. People still discuss TDK?

3. Quit smoking.
"It is my ambition to say in ten sentences what others say in a whole book."
tulle
Posts: 4,445
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 9:42:48 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Christian Bale though, really? :p

I think what makes you the jerk in this situation (not that I agree, just speculating here) is the fact that you didn't let him speak. You have no idea what he was going to say and maybe you could have both just agreed to disagree (or whatever friends do) and he wouldn't have brought it up again. Taking it all Law and Order on him sounds pretty hostile, whether or not you were "right".
yang.
imabench
Posts: 21,222
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 10:46:40 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I kinda did something that pissed off half of my friends too one time.

Mario Kart.
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
YYW
Posts: 36,342
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 11:01:19 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 9:42:48 AM, tulle wrote:
Christian Bale though, really? :p

I've pretty much had a thing for him... for as long as I can remember (like, as much as ten years ago, at age 11, I thought he was hot). He's a pretty good actor too. His face is perfectly chiseled, he has fantastic hair, etc. He's also just metro enough for me to wonder... lol (maybe).

I think what makes you the jerk in this situation (not that I agree, just speculating here) is the fact that you didn't let him speak. You have no idea what he was going to say and maybe you could have both just agreed to disagree (or whatever friends do) and he wouldn't have brought it up again.

I don't know for certain, but I did guess that he was going to reiterate his argument, which I'd heard enough of. It probably was inconsiderate of me not to let him talk, even though I waited until he was basically finished before I even started talking -but again, I regret nothing.

Taking it all Law and Order on him sounds pretty hostile, whether or not you were "right".

It was pretty hostile, as others informed me later that night. I didn't think it was in the moment, but in retrospect it probably was. Still, I don't regret it. Only the people who I went downtown with for drinks are the ones I should have just gone to eat with, though... but I guess I couldn't know that beforehand.
Tsar of DDO
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 11:16:39 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
On voicing your opinion and laying the smacketh down: I hate that people think us smarter folk (hehe) ought to just "let it go" when someone is being ignorant. We've been taught that it isn't polite to talk about things like politics and religion, and now I suppose popular trials, in public settings or social gatherings. I think that's absurd. What should we talk about instead? The NY Giants? (Hey I wouldn't mind...) As fascinating as the new episode of Keeping Up With the Kardashians might be, I think that we SHOULD be talking about complicated and controversial issues, especially political issues, with our friends and/or our peers. Even if someone is just an acquaintance or even a stranger, the fact is that their ignorance DOES affect us insofar as their opinion shaping their votes and thus the policy that impact our lives and the lives of the people we care about and interact with on a daily basis. I see no reason to adhere to social graces and care about hurting other people's feelings except for in key social or professional situations where rocking the boat would be more trouble than it's worth.

On you being a condescending douche: Okay, I have a handful of friends who are in law school (I don't know if you are). One of THE most obnoxious things about one of them in particular is that they constantly use the fact that they are in law school to put down everyone else who has a different point of view on anything related to law or politics. For instance, when I mentioned that Obamacare was seemingly Unconstitutional (despite the ruling of SCOTUS... which btw was 5:4, meaning it was certainly up for debate even among some of the most esteemed and distinguished lawyers in the entire country), my friend would say similar things like "Well I don't expect someone with no formal background in law to understand..." any time he disagreed with me, which is often.

I think it's so fvcking annoying and pretentious to say things like that, even though in his mind it must be true. On the other hand I am completely guilty of similar sentiments, and most of the time it's true when I say it too lol. For example it drives me up the wall when people put down feminist points that I know they haven't examined thoroughly, whereas I have legitimately read a ton of scholarship on certain issues that I know gives me an advantage in terms of factual research and analysis. I'm sure many biblical scholars feel that they are debating n00b atheists and get frustrated as well. People tend to "specialize" in different areas of study or have different knowledge and strengths and weakness. Surely we should reference our experience and credentials, but I don't think they alone make us the sole authority figures on certain opinions or that we should insinuate that others are automatically incorrect. In other words I think it's okay to legitimize our own opinion based on the knowledge and skills we've acquired being in certain situations, but I don't think it's right to automatically discount what others think based on their lack of firsthand knowledge... if that makes sense.
President of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,342
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 11:19:30 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 8:23:14 AM, 000ike wrote:
Well, I'm assuming you do want to hear opinions on this, so I'll bite.

