FYI, that link goes to a very weird URL, which I doubt is what you intended.
Ooops, sorry, fixed.
To describe this in the way that you did, has the obvious connotation to any reasonable reader that I, unprompted, went and wrote something like “Gordon is a coward for banning me from his posts!”. That’s the picture that someone would come away with, after reading your characterization. And, of course, it would be completely inaccurate.
I agree that the context is helpful and importantly makes the “coward” aspect more understandable. I also omitted other context that I think makes the thing I intended to communicate with “you called him a coward” a more reasonable summary[1]. I think I am sold that it would have been better for me to give a bit more context and to summarize things a bit differently. I don’t overall agree that it was substantially misleading, but I agree I could have done better.
You’ve had to resort to banning me from your posts, not because my comments were somehow unusually “adversarial” or “unproductive” or any such thing—nothing remotely like that is true (and I invite anyone who doubts this to check out the above link)—but simply because I haven’t gotten fed up with Less Wrong and left on my own, and am still pointing out when you write things that are wrong and/or nonsensical. That’s all.
Which I also consider to follow the same unhelpful patterns described in the OP.
Ooops, sorry, fixed.
I agree that the context is helpful and importantly makes the “coward” aspect more understandable. I also omitted other context that I think makes the thing I intended to communicate with “you called him a coward” a more reasonable summary[1]. I think I am sold that it would have been better for me to give a bit more context and to summarize things a bit differently. I don’t overall agree that it was substantially misleading, but I agree I could have done better.
For example this paragraph:
Which I also consider to follow the same unhelpful patterns described in the OP.