Happy Birthday Mikey Duggar!

[skulduggery]

:wtf:

When you say "we'd be accusing them of ignoring the child's birthday," you are presuming to know the thought processes behind the posters here. You are pre-emptively accusing people of making an accusation that was never levied, and can't be, simply because the parameters of your accusation are nonexistent. Therefore, it's baseless, and it's personal because you presume "we" are unreasonable and deliberately putting the Duggars in a no-win situation, therefore rendering criticism invalid. That's why it's bullcrap.

[skulduggery]

One more thing - Josh doesn't have to post pictures of his kids on Twitter to prove that he celebrates his kid's birthday. I was already pretty sure he would already, without self-congratulatory picture proof to present himself as an awesome father. I'm not sure why anyone wouldn't believe he would celebrate his kid's birthday. It also makes no sense to be more worried about a birthday than why Boobchelle had to lock bedroom doors at night.

[halcionne]

Didn't Marcus have a birthday a couple of weeks ago? Was anything posted? Did anyone mention it or care?

He sure did, on June 2. I don't remember any posts...

ETA: Duggar fb was pimping the Kelly interview that day.

[gustava]

When you say "we'd be accusing them of ignoring the child's birthday," you are presuming to know the thought processes behind the posters here. You are pre-emptively accusing people of making an accusation that was never levied, and can't be, simply because the parameters of your accusation are nonexistent. Therefore, it's baseless, and it's personal because you presume "we" are unreasonable and deliberately putting the Duggars in a no-win situation, therefore rendering criticism invalid. That's why it's bullcrap.

Darlin.....Look at my post count and then look at your post count; I know whereof I speak. Moreover, I wasn't accusatory; I was prescriptive. It's only personal if directed against an individual. Therefore, :cracking-up:

[skulduggery]

Darlin.....Look at my post count and then look at your post count; I know whereof I speak. Moreover, I wasn't accusatory; I was prescriptive. It's only personal if directed against an individual. Therefore, :cracking-up:

So let me get this straight. If I manage to get 3,000 posts, I can tell everyone what they are thinking too! Do I get to see the future winning lottery numbers with that too?

You're going to speak disparagingly about people without even knowing them (yes, please look at my post count, and consider that 170 comments is hardly enough for you to determine what goes on in MY mind) and say that's not an attack? Pssh, please! :roll:

[VelociRapture]

So let me get this straight. If I manage to get 3,000 posts, I can tell everyone what they are thinking too! Do I get to see the future winning lottery numbers with that too?

You're going to speak disparagingly about people without even knowing them (yes, please look at my post count, and consider that 170 comments is hardly enough for you to determine what goes on in MY mind) and say that's not an attack? Pssh, please! :roll:

I'm not really sure how her first comment could be seen as an attack. We have a wide range of personalities on this site and we all can from varying backgrounds - I think it would be safe to assume at least one of us would accuse them of not celebrating/not caring about his birthday if they hadn't mentioned it. She didn't accuse anyone in particular or by name, so I don't see how it could be a personal attack. :twocents-02cents:

[skulduggery]

I'm not really sure how her first comment could be seen as an attack. We have a wide range of personalities on this site and we all can from varying backgrounds - I think it would be safe to assume at least one of us would accuse them of not celebrating/not caring about his birthday if they hadn't mentioned it. She didn't accuse anyone in particular or by name, so I don't see how it could be a personal attack. :twocents-02cents:

This can't be said much simpler: We're on the Internet. There's no way of knowing who anyone is, or what anyone is thinking. The only way to know is if they post what they are thinking.

(here on out, you is: general 'you')

If you're going to criticize someone for something, make it about what they've actually said. Not about what you think they said, or what you think they would say. Without actually knowing someone, you can't say what they would or would not do.

There's no reason to say with confidence that "we'd be accusing them of ignoring the child's birthday" unless there's a good reason to.

So, by all means point out to me all the posts that try to shame the Duggars for not putting pics of their kids birthdays on Instagram. Back up that statement with facts, not post count seniority. Otherwise, it's an untrue statement meant solely to make FJers look unreasonable and putting the Duggars in a catch 22. And no, it doesn't have to single out one person to be understood as a personal attack. The difference between a personal attack and debate is that in debate, you're supposed to address what the person is saying, rather than the person (or people) themselves.

Yes, we have a wide range of personalities here, which is why making blanket statements such as "we'd be accusing them of ignoring the child's birthday" is pointless and generalizing. So, who is this "we" this poster talking about? Surely not me, who apparently hasn't racked up enough posts to be taken seriously.

[Fascinated]

This can't be said much simpler: We're on the Internet. There's no way of knowing who anyone is, or what anyone is thinking. The only way to know is if they post what they are thinking.

(here on out, you is: general 'you')

If you're going to criticize someone for something, make it about what they've actually said. Not about what you think they said, or what you think they would say. Without actually knowing someone, you can't say what they would or would not do.