His position is held by some people who would have that educational background. So the opinions themselves don't exist by virtue of ignorance. As far as that's concerned, pointing out what he doesn't have did more to demean him than the argument he forwarded (which is why I don't buy that you meant no harm and your apology was sincere). Also, maybe I'm missing some context, but your presentation of the exact gravity of your comment and resulting "axis of humiliation" in that conversation seems to me a bit skewed. My friend group is a lot less mature than yours, but nevertheless if someone said something like that, true or not, he'd be the one humiliating himself. So, that's my take on it.

Something like I said or something like the guy I was arguing with said?

By the way, why didn't you just tell him that no one cared about his conversation outright (in a lighthearted way of course), instead of dishing out subtle hints that leave room for its continuance?

Another person, the girl I spoke of earlier, basically did that. She didn't just come outright and say "Look, no one cares." but that was the implication of what she was saying. People did care though. There were some others at the table that agreed with what he was saying.

and also
So, I went out for a cigarette.
smh

I regret nothing.
smh

That is all :)
Tsar of DDO
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 11:29:09 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 11:19:30 AM, YYW wrote:
At 8/25/2013 8:23:14 AM, 000ike wrote:
Well, I'm assuming you do want to hear opinions on this, so I'll bite.

His position is held by some people who would have that educational background. So the opinions themselves don't exist by virtue of ignorance. As far as that's concerned, pointing out what he doesn't have did more to demean him than the argument he forwarded (which is why I don't buy that you meant no harm and your apology was sincere). Also, maybe I'm missing some context, but your presentation of the exact gravity of your comment and resulting "axis of humiliation" in that conversation seems to me a bit skewed. My friend group is a lot less mature than yours, but nevertheless if someone said something like that, true or not, he'd be the one humiliating himself. So, that's my take on it.

Something like I said or something like the guy I was arguing with said?

something like you said. People really don't like it when you insult their intelligence based on academic accomplishments, whether they're true or not. It's just not what you do. I've learned that the hard way and changed for the better because of it.

By the way, why didn't you just tell him that no one cared about his conversation outright (in a lighthearted way of course), instead of dishing out subtle hints that leave room for its continuance?

Another person, the girl I spoke of earlier, basically did that. She didn't just come outright and say "Look, no one cares." but that was the implication of what she was saying. People did care though. There were some others at the table that agreed with what he was saying.

Oh, well if the table was divided on what to talk about, why didn't you just initiate a new conversation with the people that didn't care instead of trying to suppress the other conversation?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
YYW
Posts: 36,342
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 11:37:41 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 11:16:39 AM, Danielle wrote:
On voicing your opinion and laying the smacketh down: I hate that people think us smarter folk (hehe) ought to just "let it go" when someone is being ignorant. We've been taught that it isn't polite to talk about things like politics and religion, and now I suppose popular trials, in public settings or social gatherings. I think that's absurd. What should we talk about instead? The NY Giants? (Hey I wouldn't mind...) As fascinating as the new episode of Keeping Up With the Kardashians might be, I think that we SHOULD be talking about complicated and controversial issues, especially political issues, with our friends and/or our peers. Even if someone is just an acquaintance or even a stranger, the fact is that their ignorance DOES affect us insofar as their opinion shaping their votes and thus the policy that impact our lives and the lives of the people we care about and interact with on a daily basis. I see no reason to adhere to social graces and care about hurting other people's feelings except for in key social or professional situations where rocking the boat would be more trouble than it's worth.

I 100% agree.

On you being a condescending douche: Okay, I have a handful of friends who are in law school (I don't know if you are). One of THE most obnoxious things about one of them in particular is that they constantly use the fact that they are in law school to put down everyone else who has a different point of view on anything related to law or politics.

I'm not in law school now, but I wouldn't play that card even if I was, because doing so isn't productive. There was one person at the table -who also agreed with me- who was in law school, but that's beside the point. I did, however, know the educational background of the person I was arguing with -and he knew mine. I think that's why he thought I thought that I was trying to make him look stupid.

For instance, when I mentioned that Obamacare was seemingly Unconstitutional (despite the ruling of SCOTUS... which btw was 5:4, meaning it was certainly up for debate even among some of the most esteemed and distinguished lawyers in the entire country), my friend would say similar things like "Well I don't expect someone with no formal background in law to understand..." any time he disagreed with me, which is often.

That guy sounds like a complete douche...

I think it's so fvcking annoying and pretentious to say things like that, even though in his mind it must be true. On the other hand I am completely guilty of similar sentiments, and most of the time it's true when I say it too lol.

Same, but in this case, the statement wasn't so much about what I know, as it was about what he didn't know. He was getting ready to start classes for his MBA.

