# Opinions and Opinions with back up



## Mr Blunt (Jul 18, 2012)

> Originally Posted by Regret214
> I challenge you to prove this with names and examples


*For posters that make bold statements about very sensitive subjects I think Regrets challenge is a very good one. I think that making such judgments without some credible backup is not very convincing*. 


Often their response is “I am entitled to my opinion” That is correct but for me someone’s opinion about a very serious matter without back up is just as about as credible as a prisoner’s opinion that he is innocent. Lots of strong opinions but no back up or proof!

Just one example of what I am referring to was an exchange between Rookie and Vellocet in the Lurking Wayward thread. This is just only one example there are others. Vellocet claimed that Rookie had other reasons, other than welcoming waywards, for starting the thread Lurking Waywards. Vellocet claimed to know Rookies intentions for starting the thread but I did not see much backup to his claim. Maybe Vellocet has backup but I did not see it. See reprint of Rookie and Vellocret posts below.


The point I am making is that when someone makes a strong judgment statement about another person or topic I encourage them to be challenged to post some backup. Of course they do not have to but I put a lot more credibility with statements that have some backup reference. I assume that some others feel the same way and that backups posted would be more helpful in the threads and posts. *I realize that there will not always be back ups and that is fine but when you make serious and bold statements about very sensitive subjects I think that backups would be helpful.*


*I applauded Regret for putting out the challenge!*






> Post 1451
> *Originally Posted by Rookie4 *
> Well, I've been on a little vac, and have looked in on my thread and it has progressed about as I thought it would.
> 
> ...



What do you all prefer; opinions or opinions with backups for judgments about serious issues?


----------



## Squeakr (May 1, 2013)

So do you want backup or proof, as in the eyes of many posters these are completely different ideals? Just because there are plenty or a majority of examples that back the statement, many will deny their validity based upon the fact that they perceive the provided examples as one-off examples and don't encapsulate the entire breadth of the topic/situation and therefor are not proof (they require scientific 100% undeniable proof or it isn't acceptable as backing).

I feel that if it is an opinion one has (and is stated as such) then no, it shouldn't require proof or backing. As when challenged to prove/backup the validity of the counter-claim against the opinion, it always seems that the posters cop-out and provide no proof to the opposing viewpoints and offer the back-up that the prior statement wasn't proven therefor their counterclaim is superior and correct (without proof how can their statement be any more valid than the others).

If backup/proof is required, shouldn't all be required to meet the same standards of burden of proof? (It just seems since the majority of the posters are from the US they embrace the ideal of innocent until proven guilty and therefor place the burden of proof on the charger and relieve the charged of all burden of proof, but not all countries/communities embrace that theory.)

What say you, should the counter claims be denied if they don't provide the requisite proof as well?? I say no to any opinions stated be required to provide support as that would stifle the free-flow of discussion (and thee is always going to be the exceptions that are pointed out to deny any claim/statement). 

The topics generally dealt with here are not scientifically provable, as there is no way to create such a controlled experimentation to support either sides theory for or against it.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Mr. Blunt. What thread is Regret being quoted from?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Regret214 (Apr 22, 2012)

I hear what you're saying Squeakr and I agree with pretty much everything you posted. I think what Mr. Blunt is referring to is the commentary made by a poster who said -



> How many WSs actually help BSs here on TAM? 2? What about the other WSs who come here? Some come for their daily narcissistic IV dose, getting high on how their infidelity can wreak havoc on another person's life or to learn how BSs collect evidence?


I simply challenged that comment because in my two plus years here the only ones I've ever seen do this have been banned as trolls, like JB. I don't think it's fair to put out a commentary like that without giving examples and quotes of when it happened.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Squeakr (May 1, 2013)

Regret214 said:


> I hear what you're saying Squeakr and I agree with pretty much everything you posted. I think what Mr. Blunt is referring to is the commentary made by a poster who said -
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I see this and see the point of what you quoted (as I have seen the same thing as well). I question the validity of such challenges though, as the rules forbid personal attacks and inciting such attacks/exchanges. If someone gets banned for a seemingly innocuolos statement (as it would be viewed as nothing by most, in the case of vel) wouldn't you expect the same to happen to someone else for naming or calling out someone for their "questionable" behavior and intent (especially since it would be providing names and quotes). 

Most that see this behavior in posters, just enable their personal filters and move on from these comments without inciting exchanges which could result in personal attacks and banning. I feel that not answering such questions is actually beneficial in the situations you presented as it would do nothing but possibly blacklist a poster, type cast them, and possibly create more strife than would exist normally (and incidentally there are BS that come here specifically for the same reasons stated in your quote, and no I will not name any of the posters I am thinking of in both cases, for the reasons I have stated).

I hope this makes sense (sleep has seemed to allude me for most of the last days).


----------



## Acoa (Sep 21, 2012)

I think we should all stick to posting about our experiences. Our opinions are shaped by our experience. Rather than share an opinion, share the related experience that helped form that opinion.

Many 12 step groups practice this and it helps prevent the kind of conflict mentioned.


----------



## Regret214 (Apr 22, 2012)

You make total sense Squeakr and I feel your pain on the sleep issue as I've been going through an insomnia phase myself.

Acoa, I agree 100%.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Regret214 said:


> I hear what you're saying Squeakr and I agree with pretty much everything you posted. I think what Mr. Blunt is referring to is the commentary made by a poster who said -
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thank you for answering my question for Mr.Blunt. I agree that I have never seen a WS on TAM to " peruse" the destruction caused by infidelity. Good challenge.&#55357;&#56833;
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Squeakr (May 1, 2013)

ConanHub said:


> Thank you for answering my question for Mr.Blunt. I agree that I have never seen a WS on TAM to " peruse" the destruction caused by infidelity. Good challenge.��
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Although I too feel it is a valid challenge, I don't feel it is a "good" challenge. Like I previously stated all it does is create strife. If you answer you could be inciting and if you avoid answering then you are considered to be fabricating the claims as you have nothing to back up such claims. Damned if you do...Damned if you don't scenario with no win either way.

