2663: Dante’s Inferno

[Anxious Nerd]

Originally Posted by Lanfear

YES THEY ARE NOT CALLING IT BAD BECAUSE ONE OF THEM IS AN ANIMAL AND THE OTHER IS A CHILD THAT YOU ARE MEANT TO TEACH THINGS

You really are not ashamed that you just literally compared a grown ass woman to a misbehaving dog?

A grown ass woman is not going to react in the same manner as a dog.
These comparisons originated from Sparrow, not me.

[Lanfear]

Originally Posted by Anxious Nerd

A grown ass woman is not going to react in the same manner as a dog.
These comparisons originated from Sparrow, not me.

yes because she tried to tell you that as an example of why its wrong and you took it as confirmation for why its right

[Lanfear]

Originally Posted by Anxious Nerd

I think that the behaviour seemed very bad, regardless of whether he paid or not. Given that he did do a bunch of other things, including paying, the behaviour can be considered especially galling.

You may be correct that Dante is creating a biased sample set.

Cool so you double down on the he paid his rules theory. Good to know.

[Sparrow]

Originally Posted by Anxious Nerd

Ironically, this reaction is applying similar operant conditioning to what you've been criticising.
(Couldn't resist.)

you couldn't resist explaining a joke to make it not funny. you, sir, are the worst. and i still feel upset, so it's your responsibility now to make me not upset or i will take it out on you for upsetting me.

[Anxious Nerd]

Originally Posted by Lanfear

Cool so you double down on the he paid his rules theory. Good to know.

I believe that you know that I did not say that.
You attacked a strawman where that was the case and I tried to separate the different pieces.

The date itself has a set of expectations which include if you see the amount of effort the woman has put in, you show her respect by trying you best to avoid ruining the date for her. When she does not show you the same respect in kind and in fact actively is very nasty, then the social contract falls to pieces.

At that point once the date is already effectively over, then given that there is food that you've paid for, then it's your decision what to do with it. A bigger person may have chalked it up to a loss, but equally why accept this behaviour and continue to reward it by allowing her to abuse your hospitality. If someone did this behaviour in you house and you through them out, they also would not be able to continue eating and you wouldn't give them a doggy bag.

[Sparrow]

[Anxious Nerd]

Originally Posted by Sparrow

you couldn't resist explaining a joke to make it not funny. you, sir, are the worst. and i still feel upset, so it's your responsibility now to make me not upset or i will take it out on you for upsetting me.

I was unsure whether it was intentional or not, I don't have much of a sense of humour.
I respect you opinions, but I do not really have the tools to be nice, so all I can do is continue to apologise.

[Sparrow]

knuckle up, baby puss, and learn how to behave. if Data can do it, so can you.

[Anxious Nerd]

Originally Posted by Lanfear

yes because she tried to tell you that as an example of why its wrong and you took it as confirmation for why its right

There probably was some of that, but I thought the distinction was interesting as well.

[Anxious Nerd]

I think I concede that the date example isn't fair as it leans more towards punishment for its own sake.
The general point of an extreme reaction to address specific problems or a removal of a perk as a response still seems worth consideration.