@ Aneeda72 said
"The problem is people who write, or speak, with authority are, in my experience, dangerous people. Such people are more often believed, when they should not be. As for the statement of not spending āenergy on unproductive disputesā, what that really says, to me, is you are
not willing to spend time with certain people as your time is more valuable than their time. To me, it indicates a certain level of arrogance, which you might be entitled to, how would I know? I wouldnāt."
i'm sorry you feel that way. Tho now knowing the little of your history you shared i can see how you would feel that way.
Arrogance? It is not a matter of not willing to spend time or
energy with 'certain people' but rather not willing to spend time on certain behaviors, discussions. Ones that will only frustrate and upset the other person as well as myself because when it is clear we have a stalemate why continue? As for entitlement--i to think/feel
we are all 'entitled', have a right, to choose how and with whom we spend our energy on, or engaging with. i suspect there are people on every platform i've every been on who think i'm not 'worth' their time/energy and that's ok--i've never been everyone's cup of tea.
There are people on this forum whose way of talking to others is much more confrontational and brusque than i generally am some of them i mostly avoid, some i engage with in some contexts. We agree on some things and disagree on others. That's the way it is life. We all have experiences that shape how we react.
BTW while i did get a college degree late in life (age 48) people often assumed i already had one because like my Dad who only had an 8th grade education i read extensively, have a good memory and synthesize my own ideas from and about the things i read.
@Aneeda72 also said
"I am not impressed that your dad ended a disagreement in the manner you mentioned or that your sisterās husband was intimidated by his action. I am surprised that you seem proud of it.
I've been that piece of lumber. Your dadās action were the actions of a bully."
The first sentence in bold is why you drew the conclusion of the second. But Dad did not do it to 'intimidate BIL' (Who by the way was a WWII army vet and close Dad's age than my sister's) And you never considered HE may been being overtly hostile, seeing how far he could push (this was his nature, tho you have no way of telling from my story i guess i should have thrown in more detail). Dad did it because the simplest way to support his own view was to
demonstrate that one could indeed break boards with little preparation using physics principles. When something is telling you physical action is 'impossible' isn't the easiest way to make your case to demonstrate that it can indeed be done?
Again i'm sorry my words upset you and called up awful memories for you. i like you too.
i am glad that tho you said you didn't want to 'engage' me, i'm thinking you meant get into lengthy discussion over your statements to me, that you spoke your heart about them. Ironically by calling me out about your perception of and reaction to those posts but stating you don't want to 'engage' you are exercising your right to choose how involved you get in any point of contention with someone else.
This is extra lengthy because i won't address you about these two things again unless you choose to address them, out of respect for wishes. i reserve the right to talk about them with anyone else who has anything to say about them.
. I wish writing used unlimited energy. I would lose weight. I frequently like what you write. Your education shows. You have learned to write āwith authorityā. Iāve never seen you ramble.
who knew I was capable of such a thing? See, thatās how I knew you had more education than me. It shows. 