Hypothetically, if you were one of the posters that seemed to fit this "profile" (whether your intent or not) and someone cherry-picked your quotes and offered up your username as proof, would you feel attacked and threatened and "obligated" to defend your position and ideals (possibly inciting a flame war and bitter back and forth with the challenged) or would you just let it go and let everyone view you as you have been "profiled".

This is no different by allowing someone to be named and called out in such ways as it is to allow the constant and incessant claims of "trolls" and "trolling" which are not allowed (so I think this kind of crosses that boundary in the same intent).

JMHO.


----------



## Regret214 (Apr 22, 2012)

ConanHub said:


> Thank you for answering my question for Mr.Blunt. I agree that I have never seen a WS on TAM to " peruse" the destruction caused by infidelity. Good challenge.��
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I got lucky and was answering Squeakr and answered you, too. Dig would call it a double tap but it was pure luck that I answered both of you at the same time!
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

I agree with your point about specific names but, worded a little differently, it would have been perfect. She could have challenged by claiming to have never seen the ghoulish villains that her statement was directed at. Lurking WS enjoying pain and destruction?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Squeakr (May 1, 2013)

ConanHub said:


> I agree with your point about specific names but, worded a little differently, it would have been perfect. She could have challenged by claiming to have never seen the ghoulish villains that her statement was directed at. Lurking WS enjoying pain and destruction?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


However it is worded, how does one answer such challenges without "calling out" the offenders (Lie I said a no win situation). 

I agree though in certain threads having seen it blatantly, where the WS poster just continues to bait, brow-beat, and goad the BS through their constant defense of the "offense" as the BS "deserve it for their actions in the marriage", "didn't provide fully for their WS and therefor were responsible for the <action>". 

How does this help any situation, when apparently the only motive of the poster was to incite pain and carnage. A certain banned poster has been offered up already (and was called a troll and banned for such behavior) but maybe they weren't really trolling per say but that is actually how messed up their psyche was and their entire outlook on life was to incite fear and pain in others. They came here daily until they were banned to achieve that objective. Just because they were banned in the past doesn't mean that they don't fit the profile and therefor can't/shouldn't be offered up as proof (because they were banned and labeled a bridge dweller, does that make them any less of an example)?


----------



## Regret214 (Apr 22, 2012)

ConanHub said:


> I agree with your point about specific names but, worded a little differently, it would have been perfect. She could have challenged by claiming to have never seen the ghoulish villains that her statement was directed at. Lurking WS enjoying pain and destruction?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Two Minutes Hate


----------



## wmn1 (Aug 27, 2014)

Squeakr said:


> So do you want backup or proof, as in the eyes of many posters these are completely different ideals? Just because there are plenty or a majority of examples that back the statement, many will deny their validity based upon the fact that they perceive the provided examples as one-off examples and don't encapsulate the entire breadth of the topic/situation and therefor are not proof (they require scientific 100% undeniable proof or it isn't acceptable as backing).
> 
> I feel that if it is an opinion one has (and is stated as such) then no, it shouldn't require proof or backing. As when challenged to prove/backup the validity of the counter-claim against the opinion, it always seems that the posters cop-out and provide no proof to the opposing viewpoints and offer the back-up that the prior statement wasn't proven therefor their counterclaim is superior and correct (without proof how can their statement be any more valid than the others).
> 
> ...


I agree and I see this as an extension of the other thread which got nasty. Your points are absolutely correct.


----------



## wmn1 (Aug 27, 2014)

Squeakr said:


> I see this and see the point of what you quoted (as I have seen the same thing as well). I question the validity of such challenges though, as the rules forbid personal attacks and inciting such attacks/exchanges. If someone gets banned for a seemingly innocuolos statement (as it would be viewed as nothing by most, in the case of vel) wouldn't you expect the same to happen to someone else for naming or calling out someone for their "questionable" behavior and intent (especially since it would be providing names and quotes).
> 
> Most that see this behavior in posters, just enable their personal filters and move on from these comments without inciting exchanges which could result in personal attacks and banning. I feel that not answering such questions is actually beneficial in the situations you presented as it would do nothing but possibly blacklist a poster, type cast them, and possibly create more strife than would exist normally (and incidentally there are BS that come here specifically for the same reasons stated in your quote, and no I will not name any of the posters I am thinking of in both cases, for the reasons I have stated).
> 
> I hope this makes sense (sleep has seemed to allude me for most of the last days).


and also why are people still attacking Vellocet after he has been banned and can't defend himself or his thoughts ?


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

what is exactly the purpose of this thread? Is it to demonize vellocet? I'm not a real big fan but I think it would be easier for you and anyone else to put V on ignore than to post something like this which is nothing but an argument waiting to happen.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Almostrecovered (Jul 14, 2011)




----------



## staystrong (Sep 15, 2012)

Regret,

To what extent do you think WS's "get high" off of wreaking havoc on other people's lives ? 

Did you feel that way?


----------



## Regret214 (Apr 22, 2012)

staystrong said:


> Regret,
> 
> To what extent do you think WS's "get high" off of wreaking havoc on other people's lives ?
> 
> Did you feel that way?


I didn't say that...someone else did which is why I challenged them to provide proof.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

I'm not sure what the point of this thread is but it seems you're trying to lampoon a user who is currently banned and can't even defend himself. Not that Vellocet would need defending.

And I happen to concur with what he said cause I was in that lurking waywards thread and I was threatend time and time again to get out by the OP. I was accused of topic derailment when I was stating my opinion on what OTHERs changes the topic too, not me. I also think he had an agenda and not the one stated in the opening message. 

That is the only thread I have ever participated in that I was threatened and told to leave......which was the way wrong approach to take with me and why I stayed. He to asked for proof of these things and I showed post after post of him telling me to get out and him reporting me. It's all there if you want "proof" go look for yourself.