For example it drives me up the wall when people put down feminist points that I know they haven't examined thoroughly, whereas I have legitimately read a ton of scholarship on certain issues that I know gives me an advantage in terms of factual research and analysis. I'm sure many biblical scholars feel that they are debating n00b atheists and get frustrated as well. People tend to "specialize" in different areas of study or have different knowledge and strengths and weakness. Surely we should reference our experience and credentials, but I don't think they alone make us the sole authority figures on certain opinions or that we should insinuate that others are automatically incorrect. In other words I think it's okay to legitimize our own opinion based on the knowledge and skills we've acquired being in certain situations, but I don't think it's right to automatically discount what others think based on their lack of firsthand knowledge... if that makes sense.

It does make sense, and it was a cheap shot that I probably shouldn't have taken.
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,342
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 11:38:57 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 11:29:09 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 8/25/2013 11:19:30 AM, YYW wrote:
At 8/25/2013 8:23:14 AM, 000ike wrote:
Well, I'm assuming you do want to hear opinions on this, so I'll bite.

His position is held by some people who would have that educational background. So the opinions themselves don't exist by virtue of ignorance. As far as that's concerned, pointing out what he doesn't have did more to demean him than the argument he forwarded (which is why I don't buy that you meant no harm and your apology was sincere). Also, maybe I'm missing some context, but your presentation of the exact gravity of your comment and resulting "axis of humiliation" in that conversation seems to me a bit skewed. My friend group is a lot less mature than yours, but nevertheless if someone said something like that, true or not, he'd be the one humiliating himself. So, that's my take on it.

Something like I said or something like the guy I was arguing with said?

something like you said. People really don't like it when you insult their intelligence based on academic accomplishments, whether they're true or not. It's just not what you do. I've learned that the hard way and changed for the better because of it.

It was a cheap shot, of that there's no question.

By the way, why didn't you just tell him that no one cared about his conversation outright (in a lighthearted way of course), instead of dishing out subtle hints that leave room for its continuance?

Another person, the girl I spoke of earlier, basically did that. She didn't just come outright and say "Look, no one cares." but that was the implication of what she was saying. People did care though. There were some others at the table that agreed with what he was saying.

Oh, well if the table was divided on what to talk about, why didn't you just initiate a new conversation with the people that didn't care instead of trying to suppress the other conversation?

I was sitting across the table from him.
Tsar of DDO
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 11:48:20 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
YYW, you know I generally don't have any issues or anything with you - quite the opposite, we've gotten along amicably - but frankly, I think you were just a d1ck here. Like, straight-up full-blown pretentiousness and assholery.

Essentially, it's not so much that you ventured to disagree with him, but that you clearly did so with no intention of continuing the conversation. In your mind, you were clearly the only one that was right, and you didn't want to hear any more dissent among the ranks.

I agree, we should occupy ourselves with actually talking about serious issues: however, that actually means TALKING about them. I really don't care if he was rambling on and on saying what in your mind was total horsesh1t, you actually attempt to have a dialogue about the issue. That's my firm belief. It's really just a matter of being a polite person to actually try and have a conversation, rather than decide that the conversation is over, and that to make this point you're going to humiliate, denigrate, and insult the person you disagree with.

It's just not right. Yes, people hold stupid opinions sometimes - we ALL have - but that is absolutely no reason to try and personally make them feel like sh1t, and then give them a bullsh1t apology afterward, all the while condescending to them because you think you're the sole authority on the matter because you have better credentials.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
YYW
Posts: 36,342
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 12:00:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 11:48:20 AM, DetectableNinja wrote:
YYW, you know I generally don't have any issues or anything with you - quite the opposite, we've gotten along amicably - but frankly, I think you were just a d1ck here. Like, straight-up full-blown pretentiousness and assholery.

Well, Ninja... tell me how you really feel.

Essentially, it's not so much that you ventured to disagree with him, but that you clearly did so with no intention of continuing the conversation. In your mind, you were clearly the only one that was right, and you didn't want to hear any more dissent among the ranks.

I agree, we should occupy ourselves with actually talking about serious issues: however, that actually means TALKING about them. I really don't care if he was rambling on and on saying what in your mind was total horsesh1t, you actually attempt to have a dialogue about the issue. That's my firm belief. It's really just a matter of being a polite person to actually try and have a conversation, rather than decide that the conversation is over, and that to make this point you're going to humiliate, denigrate, and insult the person you disagree with.

So, we did have a dialogue in the sense that he rambled on, I waited until he was finished, and I broke down what he said. After that, I took a cheap shot.

It's just not right. Yes, people hold stupid opinions sometimes - we ALL have - but that is absolutely no reason to try and personally make them feel like sh1t, and then give them a bullsh1t apology afterward, all the while condescending to them because you think you're the sole authority on the matter because you have better credentials.

