Cowboys and cowgirls

Flowerchild, there is a huge difference between interference and influence. You seem to be conflating the two.
 
hmmm

Like most threads, this has ultimately devolved to a question of semantics.... ah, well. :)

Please only post comments to the original post. ... I'll respond to those :)
 
Maybe so, but the problem could be avoided if you used words that mean what you want them to mean rather than similar but entirely different ones that don't. Trying to call people out based on your understanding of their posts when you're reading your own definitions into common words is not semantics, it's an inability to competently use the English language.
 
FC,

An observation: It might help to reduce your writing to simpler terms and easier concepts. You're dealing with a mixed audience of various perspectives and language patterns, so clarity is a must if you'd like useful thought exchanges. While I think the previous post to mine was a bit rude, I think the point is that this topic doesn't require such complexity or carefully crafted speech. Keep it simple, right?
 
clarity

Is the issue really about clarity only? Is it only unclear due to the precise details of the definition of certain words?

Is it that you honestly have no idea what the OP was trying to convey and that if alternate words were used you could then understand?

Because it appears, at least to me, that it would be much more accurate and easily understood to say that what you are really requesting is for her to use vocabulary that aligns with the style of poly dynamics you subscribe to

for instance "independent poly" as opposed to "polyt-tribes"

or maybe "anarchism" as opposed to "hierarchy"

if the vocab aligned with anarchist or independent polyamory would the choice of words be more acceptable?

because from the wording and clear meaning of the OP and the replies as part of a discussion, it seems clear to me what the problem of semantics is rooted in, that problem being that the words do not fit the assertions made by two people who believe that hierarchy is wrong and anarchism is right.


It doesn't appear that it's the vocabulary or the actual choice of words used to convey the meaning is the problem as claimed. Certainly there are many different ways to say the same thing as well as a whole slough full of different words that can be used to say sentences with identical meaning, yet the verbs, adjectives, and the non-person nouns can be different words so that there are numerous ways to say the same thing.

There might be four ways to basically say "Poly is a good and acceptable way to live your life"

and you want to silence two of four sentences that say "Poly is good and hierarchical poly is an acceptable way to live your life"

so that the only choice of words repeated as sentences with any regularity are "Poly is good and independent poly is an acceptable way to live your life"

am I off base?

I have heard you repeat many times that I am as well as others who appear to say the same thing, but if it is not true, then why is it only the "hierarchical" poly words that you have a problem with, and why does the problem need to come from user profiles which imply that more people have trouble with this exact semantics issue than the number of people who actually have problems understanding?

If it is not OK to have a preference for the style of poly personally practiced, then it would be easier to simply state so in the Guidelines, and perhaps it should be branched into two poly forums to prevent these problems from intentionally being sown into every thread.
 
Last edited:
How is either "interference" or "influence" a hierarchical word? If FC were to look them up in any number of dictionaries and use them accordingly she would not be confused about what people are saying. The issue here is not semantics, and it's not whatever conspiracy theory Dirtclustit is harbouring this week, it's simply that FC is misusing the English language and then blaming others for her misunderstanding.

Earlier I was called rude for pointing this out. The other option, of course, is that she is being deliberately obtuse or trolling, but I prefer not to ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by ignorance and/or incompetence.
 
Flowerchild, there is a huge difference between interference and influence. You seem to be conflating the two.

Your reply has absolutely nothing to do with accusations I made, and asked for clarification of.

In no way was your reply guilty of the situations I described
 
Completely agree

Unless your partner is willing to abandon you, nothing that other person can say or do will take them away.

Completely agree. Security and a strong bond is the solution for jealousy.
 
Ty

Lookingglass, thanks for bringing back to original topic.

Oh, and Dirt, appreciate your support, but getting in the middle of troll fights is pointless. :)
 
Lookingglass, thanks for bringing back to original topic.

Oh, and Dirt, appreciate your support, but getting in the middle of troll fights is pointless. :)

Well, you just called some of the most respectable people on this site trolls. Good luck having future discussions if that's your perspective.
 
There are sociopaths out there, but it sounds like most of them are dating LovingRadiances fellas, so we're pretty safe in the cities :p

Only one fella-and yeah-you should be safe in the city. :)

For that matter-we should be safe too.

It seems there should be a limit to the number in any given proximity-and even if a person is attracted to them, it would seem that they would run out eventually yes?