----------



## Squeakr (May 1, 2013)

I too was subjected to that same sort of treatment, even though I have tried to remain diplomatic the entire time. I realize that I share some views that others don't agree with, but they are my views and based upon my experiences and someone to tell me I am wrong for having those views seems very controlling to me.

I don't try to change others views, but to get them to see and realize that others may have different viewpoints and just because they don't meet your criteria or standards, doesn't make them any less valid. 

Unfortunately some feel as though there must be an absolute judge and jury when it comes to deciding the validity of one's statements and if "proper backing or proof" is not provided or an exception may exist to the statement, then it is invalidated completely in their minds (and everyone must agree with their findings). 

I still have posters haunting me from that thread as I would not renounce my "opinions" and the thread was closed before I was able to be "debated" on those opinions.


----------



## Calibre1212 (Aug 11, 2014)

"Quote:
Originally Posted by jim123 View Post
I would like to add to those who were kicked to the curb and those in reconciliation but out of weakness instead of strength.

Most of the time, posters are angry at themselves and not the WS. It is the inaction in their own lives that makes them so angry."

My FULL response: 
"Why does this sound pompous? How many WSs actually help BSs here on TAM? 2? What about the other WSs who come here? Some come for their daily narcissistic IV dose, getting high on how their infidelity can wreak havoc on another person's life or to learn how BSs collect evidence? 

No I will not hero-worship WSs who saw "the light". If you are going to help someone, do so from your heart with no expectations, if you have a heart and most WSs don't. Threads take on a life of their own, each one is unique and ends that way. Who cares if there are tributaries along the river? The point is we all get to share each other's pain and help each other to cope. I have yet to see anyone else fully understand the plight of a BS, other than another BS."

It is I who was challenged but I do not feel the NEED to take up a challenge from a sleep deprived person who is clearly seeking a fight...That would be playing on an unleveled field. I do not have time to nurse anyone's bruised ego because I have matured beyond that point. What I will not do is leave TAM before I wish to. My recommendation to Regret214 is to take care of yourself. Those are my words quoted. I stand by them...What I do make time to do is to help others to wade through the mess forced upon them, based on my own experience and what I have learned/applied from TAM and other BSs.


----------



## Regret214 (Apr 22, 2012)

Actually, Caliber I was not seeking a fight. I was seeking truth. If that's a fight to you then so be it. I simply find it silly to pull things from your nether region and make a claim that that's the way it is.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Calibre1212 (Aug 11, 2014)

Then show me the evidence to prove or disprove my claims, after you get some sleep.


----------



## Regret214 (Apr 22, 2012)

LOL. I see blameshift has now commenced. Good bye, Caliber. Good luck with healing.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Calibre1212 (Aug 11, 2014)

You refuted your own challenge by proving my claim, by your very own words: 

*"I simply challenged that comment because in my two plus years here the only ones I've ever seen do this have been banned as trolls, like JB. I don't think it's fair to put out a commentary like that without giving examples and quotes of when it happened."*

You know where the evidence is to substantiate my claims. So don't rug-sweep now, bring it forward.


----------



## BetrayedDad (Aug 8, 2013)

Careful there friend. Alot of posters have been getting banned lately going down the road you are. Don't take the bait.


----------



## 1812overture (Nov 25, 2013)

Calibre1212 said:


> How many WSs actually help BSs here on TAM? 2? What about the other WSs who come here?


Regret just stepped in to try to help Thinkittrhough. Mrs. John Adams tried to help Hawx, Soul Potato tried to help BetrayedAgain, Blossom Leigh tried to help Dadof2.

Regret can take care of herself, and is wise to not join the debate. But those are four examples. And even so, the quantity isn't what matters, so much as the quality of the help provided. If you read the exchange between Hawx and Mrs. John Adams, I think you will understand what I mean. Some might even say it's worth all of the bickering and nastiness.


----------



## convert (Oct 4, 2013)

EI has helped me along with Mrs John adams and even Regret214 through their stories of what a proper R is supposed to resemble.

It gives me some hope that it can be done and it is not impossible even though it is so hard and takes so long


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Calibre1212 said:


> Then show me the evidence to prove or disprove my claims, after you get some sleep.


You are asking her to disprove a negative. I have only been here a little over a year but have not witnessed "evil" lurking ws that thrive on the destruction wrought by infidelity. I am sure it occasionally happens but is certainly not the norm.

I have seen fws try and help many here. I, personally, have been helped by a nurturing soul that goes by EI.

I have simply not seen the atmosphere that you have portrayed concerning ws to be true of TAM.

If anything, TAM could certainly become a little more ws "friendly". By that I mean when a ws comes here looking for help, knowing they have sunk to the lowest and have become someone they hate, a little compassion and a lot of instruction would always be refreshing to see.

A ws does not deserve their marriage, but they damn sure deserve to get help if they want it. 

Everyone deserves to get help to become a better healthier person.

I am not saying that the occasional 2x4 up side the head, or hard/harsh words are not called for. Infidelity is one of the hardest/harshest events to endure and you should call a spade a spade.

O.K...... rant over.


----------



## Mr Blunt (Jul 18, 2012)

> Wmn
> and also why are people still *attacking Vellocet* after he has been banned and can't defend himself or his thoughts ?
> 
> 
> ...



I like Dig’s terminology with his “Double Tap” I am going to see if I can do a TRIPLE TAP for Wmn, ClipClop, and Wolf

The posters above seem to think that I have attacked and demonized Vellocet and that they must be his defenders. Here below again is exactly what I said regarding Vellocet






> “Just one example of what I am referring to was an exchange between Rookie and Vellocet in the Lurking Wayward thread. This is just only one example there are others. Vellocet claimed that Rookie had other reasons, other than welcoming waywards, for starting the thread Lurking Waywards. Vellocet claimed to know Rookies intentions for starting the thread but I did not see much backup to his claim. Maybe Vellocet has backup but I did not see it. See reprint of Rookie and Vellocet posts below.”