There's no reason to say with confidence that "we'd be accusing them of ignoring the child's birthday" unless there's a good reason to.

So, by all means point out to me all the posts that try to shame the Duggars for not putting pics of their kids birthdays on Instagram. Back up that statement with facts, not post count seniority. Otherwise, it's an untrue statement meant solely to make FJers look unreasonable and putting the Duggars in a catch 22. And no, it doesn't have to single out one person to be understood as a personal attack. The difference between a personal attack and debate is that in debate, you're supposed to address what the person is saying, rather than the person (or people) themselves.

Yes, we have a wide range of personalities here, which is why making blanket statements such as "we'd be accusing them of ignoring the child's birthday" is pointless and generalizing. So, who is this "we" this poster talking about? Surely not me, who apparently hasn't racked up enough posts to be taken seriously.

There are many, many examples in the the various Duggar threads where the type of thing to which Gustava refers has occurred. Gustava has been here for a very long time and, as such, has probably read thousands of pages. That is why her post count is meaningful. I don't mean to speak for her, but I don't believe she was 'attacking' you, or even suggesting you'd be the person to criticize a non-birthday celebration. But, rest assured, someone would have.

[FloraKitty35]

Didn't Marcus have a birthday a couple of weeks ago? Was anything posted? Did anyone mention it or care?

Marcus turned 2 on June 2. I didn't check to see he got a shout out online.

[Alexa]

Happy Birthday to Mikey! I will say Josh and Anna have some really cute kids and thus far have always seemed pretty happy.

[gustava]

There are many, many examples in the the various Duggar threads where the type of thing to which Gustava refers has occurred. Gustava has been here for a very long time and, as such, has probably read thousands of pages. That is why her post count is meaningful. I don't mean to speak for her, but I don't believe she was 'attacking' you, or even suggesting you'd be the person to criticize a non-birthday celebration. But, rest assured, someone would have.

Thanks VR. I did not realize that it was thought my general comment was directed at a specific person. And you are correct as to why I noted my post count. Granted, my tone was quite snippy, as I couldn't figure out what was going on.

[VelociRapture]

Thanks VR. I did not realize that it was thought my general comment was directed at a specific person. And you are correct as to why I noted my post count. Granted, my tone was quite snippy, as I couldn't figure out what was going on.

That was actually Fascinated who wrote that! I completely agree though. I didn't think you meant to sound like you were accusing anyone of anything (at least it didn't sound that way to me).

[happy atheist]

This can't be said much simpler: We're on the Internet. There's no way of knowing who anyone is, or what anyone is thinking. The only way to know is if they post what they are thinking.

(here on out, you is: general 'you')

If you're going to criticize someone for something, make it about what they've actually said. Not about what you think they said, or what you think they would say. Without actually knowing someone, you can't say what they would or would not do.

There's no reason to say with confidence that "we'd be accusing them of ignoring the child's birthday" unless there's a good reason to.

So, by all means point out to me all the posts that try to shame the Duggars for not putting pics of their kids birthdays on Instagram. Back up that statement with facts, not post count seniority. Otherwise, it's an untrue statement meant solely to make FJers look unreasonable and putting the Duggars in a catch 22. And no, it doesn't have to single out one person to be understood as a personal attack. The difference between a personal attack and debate is that in debate, you're supposed to address what the person is saying, rather than the person (or people) themselves.

Yes, we have a wide range of personalities here, which is why making blanket statements such as "we'd be accusing them of ignoring the child's birthday" is pointless and generalizing. So, who is this "we" this poster talking about? Surely not me, who apparently hasn't racked up enough posts to be taken seriously.

There was nothing personal about Gustava's comment. And FWIW I agree with the sentiment. They're damned if they do and they're damned if they don't. That's what happens when you put your whole life out for public consumption: People obsess on both sides.

[Nic]

It's not a happy birthday when he can google this years from now and realize that his father, aunts, and uncles posted pictures of him and his cousins on the Internet to deflect the damage the Duggars have done to themselves and others.

The whole thing smacks of using them as public relation human shields.

Yikes! He's gonna have a lot of issues if from YEARS FROM NOW he is going to be deep Googling himself to find pics from his 4th bday and then putting them in relation to family current events.

[Tiny Bubbles]

Thanks VR. I did not realize that it was thought my general comment was directed at a specific person. And you are correct as to why I noted my post count. Granted, my tone was quite snippy, as I couldn't figure out what was going on.

FWIW, I would never have considered your post anything but a general wry observation. As we do.

The other poster's interpretation was unexpected.

[DuggarsTheEndIsNear]

Yikes! He's gonna have a lot of issues if from YEARS FROM NOW he is going to be deep Googling himself to find pics from his 4th bday and then putting them in relation to family current events.

Hahaha preach.