The cheap shot was not about how good my credentials were. I didn't even mention them, nor did I say or indicate that I was the sole authority on anything. The cheap shot was about how insufficient his educational background was -which I acknowledge was inappropriate. The apology was bullsh!t though, and I was being condescending (as I tend to get when I've been drinking in the company of people who hold stupid opinions).
Tsar of DDO
daytonanerd
Posts: 6,769
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 12:03:55 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 12:23:04 AM, YYW wrote:
I had dinner not long ago with some friends of mine. We all went out, and among other things the George Zimmerman case, Paula Dean, and Barack Obama all came up. Compared to some of my friends, I'm a radically left-leaning liberal. Compared to others, I might as well be the more youthful reincarnation of George W. Bush. I know that may sound odd, but here's the situation.

We had a discussion about the extent to which George Zimmerman profiled Trayvon Martin, whether or not Paula Dean was a racist, etc. I had been drinking before we went out (there was about ten of us) -but I say that only to illustrate the fact that when I've been drinking, I'm quire a bit less likely to hold my tongue when people say insurmountably stupid things.

So, one friend of mine made the argument that George Zimmerman was more or less an innocent person, framed the case as an issue of second amendment rights and self defense rights, and concluded that the only justifiable outcome was to let Zimmerman go. He spent, to the best of my recollection, about three and a half minutes voicing his opinion. I thought it best not to say anything then because, after all, this was nothing more than a social gathering. So, I went out for a cigarette.

Two others followed me out, one of them gay, and we talked about both how attractive Christian Bale was, how fantastic the Dark Knight was, etc. We went back in, and the old friend of mine continued to express his thoughts on the nuances of the case once I returned. Another friend who I was really close with in college changed the subject. She and I were both getting pissed, and she was trying to politely pacify the situation in the most amicable way possible. The other guy either missed the social cue, or didn't give a single fvck. Others started to weigh in, after we placed our order. The conversation probably went on for about ten minutes after I returned from my smoke break... at which point I'd had enough.

I folded my hands, looked across the table, and said something to the effect of "Alright then. Let's explore some of the finer points of the argument you've been advancing." I calmly dissected his argument, before the entire table, and point by point broke down everything he said, and refuted it in such a way that whether he thought I agreed with his conclusion or not, there was no possible way he could have come back -all of this after having been fairly quiet during the meal. He tried to interrupt me about three or four times, and failed. I cut him off every time, and continued to rip his argument apart.

When I was done, I said, again, something to the effect of "In all fairness, I don't expect someone with no legal experience, no noteworthy expertise on legal procedure, no grounding in constitutional law, no practical ethical experience, and no properly informed understanding of the facts in question to be able to form a coherent opinion about this case. So, it's all good. Just carry on." The table turned and looked at me, and the guy I was talking to was dumbfounded.

His literal response was "If you would stop trying to make me look stupid and listen..."

I said that making him look stupid was hardly my objective, that even if that was the effect of my rebutting his idiotic series of claims, that making him look stupid was not my intent, and that if he felt offended by what I said, that I sincerely apologized.

Another person at the table asked me why, whenever someone says something that's obviously in error, that I feel the need to point it out when it doesn't make a bit of difference. I was blamed for ruining the tone of the dinner, as well, by two of the lot in attendance. I was the one, not the blundering jackass who went on and on about how Zimmerman was a hero... but me. I stated, perhaps louder than I should, that I had forgotten why I hadn't been out with those lot since freshman year in college but now the memory no longer escaped me.

Half of the group went downtown for more drinks after the meal was over (the half that agreed with me). Half of the lot went their separate ways. Drinking afterward was fine. That which preceded it, less so. Even still, one of the other people in the group took me to task for having opened my mouth, for having essentially humiliated another person we were out with, etc. They thought it was personal. It wasn't about the other person. It was about the bullsh!t that came out of his mouth. While it was not my intention, apparently I made him look quite stupid...

I regret nothing.

Anyone else ever had an experience like that?

*Gives pat on back*

I know that feel.
#FeeltheFreezerBern
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 12:07:26 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 12:00:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/25/2013 11:48:20 AM, DetectableNinja wrote:
YYW, you know I generally don't have any issues or anything with you - quite the opposite, we've gotten along amicably - but frankly, I think you were just a d1ck here. Like, straight-up full-blown pretentiousness and assholery.

Well, Ninja... tell me how you really feel.

That was how I felt. I still like you, YYW. It's just that I don't abide condescension.

Essentially, it's not so much that you ventured to disagree with him, but that you clearly did so with no intention of continuing the conversation. In your mind, you were clearly the only one that was right, and you didn't want to hear any more dissent among the ranks.