I was using Vellocet’s debate with Rookie as ONE EXAMPLE to illustrate the point of my thread. Because Vellocet and Rookie went on and on for many posts about an issue that was not even related to the thread I was pointing out that I did not see any backup by Vellocet. Vellocet said many times that Rookie’s intentions were not the only reason that he posted that thread. I was looking for backup from Vellocet for his judgment of Rookie that is all. *Where did I attack and demonize Vellocet? I did no such thing!*


To insinuate that I was demonizing and attacking vellocet without any backup is another bunch of posts that would prompt the topic of this thread. There are no attacks or demonizing of Vellocet in my posts.



The two posters below are asking questions of what the point of my thread is.



> ClipClop
> what is exactly the *purpose of this thread?* Is it to demonize vellocet?
> 
> 
> ...


*My point was clearly stated in my posts. Here it is again reprinted below. I do not know how to make it much more clear*




> The point I am making is that when someone makes a strong judgment statement about another person or topic I encourage them to be challenged to post some backup.


----------



## RV9 (Sep 29, 2014)

Hatred is the appropriate emotion when you're powerless to do anything else. Pity or rather indifference is a more suitable response for those that have moved on with their head held high.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

I am defending no one.

I am taking exception with this thread. 

Maybe you should consider a,self-imposed TAMout rather than end up acting how I thought was outside your character.


----------



## Pluto2 (Aug 17, 2011)

Mr. Blunt, you singled out a poster for your "example" knowing he had no voice. Bad form, sir.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

Pluto2 said:


> Mr. Blunt, you singled out a poster for your "example" knowing he had no voice. Bad form, sir.


Cowardly is a better word I would use.

You want to make a point about threads getting derailed no issue with that. They do and that's just the way things go on a public forum. Making an example out of an interaction between two posters ,one of which can't come and defend himself, cowardly.

And I never said you attacked him. I said lampooned meaning brought him into it without his ability to come a refute


----------



## cpacan (Jan 2, 2012)

I'm sorry that I can't bring any scientific proof to back this opinion of mine up. So please accept this as my description of feelings that I get from reading this.

First; when you use Vellocet as a specific example to illustrate your main point, this thread is indeed about Vellocet, otherwise I think you would probably choose another example to make your point even more clear (this is an assumption though).

Second; how does Rookies choice of words: "Haters" - about people who disagree with him or just state their opinions against infidelity sound to you? This is a genuine question that I would like you to answer. Personally, I don't like that label, but I do get that it might make lurking WS feel more welcome and among like minded people.

I don't know if such tactics/choice of words are used differently here than on other boards, but in my experience (no proof) they are usually used either as bait or derogatory remarks to make the "opponent" look less attractive, intelligent or just not welcome. Politicians use similar tactics to demonize their political opponents and are trained to do so - this is probably something that can be verified or backed up.


----------



## Calibre1212 (Aug 11, 2014)

cpacan, Wolf, Pluto, clipclop, wmn, squeakr ... All I can say is, you are...simply amazing! Honored to be in your company!


----------



## murphy5 (May 1, 2014)

will you guys please stop this petty bullsh*t


----------



## Calibre1212 (Aug 11, 2014)

ConanHub said:


> You are asking her to disprove a negative. I have only been here a little over a year but have not witnessed "evil" lurking ws that thrive on the destruction wrought by infidelity. I am sure it occasionally happens but is certainly not the norm.
> 
> I have seen fws try and help many here. I, personally, have been helped by a nurturing soul that goes by EI.
> 
> ...


I brought no one a challenge. The challenger shot herself in the leg...End of story.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Calibre1212 said:


> I brought no one a challenge. The challenger shot herself in the leg...End of story.


If I read your assertion about ws that were lurking to survey the damage they had wrought incorrectly, then my apologies.


----------



## nuclearnightmare (May 15, 2013)

sometimes its better to try for a good punch line, asserting that if such a line is good enough no back up is needed...

-- it's easier for a WS to help _somone else's_ BS than to help their own.


----------



## wmn1 (Aug 27, 2014)

cpacan said:


> I'm sorry that I can't bring any scientific proof to back this opinion of mine up. So please accept this as my description of feelings that I get from reading this.
> 
> First; when you use Vellocet as a specific example to illustrate your main point, this thread is indeed about Vellocet, otherwise I think you would probably choose another example to make your point even more clear (this is an assumption though).
> 
> ...


I agree cpacan. My initial response should have been like yours.


----------



## wmn1 (Aug 27, 2014)

Calibre1212 said:


> cpacan, Wolf, Pluto, clipclop, wmn, squeakr ... All I can say is, you are...simply amazing! Honored to be in your company!


agreed Calibre


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

I agree with Mr Blunt.

In fact, I'll go so far as to say that if someone *really* has a problem with a post or a poster that they would use the "report" button to alert a moderator to their concerns.

If they really had a problem, that is.


----------



## Regret214 (Apr 22, 2012)

nuclearnightmare said:


> sometimes its better to try for a good punch line, asserting that if such a line is good enough no back up is needed...
> 
> -- it's easier for a WS to help _somone else's_ BS than to help their own.


Yes, neither EI, Mrs. John Adams, Maricha, Blossom, or myself have helped our betrayed spouses in any way. If that's your punchline, I'd suggest NOT going to an open mic any time soon.

One thing that I just don't get is the passive aggressive hostility. Oh, I know the betrayed are hurt and a whole slew of other feelings are going on, but I simply find it disheartening to see people who reformed themselves continue to be attacked. This silly virtual high five takes the cake.

I said it once, so I'll say it a final time. You betrayed with your dulled out axes to grind need help. It's only you who can change. Mr. Blunt, you're absolutely correct, B1 and Dig are much better off not being here. I hope you all enjoyed yourselves. You're all pretty f'ng sad.

