Re: neck finish help needed!!!
But, given your following explanation of what you meant in your original post, I understand what you were trying to say. I admit, I didn't take it the way you say you meant it.
When you used the word "you" I sincerely thought you were referring specifically to me. That is what I took offense to.
I didn't take it out of context at all. You just didn't make your meaning clear. I took your statement at face value.
Oh give me a break. You rationalize worse than ...... No exaggeration on my part whatsoever!
But your name calling right now is doing exactly what you accused me of doing. This is being "coldly, calmly, and cordially state(ing) the facts", "very impersonal and mostly objective"?!
Your statement was at best ambiguous. The "fault" is not in my interpretation, but in your initial itterance. When one wants to be impersonal, one uses the term "one", not "you". Sorry for the grammar lesson, but perhaps it is needed.
But, given your following explanation of what you meant in your original post, I understand what you were trying to say. I admit, I didn't take it the way you say you meant it.
Sentences 1–3 describe the '90's. To paraphrase them: There used to be similar rumors of lacquers demise, but the stuff could still be found with no real problem. Sentences 4–5 describe today. To paraphrase them: There's a bit more of a problem, but the stuff can still be found. Neither of these sentences refer to or address any individual here on this forum.
When you used the word "you" I sincerely thought you were referring specifically to me. That is what I took offense to.
Additionally, your quotation of my statement was used out of the context of the paragraph, distorting its meaning. Reasonably, you can't isolate a sentence from a paragraph, interpret it out of context, get your Underoos in a bunch over it, and expect anyone to take your offense seriously.
I didn't take it out of context at all. You just didn't make your meaning clear. I took your statement at face value.
In this exchange you have shown unnecessary exaggeration to make statements that are not entirely true, extremely poor reading comprehension, extreme emotional sensitivity, anger, rudeness, and arrogance. What I have done is to coldly, calmly, and cordially state the facts as I understand them, my experiences as I have experienced them, and how I interpret these things. If you, as it seems, have a major problem with anything I have stated, this problem is rooted within your own mind. I've been very impersonal and mostly objective this entire time.
Oh give me a break. You rationalize worse than ...... No exaggeration on my part whatsoever!
But your name calling right now is doing exactly what you accused me of doing. This is being "coldly, calmly, and cordially state(ing) the facts", "very impersonal and mostly objective"?!
Your statement was at best ambiguous. The "fault" is not in my interpretation, but in your initial itterance. When one wants to be impersonal, one uses the term "one", not "you". Sorry for the grammar lesson, but perhaps it is needed.