I agree, we should occupy ourselves with actually talking about serious issues: however, that actually means TALKING about them. I really don't care if he was rambling on and on saying what in your mind was total horsesh1t, you actually attempt to have a dialogue about the issue. That's my firm belief. It's really just a matter of being a polite person to actually try and have a conversation, rather than decide that the conversation is over, and that to make this point you're going to humiliate, denigrate, and insult the person you disagree with.

So, we did have a dialogue in the sense that he rambled on, I waited until he was finished, and I broke down what he said. After that, I took a cheap shot.

It's just not right. Yes, people hold stupid opinions sometimes - we ALL have - but that is absolutely no reason to try and personally make them feel like sh1t, and then give them a bullsh1t apology afterward, all the while condescending to them because you think you're the sole authority on the matter because you have better credentials.

The cheap shot was not about how good my credentials were. I didn't even mention them, nor did I say or indicate that I was the sole authority on anything. The cheap shot was about how insufficient his educational background was -which I acknowledge was inappropriate. The apology was bullsh!t though, and I was being condescending (as I tend to get when I've been drinking in the company of people who hold stupid opinions).

I suppose you're at least aware of what you did inappropriately.

I think it's a bit heavy to say "No regrets," though. i'd personally be humiliated myself for making someone else feel humiliated like that, probably moreso than what they said. Then again, that stems from me having a far too overactive/tuned sense of emotional intelligence: when people are upset, and ESPECIALLY if I made them upset, even slightly, that feeling is magnified on myself. And this oftentimes is much more of a weakness than a strength.

We're all different though.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
YYW
Posts: 36,342
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 12:14:14 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 12:07:26 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 8/25/2013 12:00:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/25/2013 11:48:20 AM, DetectableNinja wrote:
YYW, you know I generally don't have any issues or anything with you - quite the opposite, we've gotten along amicably - but frankly, I think you were just a d1ck here. Like, straight-up full-blown pretentiousness and assholery.

Well, Ninja... tell me how you really feel.

That was how I felt. I still like you, YYW. It's just that I don't abide condescension.

Essentially, it's not so much that you ventured to disagree with him, but that you clearly did so with no intention of continuing the conversation. In your mind, you were clearly the only one that was right, and you didn't want to hear any more dissent among the ranks.

I agree, we should occupy ourselves with actually talking about serious issues: however, that actually means TALKING about them. I really don't care if he was rambling on and on saying what in your mind was total horsesh1t, you actually attempt to have a dialogue about the issue. That's my firm belief. It's really just a matter of being a polite person to actually try and have a conversation, rather than decide that the conversation is over, and that to make this point you're going to humiliate, denigrate, and insult the person you disagree with.

So, we did have a dialogue in the sense that he rambled on, I waited until he was finished, and I broke down what he said. After that, I took a cheap shot.

It's just not right. Yes, people hold stupid opinions sometimes - we ALL have - but that is absolutely no reason to try and personally make them feel like sh1t, and then give them a bullsh1t apology afterward, all the while condescending to them because you think you're the sole authority on the matter because you have better credentials.

The cheap shot was not about how good my credentials were. I didn't even mention them, nor did I say or indicate that I was the sole authority on anything. The cheap shot was about how insufficient his educational background was -which I acknowledge was inappropriate. The apology was bullsh!t though, and I was being condescending (as I tend to get when I've been drinking in the company of people who hold stupid opinions).

I suppose you're at least aware of what you did inappropriately.

I think it's a bit heavy to say "No regrets," though. i'd personally be humiliated myself for making someone else feel humiliated like that, probably moreso than what they said. Then again, that stems from me having a far too overactive/tuned sense of emotional intelligence: when people are upset, and ESPECIALLY if I made them upset, even slightly, that feeling is magnified on myself. And this oftentimes is much more of a weakness than a strength.

We're all different though.

There are many people who I wouldn't want to make upset, for any reason, because I care about them. But as a general rule, upsetting people and hurting their feelings isn't something that bothers me. And, it isn't that I don't always know how condescending/douchie something will come across -but in that context, it was that even if I did know how bad it was going to be, I still would have done it (perhaps, minus the cheap shot).
Tsar of DDO
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 12:24:11 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 12:14:14 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/25/2013 12:07:26 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 8/25/2013 12:00:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/25/2013 11:48:20 AM, DetectableNinja wrote:
YYW, you know I generally don't have any issues or anything with you - quite the opposite, we've gotten along amicably - but frankly, I think you were just a d1ck here. Like, straight-up full-blown pretentiousness and assholery.