Good bye.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

nuclearnightmare said:


> sometimes its better to try for a good punch line, asserting that if such a line is good enough no back up is needed...
> 
> -- it's easier for a WS to help _somone else's_ BS than to help their own.


Sometimes a former WS can see a BS who is hurting and think: "Oh, ****! That's *exactly* what I put my poor wife/husband through! Their pain is the same! I'll reach out to them."

Only to have some well meaning person jump into the thread (which is not theirs, by the way) and say: "Get off of this thread, you WS! You WS' are all evil, I tell ya! Nobody wants to hear ya!"

And the thread then goes badly off topic, gets so toxic that people are banned and the thread perhaps gets locked. And meanwhile the BS is thinking: "Hello? Is there anyone there for me, please?"


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

staystrong said:


> Regret,
> 
> To what extent do you think WS's "get high" off of wreaking havoc on other people's lives ?
> 
> Did you feel that way?


Not sure if ^this was meant as a genuine question or just to be snarky, but could you provide the same insight into the mindset of an OM?


----------



## Nostromo (Feb 8, 2014)

MattMatt said:


> Sometimes a former WS can see a BS who is hurting and think: "Oh, ****! That's *exactly* what I put my poor wife/husband through! Their pain is the same! I'll reach out to them."
> 
> Only to have some well meaning person jump into the thread (which is not theirs, by the way) and say: "Get off of this thread, you WS! You WS' are all evil, I tell ya! Nobody wants to hear ya!"
> 
> And the thread then goes badly off topic, gets so toxic that people are banned and the thread perhaps gets locked. And meanwhile the BS is thinking: "Hello? Is there anyone there for me, please?"


That's a fair and I believe accurate observation MattMatt, but on the flip side I have also witnessed many instances where a WS comes waltzing into a thread started by a BS and immediately starts throwing in little jabs at the OP, almost like they're trying to get a rise out of them and then when called out immediately jumps into 'victim mode' and acts like they were only trying to help. Very passive aggressive behavior.

As often as many people on here are accused of taking their anger for their own WS and projecting that onto other WS's on TAM, I do wonder if it's not just as often the reverse scenario with many a WS perhaps no longer feeling like they can freely speak their piece to their own BS due to their affair/s using TAM as their outlet to take out their own pent up frustrations with their BS out on others that remind them of their BS in some way.


BTW do you think there's enough acronyms in my post?


----------



## Thundarr (Jul 4, 2012)

Mr Blunt said:


> What do you all prefer; opinions or opinions with backups for judgments about serious issues


I prefer opinions that have substance behind them. What I mean by that is that either they have backups or the originator can connect the dots in a logic way as to why they have the opinion.


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

Nostromo said:


> That's a fair and I believe accurate observation MattMatt, but on the flip side I have also witnessed many instances where a WS comes waltzing into a thread started by a BS and immediately starts throwing in little jabs at the OP, almost like they're trying to get a rise out of them and then when called out immediately jumps into 'victim mode' and acts like they were only trying to help. Very passive aggressive behavior.
> 
> As often as many people on here are accused of taking their anger for their own WS and projecting that onto other WS's on TAM, I do wonder if it's not just as often the reverse scenario with many a WS perhaps no longer feeling like they can freely speak their piece to their own BS due to their affair/s using TAM as their outlet to take out their own pent up frustrations with their BS out on others that remind them of their BS in some way.
> 
> ...


Yes. You are now declared an official TAMASU. (TAM Acronym Star User.):smthumbup:


----------



## Calibre1212 (Aug 11, 2014)

Regret214 said:


> Yes, neither EI, Mrs. John Adams, Maricha, Blossom, or myself have helped our betrayed spouses in any way. If that's your punchline, I'd suggest NOT going to an open mic any time soon.
> 
> One thing that I just don't get is the passive aggressive hostility. Oh, I know the betrayed are hurt and a whole slew of other feelings are going on, but I simply find it disheartening to see people who reformed themselves continue to be attacked. This silly virtual high five takes the cake.
> 
> ...


...And this is not ridiculous, rude and bannable? Like a spoilt little child who did not get her own way and shot herself in the leg? Showing all the true colors...I think your "kudos" got to your head. I used to respect you. 

No way, after going through what I did with my own WS, will I take any power & control tripping from someone else. No more fear. Vellocet, stood up to you and he was banned...There...I said it. 

Do you think after all I have been through, I have any fear? Worst of all, fear of getting banned? No one of us should be wielding a "banning stick" over anyone's head. If a moderator chooses to ban me, so be it. I will not lose my oxygen supply and that's a guarantee. 

And just for the record, it is PLAINLY logical that while typing, he accidentally left the "Y" off of "...our", as in a TYPO, meaning he clearly meant to say "It is Your opinion and you are entitled to it."

Edited: P.S. You accuse others of the very same things you exhibit as in passive-aggression, blah, blah, blah...


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

These threads suck.


----------



## Calibre1212 (Aug 11, 2014)

They suck because they are used to Salem-witch-hunt people or BSs into getting banned. Reminds me of "The Crucible", which I was forced to read for Oxford & Cambridge O'Level exams 30 years ago; now I am living it?...No thank you.


----------



## honcho (Oct 5, 2013)

GusPolinski said:


> These threads sucks.


Is it the thread that sucks or the inevitable direction they always seem to go....


----------



## Thundarr (Jul 4, 2012)

honcho said:


> Is it the thread that sucks or the inevitable direction they always seem to go....


With Vel being quoted and also being banned, this thread will spin in circles until he's back. I do like the question Mr Blunt is asking though. Honestly I'm very happy the phrase 'my truth' is falling out of favor and hasn't been showing in this thread. Those dammed 'my truthers'


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

there's something else going on here and it has completely to do with certain personalities and nothing to do with the majority of us. 