I make no argument that Maca doesn't have a severe issue with being attracted to the "bad thing". Women, drugs, driving to fast-any risk at all.
Thankfully he seems to be finally realizing that is dysfunctional in terms of his long term life ANYTHING (living, happiness etc). ;)

Marcus-you crack me up.

(and actually-only one psycho was during our relationship)
 
Ok

Alright, I officially give up on maintaining any control over the direction of this thread :D

Marcus, if you take offense to this, you have a thinner skin than I thought :p
 
Flowerchild, I am confused as well. Firstly, whose life do you feel you should be able to interfere with - your partner's or your metamour's?

Secondly, there is no rule that in order to be polyamorous all the people you are involved with have to know each other and get along. Keeping relationships separate and "not intersecting" does not automatically mean that there is coldness or lack of respect going on. Not everyone wants to be in a poly tribe.

Sorry to leave you out, Nycindie :) But your questions are too broad for me to know how to answer without a real risk of offending you. I never said lack of intersection is a lack of respect, for example.

I only asked ONE question and it was quite specific - not broad at all: whose life do you feel you should be able to interfere with - your partner's or your metamour's? The other things I wrote were comments, not questions.

But I have since ascertained that you believe you should be able to influence AND interfere in your partner's other relationships, even though you are not a part of them. Interesting viewpoint.

As far as the possibility of my being offended, that is unlikely. Taking offense is an action someone would choose and it's very subjective. You could do or say something you think is offensive and it would probably not even faze me. I don't generally choose to take offense at things posted by folks I don't know on the internet. It would have to be really important to me to take offense, but this is just a conversation.

Just asking my next question out of curiosity, not judgment: There seems to always be a disconnect between what you interpret others have said to mean, what you try to say, and what people think you're trying to say. I am beginning to think you may have a problem with reading comprehension. Do you have a learning disability? Maybe that's why so many of your discussions get caught up in everyone trying to figure out what you're trying to say. Just wondering - if we knew that, it might help us understand you.
 
Last edited:
Well

I only asked ONE question and it was quite specific - not broad at all: whose life do you feel you should be able to interfere with - your partner's or your metamour's? The other things I wrote were comments, not questions.

But I have since ascertained that you believe you should be able to influence AND interfere in your partner's other relationships, even though you are not a part of them. Interesting viewpoint.

As far as the possibility of my being offended, that is unlikely. Taking offense is an action someone would choose and it's very subjective. You could do or say something you think is offensive and it would probably not even faze me. I don't generally choose to take offense at things posted by folks I don't know on the internet. It would have to be really important to me to take offense, but this is just a conversation.

Just asking my next question out of curiosity, not judgment: There seems to always be a disconnect between what you interpret others have said to mean, what you try to say, and what people think you're trying to say. I am beginning to think you may have a problem with reading comprehension. Do you have a learning disability? Maybe that's why so many of your discussions get caught up in everyone trying to figure out what you're trying to say. Just wondering - if we knew that, it might help us understand you.

Insulting a total stranger seems to say that you DO take quite a bit of offense, even though no malice was directed at you. And Dirt seemed to understand what I meant just fine, so perhaps the learning disability lies with you?
 
Additionally

I do not engage in passive aggressive fights with strangers online and I do not have to answer every question posed to me, especially ones I know will lead to fights.

I have no interest in defining my definition of interference and influence, as I have already done so here. Nycindie, I am happy you have "ascertained" what I "really" mean. Good for you.

Again, should anyone wish to continue the relevant question of whether or not a cowboy is a threat, I'm happy to answer.

Please do not try to engage me by insults or passive aggressive, I'm sorry you have a disability, comments.
 
For the sake of

However, Nycindie, I will assume that you meant no harm, but merely were careless with words. Therefore, I will answer you.

I have no energy at this point to continue an argument of what I mean by involvement. Yes, I do feel that I am a part of my partner's other dating partners. It is a real, and significant, part of his life, and I take as much interest in it as I do in any other part of his life.

If he is involved with someone who I feel is harmful for him, I will talk to him about it. I know that may seem interfering to some, well, that's their view, I have mine.

But I don't know how to make that clear to you...language barriers are apparently an issue here.
 
MOD HAT

Lets calm it down people. No need to start slinging insults back and forth. you have differing opinions on what you both think should be allowed within a relationship construct. Leave it at that, and walk away from the topic.

If this line of shit slinging continues I will just close the thread

thanks

MOD HAT OFF
 
Ty

Ariakas, thanks. I would not be upset if you closed this down, it's wandered so off topic that I don't see it going back.
 
Back
Top