Well, Ninja... tell me how you really feel.

That was how I felt. I still like you, YYW. It's just that I don't abide condescension.

Essentially, it's not so much that you ventured to disagree with him, but that you clearly did so with no intention of continuing the conversation. In your mind, you were clearly the only one that was right, and you didn't want to hear any more dissent among the ranks.

I agree, we should occupy ourselves with actually talking about serious issues: however, that actually means TALKING about them. I really don't care if he was rambling on and on saying what in your mind was total horsesh1t, you actually attempt to have a dialogue about the issue. That's my firm belief. It's really just a matter of being a polite person to actually try and have a conversation, rather than decide that the conversation is over, and that to make this point you're going to humiliate, denigrate, and insult the person you disagree with.

So, we did have a dialogue in the sense that he rambled on, I waited until he was finished, and I broke down what he said. After that, I took a cheap shot.

It's just not right. Yes, people hold stupid opinions sometimes - we ALL have - but that is absolutely no reason to try and personally make them feel like sh1t, and then give them a bullsh1t apology afterward, all the while condescending to them because you think you're the sole authority on the matter because you have better credentials.

The cheap shot was not about how good my credentials were. I didn't even mention them, nor did I say or indicate that I was the sole authority on anything. The cheap shot was about how insufficient his educational background was -which I acknowledge was inappropriate. The apology was bullsh!t though, and I was being condescending (as I tend to get when I've been drinking in the company of people who hold stupid opinions).

I suppose you're at least aware of what you did inappropriately.

I think it's a bit heavy to say "No regrets," though. i'd personally be humiliated myself for making someone else feel humiliated like that, probably moreso than what they said. Then again, that stems from me having a far too overactive/tuned sense of emotional intelligence: when people are upset, and ESPECIALLY if I made them upset, even slightly, that feeling is magnified on myself. And this oftentimes is much more of a weakness than a strength.

We're all different though.

There are many people who I wouldn't want to make upset, for any reason, because I care about them. But as a general rule, upsetting people and hurting their feelings isn't something that bothers me. And, it isn't that I don't always know how condescending/douchie something will come across -but in that context, it was that even if I did know how bad it was going to be, I still would have done it (perhaps, minus the cheap shot).

Again, it all just seems to be a different strokes thing. For me, it bothers me to upset almost anybody.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
YYW
Posts: 36,342
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 12:26:15 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 12:24:11 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 8/25/2013 12:14:14 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/25/2013 12:07:26 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 8/25/2013 12:00:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/25/2013 11:48:20 AM, DetectableNinja wrote:
YYW, you know I generally don't have any issues or anything with you - quite the opposite, we've gotten along amicably - but frankly, I think you were just a d1ck here. Like, straight-up full-blown pretentiousness and assholery.

Well, Ninja... tell me how you really feel.

That was how I felt. I still like you, YYW. It's just that I don't abide condescension.

Essentially, it's not so much that you ventured to disagree with him, but that you clearly did so with no intention of continuing the conversation. In your mind, you were clearly the only one that was right, and you didn't want to hear any more dissent among the ranks.

I agree, we should occupy ourselves with actually talking about serious issues: however, that actually means TALKING about them. I really don't care if he was rambling on and on saying what in your mind was total horsesh1t, you actually attempt to have a dialogue about the issue. That's my firm belief. It's really just a matter of being a polite person to actually try and have a conversation, rather than decide that the conversation is over, and that to make this point you're going to humiliate, denigrate, and insult the person you disagree with.

So, we did have a dialogue in the sense that he rambled on, I waited until he was finished, and I broke down what he said. After that, I took a cheap shot.

It's just not right. Yes, people hold stupid opinions sometimes - we ALL have - but that is absolutely no reason to try and personally make them feel like sh1t, and then give them a bullsh1t apology afterward, all the while condescending to them because you think you're the sole authority on the matter because you have better credentials.

The cheap shot was not about how good my credentials were. I didn't even mention them, nor did I say or indicate that I was the sole authority on anything. The cheap shot was about how insufficient his educational background was -which I acknowledge was inappropriate. The apology was bullsh!t though, and I was being condescending (as I tend to get when I've been drinking in the company of people who hold stupid opinions).

I suppose you're at least aware of what you did inappropriately.

I think it's a bit heavy to say "No regrets," though. i'd personally be humiliated myself for making someone else feel humiliated like that, probably moreso than what they said. Then again, that stems from me having a far too overactive/tuned sense of emotional intelligence: when people are upset, and ESPECIALLY if I made them upset, even slightly, that feeling is magnified on myself. And this oftentimes is much more of a weakness than a strength.