I don't know what it is but I really resent being dragged into it in the sense that a community of people are being pulled into a fight that I think is probably going on offline. 

and regret I really like you a lot but I think you're still very f***** up. 

because quite honestly there is no reason for that.


----------



## Mr Blunt (Jul 18, 2012)

> *Originally Posted by Pluto2 *
> Mr. Blunt, you singled out a poster for your "example" knowing he had no voice. Bad form, sir.
> 
> *By Wolf*
> ...




Pluto and Wolf
You both have determined my intentions and Wolf has judged me as “cowardly” Your judgments of me without any backup is not going to stop me from bring attention to the point I have been making. In addition, I noticed that you did not answer my question that would be some backup to your allegations and judgments. Perhaps the reason that your did not answer is because your allegations and judgments are empty. Here is the question again below:

*Where did I attack and demonize Velocity?*

Additionally, I also noticed that you do not post any of my quotes to back up your statements and judgments; just your opinions


Wolf, your need to look up the definition of “lampooned” because it does not mean what you said it means



> *By Wolf.*
> I said lampooned meaning brought him into it without his ability to come a refute


*NOT!!!*



You guys can hurl all of your judgments without backup of me that your want and I am not going to stop getting back to the main point of my thread (vellocet is not the main point) which I am going to repeat AGAIN below:



> The point I am making is that when someone makes a strong judgment statement about another person or topic I encourage them to be challenged to post some backup.



Wolf and Pluto’s post above proves that they will make judgments without any backup but I am hoping that when people like Wolf and Pluto make such judgments that they get called out to at least post a quote to back up their baseless opinions.


I understand that there are some discussions that do not require back up but when someone takes another person’s post and determines that their intention is not what the OP stated and has nothing to back that up with they deserve to be called out. That also goes for someone like Wolf who judges another poster as “cowardly” based upon his misinterpretation of what the main topic of this thread is about. The topic is not just about Vellocet it is about all people that make judgments and proclamations’ without any backup!

*Wolf, Pluto, and the rest of the self-appointed defenders of Vellocet are not going to derail me from the main topic by trying to zone in on Vellocet! TAM is a lot more than just Vellocet. Challenging people who make judgments about people without backup is the main issue.*


----------



## tom67 (Oct 2, 2012)

Thundarr said:


> With Vel being quoted and also being banned, this thread will spin in circles until he's back. I do like the question Mr Blunt is asking though. Honestly I'm very happy the phrase 'my truth' is falling out of favor and hasn't been showing in this thread. Those dammed 'my truthers'


It's kind of like where you can't discuss a certain historical event that took place during WW2 in many European countries and Australia. H word.
Why is it a thought crime to discuss history.
What are they afraid of.
Anyway it kind of parallels...
Back to KC and Angels


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

it's very funny that anyone who is opposing this thread is deemed a supporter of Velocette. 

Mr blunt I'm very surprised at you. 

again I'm not privy to what's going on in the background but whatever it is please take it underground.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

I'll be very clear I've never liked Vellicet. I found him or her I don't even know which combative and argumentative. But this thread sucks. 

And that is totally on you Mr blunt .


----------



## Calibre1212 (Aug 11, 2014)

Mr Blunt said:


> Pluto and Wolf
> You both have determined my intentions and Wolf has judged me as “cowardly” Your judgments of me without any backup is not going to stop me from bring attention to the point I have been making. In addition, I noticed that you did not answer my question that would be some backup to your allegations and judgments. Perhaps the reason that your did not answer is because your allegations and judgments are empty. Here is the question again below:
> 
> *Where did I attack and demonize Velocity?*
> ...


Btw, Blunt...You will have to pay my azz to read all this bullsh!t. Your special price: $100 per word. Why? It's off the charts boringly attention-seeking. Hasta la vista baby.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

Mr Blunt said:


> Pluto and Wolf
> You both have determined my intentions and Wolf has judged me as “cowardly” Your judgments of me without any backup is not going to stop me from bring attention to the point I have been making. In addition, I noticed that you did not answer my question that would be some backup to your allegations and judgments. Perhaps the reason that your did not answer is because your allegations and judgments are empty. Here is the question again below:
> 
> *Where did I attack and demonize Velocity?*
> ...


Actually you just proved my point. Could care less about your opinion of me. You seem no better than other blowhards who state an opinion, it gets questioned and challenged and you go on the attack. I wasn't defending anyone. Don't need to. I said that I also felt the same way that Vellocet did which was attacked and that Rookie had a different agenda in that thread than he presented. 

Don't agree....I don't care. The proof of why I felt that way is in that thread, and I stated that earlier, ....I'm not about to go into it and post replies from him to me, on this thread cause I have zero to prove to you. Those who were there, which I also believe you were, saw first hand.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

clipclop2 said:


> it's very funny that anyone who is opposing this thread is deemed a supporter of Velocette.
> 
> Mr blunt I'm very surprised at you.
> 
> again I'm not privy to what's going on in the background but whatever it is please take it underground.


So am I. I obviously misread him from other threads I have seen him in. Disappointing


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

Calibre1212 said:


> They suck because they are used to Salem-witch-hunt people or BSs into getting banned. Reminds me of "The Crucible", which I was forced to read for Oxford & Cambridge O'Level exams 30 years ago; now I am living it?...No thank you.


These threads suck because of all the rampant vitriol. They typically start out altruistically enough, but then the chorus of "waaaaay too angry to claim that they're actually 'coping' with infidelity" BS's ramps up and... well, hold on, because we're off to the races!

These threads suck because there are simply too many of us just waiting on the sidelines w/ a certain zealous anticipation for someone to chime in w/ something that doesn't comply w/ the usual "all WS's are no better than a pack of heartless, remorseless, and unrepentant wh*remongers incapable of even a scintilla of compassion for their BS's" mentality.

