Grr. You know that MtS post?
Sep. 9th, 2004 01:53 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
conuly
Yeah, this one girl is now complaining that I "didn't answer her question" as to whether or not I homeschool. Well, I did answer, I answered by asking why she asked it. And that's all the answer she's getting, for a number of very good reasons.
1. I wasn't even talking about homeschooling on that thread until she asked that question, so it was completely irrelevant.
2. Even if it weren't completely irrelevant because of that, it would still be completely irrelevant. What does it matter if I homeschool/am homeschooled?
3. *laughs* Yeah, like I'm that stupid. I know perfectly well why she was asking. If I'd said yes, the reply would be that I'm biased (and maybe stupid) because of it. If I'd said no, the reply would be either "you don't know anything about homeschooling because you don't homeschool" or (since that goes both ways) "if you think it's so good, you should homeschool. You must not really think it's that good, you hypocrite". Either way, it's illogical and pointless.
I realized this way back in the sixth grade, that people ask questions to attack you, not because they're actually interested in the answers. It's been my policy ever since not to answer questions unless I could figure out why they were asked. In this case I know the reason, but that doesn't make me feel any more inclined to answer. Really, does she think that's going to work? I'd have to be very slow to keep falling for that trap, especially online where I can think of my answers.
1. I wasn't even talking about homeschooling on that thread until she asked that question, so it was completely irrelevant.
2. Even if it weren't completely irrelevant because of that, it would still be completely irrelevant. What does it matter if I homeschool/am homeschooled?
3. *laughs* Yeah, like I'm that stupid. I know perfectly well why she was asking. If I'd said yes, the reply would be that I'm biased (and maybe stupid) because of it. If I'd said no, the reply would be either "you don't know anything about homeschooling because you don't homeschool" or (since that goes both ways) "if you think it's so good, you should homeschool. You must not really think it's that good, you hypocrite". Either way, it's illogical and pointless.
I realized this way back in the sixth grade, that people ask questions to attack you, not because they're actually interested in the answers. It's been my policy ever since not to answer questions unless I could figure out why they were asked. In this case I know the reason, but that doesn't make me feel any more inclined to answer. Really, does she think that's going to work? I'd have to be very slow to keep falling for that trap, especially online where I can think of my answers.
no subject
Date: 2004-09-09 01:52 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-09-09 02:23 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-09-09 02:28 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-09-09 02:35 pm (UTC)I won't even start on the logic itself. Yeesh.
no subject
Date: 2004-09-09 02:37 pm (UTC)2. Her logic sucks, to be sure... but look at it. She started out arguing one thing, and every time she got stuck, she changed it! And I'm the only one to call her on it yet. Clever. Stupid, really, because she's still wrong and drowning in illogic, but clever.