We're all different though.

There are many people who I wouldn't want to make upset, for any reason, because I care about them. But as a general rule, upsetting people and hurting their feelings isn't something that bothers me. And, it isn't that I don't always know how condescending/douchie something will come across -but in that context, it was that even if I did know how bad it was going to be, I still would have done it (perhaps, minus the cheap shot).

Again, it all just seems to be a different strokes thing. For me, it bothers me to upset almost anybody.

Even if the person is advancing an argument that is both antagonistic to reason and good principle?
Tsar of DDO
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 12:32:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 12:26:15 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/25/2013 12:24:11 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 8/25/2013 12:14:14 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/25/2013 12:07:26 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 8/25/2013 12:00:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/25/2013 11:48:20 AM, DetectableNinja wrote:
YYW, you know I generally don't have any issues or anything with you - quite the opposite, we've gotten along amicably - but frankly, I think you were just a d1ck here. Like, straight-up full-blown pretentiousness and assholery.

Well, Ninja... tell me how you really feel.

That was how I felt. I still like you, YYW. It's just that I don't abide condescension.

Essentially, it's not so much that you ventured to disagree with him, but that you clearly did so with no intention of continuing the conversation. In your mind, you were clearly the only one that was right, and you didn't want to hear any more dissent among the ranks.

I agree, we should occupy ourselves with actually talking about serious issues: however, that actually means TALKING about them. I really don't care if he was rambling on and on saying what in your mind was total horsesh1t, you actually attempt to have a dialogue about the issue. That's my firm belief. It's really just a matter of being a polite person to actually try and have a conversation, rather than decide that the conversation is over, and that to make this point you're going to humiliate, denigrate, and insult the person you disagree with.

So, we did have a dialogue in the sense that he rambled on, I waited until he was finished, and I broke down what he said. After that, I took a cheap shot.

It's just not right. Yes, people hold stupid opinions sometimes - we ALL have - but that is absolutely no reason to try and personally make them feel like sh1t, and then give them a bullsh1t apology afterward, all the while condescending to them because you think you're the sole authority on the matter because you have better credentials.

The cheap shot was not about how good my credentials were. I didn't even mention them, nor did I say or indicate that I was the sole authority on anything. The cheap shot was about how insufficient his educational background was -which I acknowledge was inappropriate. The apology was bullsh!t though, and I was being condescending (as I tend to get when I've been drinking in the company of people who hold stupid opinions).

I suppose you're at least aware of what you did inappropriately.

I think it's a bit heavy to say "No regrets," though. i'd personally be humiliated myself for making someone else feel humiliated like that, probably moreso than what they said. Then again, that stems from me having a far too overactive/tuned sense of emotional intelligence: when people are upset, and ESPECIALLY if I made them upset, even slightly, that feeling is magnified on myself. And this oftentimes is much more of a weakness than a strength.

We're all different though.

There are many people who I wouldn't want to make upset, for any reason, because I care about them. But as a general rule, upsetting people and hurting their feelings isn't something that bothers me. And, it isn't that I don't always know how condescending/douchie something will come across -but in that context, it was that even if I did know how bad it was going to be, I still would have done it (perhaps, minus the cheap shot).

Again, it all just seems to be a different strokes thing. For me, it bothers me to upset almost anybody.

Even if the person is advancing an argument that is both antagonistic to reason and good principle?

Yes. It's my belief to act in such a manner that you argue against the argument, not the arguer.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 12:50:34 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I find it more humiliating to smirk and laugh a bit when demolishing my peers' arguments. Recently one said that "recreational" drug use was different from using it for fun. We looked up Wikipedia and countless dictionaries, and all agreed with me. He said, "That's what the DICTIONARY says!" I just laughed and told him I'm right.

Nonetheless. In your situation, I would've taken a different route. I tend to say that we'll take the issue up soon -- which means they'll either want to resolve it ASAP, or actually be up for a good argument later. Or just concede.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 12:51:39 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Way to make yourself sound like a tortured intellectual.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 3:44:01 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 12:23:04 AM, YYW wrote:

I regret nothing.

Anyone else ever had an experience like that?

Yes.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
sdavio
Posts: 1,798
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 4:38:53 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Even assuming you're right, and that the guy was stupid, being so sarcastic that way and framing the your little speech to make you seem like the 'hero' is immature and immoral as well.. I mean it's essentially bullying. You don't learn new things that way, which should be the goal of discussing politics IMO, not to teach everyone else how right you are.
"Logic is the money of the mind." - Karl Marx
YYW
Posts: 36,342
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 5:02:01 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 4:38:53 PM, sdavio wrote:
Even assuming you're right, and that the guy was stupid, being so sarcastic that way and framing the your little speech to make you seem like the 'hero' is immature and immoral as well.. I mean it's essentially bullying.