These threads suck because of the all-too-common assertion (and even if it's only implied) that each and every single BS is and always has been a near-perfect spouse whose most horrendous infraction to date within the scope of his or her marriage is that he perhaps forgot to put the toilet seat down or that she perhaps forgot to iron her husband's slacks (this is not intended to be sexist)... and is therefore completely blameless for the state of his or her own marriage.

Look... far more often than not, affairs are horribly painful ordeals. We should all be able to agree on that point pretty easily. BUT... since each affair is fundamentally different than the next, it stands to reason that the same will be true for each WS, each BS, etc.

Let's not paint everyone w/ the same broad brush. Let's take the time to ask questions, listen to (and learn from!) answers, and grow.

Or, as the name of the forum suggests... to actually "cope" w/ infidelity.


----------



## tom67 (Oct 2, 2012)

GusPolinski said:


> These threads suck because of all the rampant vitriol. They typically start out altruistically enough, but then the chorus of "waaaaay too angry to claim that they're actually 'coping' with infidelity" BS's ramps up and... well, hold on, because we're off to the races!
> 
> These threads suck because there are simply too many of us just waiting on the sidelines w/ a certain zealous anticipation for someone to chime in w/ something that doesn't comply w/ the usual "all WS's are no better than a pack of heartless, remorseless, and unrepentant wh*remongers incapable of even a scintilla of compassion for their BS's" mentality.
> 
> ...


Best way to call it "Mental Masturbation"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSjK2Oqrgic


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

GusPolinski said:


> These threads suck because of all the rampant vitriol. They typically start out altruistically enough, but then the chorus of "waaaaay too angry to claim that they're actually 'coping' with infidelity" BS's ramps up and... well, hold on, because we're off to the races!
> 
> These threads suck because there are simply too many of us just waiting on the sidelines w/ a certain zealous anticipation for someone to chime in w/ something that doesn't comply w/ the usual "all WS's are no better than a pack of heartless, remorseless, and unrepentant wh*remongers incapable of even a scintilla of compassion for their BS's" mentality.
> 
> ...


Wise words my friend and I agree


----------



## Calibre1212 (Aug 11, 2014)

GusPolinski said:


> These threads suck because of all the rampant vitriol. They typically start out altruistically enough, but then the chorus of "waaaaay too angry to claim that they're actually 'coping' with infidelity" BS's ramps up and... well, hold on, because we're off to the races!
> 
> These threads suck because there are simply too many of us just waiting on the sidelines w/ a certain zealous anticipation for someone to chime in w/ something that doesn't comply w/ the usual "all WS's are no better than a pack of heartless, remorseless, and unrepentant wh*remongers incapable of even a scintilla of compassion for their BS's" mentality.
> 
> ...


Completely irrelevant to the topic...Let's stay on topic. It appears that whoever dares to somehow offend or irk these WSs who are finger-pointing, tend to get cornered, attacked and set-up for a ban. When they themselves get called to task and are forced to look in the mirror, they cry foul and run away. Typical cheater style. Get it together Polinski.


----------



## Thundarr (Jul 4, 2012)

clipclop2 said:


> it's very funny that anyone who is opposing this thread is deemed a supporter of Velocette.
> 
> Mr blunt I'm very surprised at you.
> 
> again I'm not privy to what's going on in the background but whatever it is please take it underground.





Wolf1974 said:


> So am I. I obviously misread him from other threads I have seen him in. Disappointing


Forget that you disagree with the presentation, for just one post. Pretent you believe Mr Blunt's is sincerely in asking the question.

Now what do you prefer? The question is not BS/WS oriented by the way.


----------



## EI (Jun 12, 2012)

MattMatt said:


> Sometimes a former WS can see a BS who is hurting and think: "Oh, ****! That's *exactly* what I put my poor wife/husband through! Their pain is the same! I'll reach out to them."


On a positive note, what you described above, MM, is exactly what happened to me during my earliest days on TAM, over two years ago. But, before I reached out to those BS's, they reached out to me, first. B1 and I were both posting on TAM. I posted first, then he found my initial thread, and within a day or two, he started one of his own. We were both still angry, both hurt, and both confused. I wasn't yet able to truly "feel" his pain, because I was still extremely bitter about many of the pre-A issues in our marriage. I understood his anger, but not his pain. His pain was a result of his love, but I hadn't seen that love for many years prior to my A. I was very confused. I understand that BS's are hurt and confused after D-Day. But, I can honestly say, this WS was also hurt and confused after D-Day. I didn't trust him any more than he trusted me, at that point.

It was in reading the stories of the BS's on TAM, that I was finally able to begin to understand the depth of B1's pain. I could easily feel compassion for them, when I could not yet feel it for my own BS. But, it didn't take very long for it to sink in for me. When I realized that B1 was genuinely hurting, I realized that he he truly did love me. Then, my compassion for him began to overflow. He, too, was learning, and growing, and beginning to realize the part he played, not in my infidelity, because he played no part in that, but he knew that he played a huge part in the destruction of our pre-A marriage. 

We both learned so much about ourselves and about one another with the direction and support of so many here. But, it was never the 2 x 4's that helped either of us. It was the honest sharing of information between the BS's and the WS's on TAM, who we credit with giving us the tools to build a brand new marriage..... a truly happy marriage, this time around. That's a pretty big deal in our book! 

So, yeah, I try to stick around to pay it forward, if I can. Our story was a very pain filled story, it's very triggery for many BS's. But, it's still our story. We can't tell it any other way than the way it happened. I know that I have triggered a lot of BS's when I've shared my innermost pre-A feelings. Hurting BS's, mine or anyone else's was never my intention. Our intention was to share, so that others, who may recognize similarities in their own marriages, might be spared the same hurts that B1 and I went through. Often, it was the most painful stories, from the BS's here, that gave me the most valuable insight. 

Someone mentioned WS's coming here expecting hero-worship, and another said something about WS's coming here to get their daily IV dose. This is the LAST place any WS would come looking for those things. I have never felt less heroic in my life, and the "dose" of whatever it is here for WS's, is probably about as pleasant as cod liver oil. I think that most of the WS's who have passed through TAM since I have been here are searching for the same things that the BS's are searching for; some direction, some hope, some comfort, some support, and something that will allow them to believe that, someday, things may get better than they are when they first arrive here.