Hero? Really? You got that out of what I wrote... astounding. Almost as astounding as the conclusion you arrived at.
Tsar of DDO
sdavio
Posts: 1,798
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 5:09:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 5:02:01 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/25/2013 4:38:53 PM, sdavio wrote:
Even assuming you're right, and that the guy was stupid, being so sarcastic that way and framing the your little speech to make you seem like the 'hero' is immature and immoral as well.. I mean it's essentially bullying.

Hero? Really? You got that out of what I wrote... astounding. Almost as astounding as the conclusion you arrived at.

You're doing it again, lol. Why not actually point out flaws in people's arguments rather than sarcasm? Until you do so, the point stands, and it's just you trying to prove you're smarter than the other person regardless.
"Logic is the money of the mind." - Karl Marx
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 5:21:39 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 5:02:01 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/25/2013 4:38:53 PM, sdavio wrote:
Even assuming you're right, and that the guy was stupid, being so sarcastic that way and framing the your little speech to make you seem like the 'hero' is immature and immoral as well.. I mean it's essentially bullying.

Hero? Really? You got that out of what I wrote... astounding. Almost as astounding as the conclusion you arrived at.

I'll offer the same disclaimer as DN. I like you, but I'm just calling it as I see it. It's the same theme, every time. Someone said or did something stupid and you just had to jump in and put a stop to it. What is that if not vigilantism?

You undermine your own knowledge and intelligence when you use them as weapons rather than tools.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
YYW
Posts: 36,342
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 5:57:11 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 5:09:54 PM, sdavio wrote:
At 8/25/2013 5:02:01 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/25/2013 4:38:53 PM, sdavio wrote:
Even assuming you're right, and that the guy was stupid, being so sarcastic that way and framing the your little speech to make you seem like the 'hero' is immature and immoral as well.. I mean it's essentially bullying.

Hero? Really? You got that out of what I wrote... astounding. Almost as astounding as the conclusion you arrived at.

You're doing it again, lol. Why not actually point out flaws in people's arguments rather than sarcasm? Until you do so, the point stands, and it's just you trying to prove you're smarter than the other person regardless.

Here's why:

There was nothing heroic about what I said. It wasn't about being a hero, it was about telling someone off -which as I have said above, included an unnecessary cheap shot. It also wasn't bullying. Bullying is the use of force or coercion to abuse or intimidate others. I was not using force or coercing anyone to do anything. Bullying is habitual and involve an imbalance of social or physical power.

I may have been smarter than him, but it wasn't about power. Bullying includes verbal harassment or threat, physical assault or coercion and may be directed repeatedly towards particular victims, perhaps on grounds of class, race, religion, gender, sexuality, appearance, or behavior. It had nothing to do with any of those things. This was something which I thought was quite clear, but since you essentially asked me to make the distinction, there you go. Moreover, the cheap shot was not meant to belittle the one whom it was directed at. It was to point out why he came to the conclusion that he did. That further established, I can be a bully when I want to be and at times when I'm not even realizing it. I recognize that, but this was not one of those circumstances.

However, because of the ambiguity of your saying what I did was bullying (and you did not distinguish between rebuttal and the cheap shot -both happened), I'm going to assume that you were only referring to my closing line, and not the actual act of breaking down the other person's argument. I assume that because despite the audacity of your claim, I can see how someone could reasonably think that I was picking on the other person. To that end, read the above.
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,342
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 5:59:52 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 5:21:39 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 8/25/2013 5:02:01 PM, YYW wrote:
At 8/25/2013 4:38:53 PM, sdavio wrote:
Even assuming you're right, and that the guy was stupid, being so sarcastic that way and framing the your little speech to make you seem like the 'hero' is immature and immoral as well.. I mean it's essentially bullying.

Hero? Really? You got that out of what I wrote... astounding. Almost as astounding as the conclusion you arrived at.

I'll offer the same disclaimer as DN. I like you, but I'm just calling it as I see it. It's the same theme, every time. Someone said or did something stupid and you just had to jump in and put a stop to it. What is that if not vigilantism?

It is me, being a dick. -which I have acknowledged. No more or less. Still, I am not sorry for what I said. While it was in poor taste, I'm not bothered by that.
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,342
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 6:00:18 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 3:44:01 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 8/25/2013 12:23:04 AM, YYW wrote:

I regret nothing.

Anyone else ever had an experience like that?

Yes.

Well, I'm glad I'm not the only one lol.
Tsar of DDO