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

Calibre1212 said:


> Completely irrelevant to the topic...Let's stay on topic.


It's certainly relevant to the overall direction of this thread, as well as others. Honestly, the details of who said what in response to who don't even matter.



Calibre1212 said:


> It appears that whoever dares to somehow offend or irk these WSs who are finger-pointing, tend to get cornered, attacked and set-up for a ban. When they themselves get called to task and are forced to look in the mirror, they cry foul and run away. Typical cheater style. Get it together Polinski.


But why all the bitterness? Unless your own WS (or, hopefully, FWS) is present on this site/forum, there's not a one of them here that is accountable to you for their past (or even present, if that's the case) misdeeds. This goes for each of us. Each and every WS/FWS who chooses to participate in the ongoing dialogue here is accountable to themselves, their spouses, and their families for their misdeeds... and the list pretty much ends there.

They _choose_ to share their stories here so that we can all learn from them. They _choose_ to contribute to different threads in order to offer the insight afforded to them by their experiences, and we're all the better for it. 

And we're not doing ourselves any favors if we continue to attack them over every single trivial (perceived) disagreement.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

Thundarr said:


> Forget that you disagree with the presentation, for just one post. Pretent you believe Mr Blunt's is sincerely in asking the question.
> 
> Now what do you prefer? The question is not BS/WS oriented by the way.


I believe I did which is opinions is fine and if challenged you can can choose to provide proof and backup. I stated as such.

Sometimes threads are nothing more than just sharing your viewpoint or your feeling on a subject....this is an area people need to be more respectful. Other times you are challenged and you can provide proof which then somehow never seems to be enough or the correct amount or whatever. 

My point is I wouldn't get overly wrapped up on TAM trying to prove a point.....most don't want to hear any view other than theirs. I personally believe everyone should have a chance to share thier opinion but not everyone has to agree. Try and be respectful


----------



## jim123 (Sep 29, 2012)

Calibre1212 said:


> Completely irrelevant to the topic...Let's stay on topic. It appears that whoever dares to somehow offend or irk these WSs who are finger-pointing, tend to get cornered, attacked and set-up for a ban. When they themselves get called to task and are forced to look in the mirror, they cry foul and run away. Typical cheater style. Get it together Polinski.


Welcome to the world the WS live. They do look in the mirror and cry for what they have done. They do not run away.

You object to my post because it is true and struck a cord with you, Time for you to look in the mirror too. What do you see?


----------



## Miss Taken (Aug 18, 2012)

CWI seemed a better and healthier place when I joined. What I do see is a lot of pain, bitterness, anger that is often directed every which way but where it needs to go. I also see people who have been posting here for 2 years, 3 years, or more but it may as well be 2 or 3 days so far as their healing seems to have gone. For those same people, in my lurking for some of them it seems that outside of TAM they have done little to move forward.

I've read countless times that healing takes two to five years to overcome infidelity betrayal. Personally, I am 2 years out of my own betrayal and how I feel today is not represented in many of these CWI threads. Of course everyone is different hence the two to five years but it really feels sometimes that some of the people here are really aiming for that five. 

I mostly lurk here now but even then quickly go to other areas of the forum as this is part of TAM is just too much. It _feels _toxic to me. Not talking about the new stories, those are painful to read as an empathetic person but that's not it and I also tend to be thick-skinned. Being more removed from my own pain, I can look at those stories individually. No, this is something more. Not sure if "mob-mentality" or "hateful" or "misery loves company" are the appropriate words but it is as close as I can describe how this place feels to me and why I find no solace here now. 

Even now this thread with BS's turning against other BS's and getting in bitter side arguments. It's just counter-intuitive to the things I think are good, positive, productive and healing. 


-----------------
As for the original question/post. My answer would be that I prefer opinions that can be backed up with evidence. Although, sometimes anecdotal evidence will do but it really depends on what is being stated or asked. Something damning, provocative or controversial I generally prefer to be backed up.


----------



## Calibre1212 (Aug 11, 2014)

Why is the trump aka default word always "bitter"? I have a zero tolerance for bullying. Gus, when the cornering and attacking happens to you, let me know. 

Jim123: When I look in the mirror, I see someone who will not accept disrespect. Thanks for asking. When you look at responses like these, tell me what you see:

"One thing that I just don't get is the passive aggressive hostility. Oh, I know the betrayed are hurt and a whole slew of other feelings are going on, but I simply find it disheartening to see people who reformed themselves continue to be attacked. This silly virtual high five takes the cake.

I said it once, so I'll say it a final time. You betrayed with your dulled out axes to grind need help."

Typical cheater spoilt-brat style is what I really meant to say...Everyone else needs help except them. The essence of narcissism, that's what I see from the quote above. 

I agree that we all can help each other. I do not believe anyone should force their opinion down my throat and vice-versa. If I refuse the choking, don't bring me in front of a tribunal and expect me to be made an example of then further expect me to lie there and take it.


----------



## Blossom Leigh (Mar 27, 2014)

Geeze people... So much pain. 

Just for clarity. Blossoms past is complex since I am a WS and also a BS. This is why I know the pain on both sides intimately. I am also an abuse survivor in childhood and adulthood. Its why I can speak to so many situations and emotions, especially with the level of recovery work I've done and continue to do.

Calibre, I find it interesting you say Regret pulled the victim card and yet classifying yourself as cornered and attacked. Gus would never find himself "cornered" because this is an internet forum and he carries that healthy detachment. You literally can't get cornered here. Yet you do sound like a cornered man lashing out, which I find interesting since giving power away like that is a personal choice. For your own sake and peace of heart, soul, and mind, take your power back. 

And for those who think all WS run..... You've never met me.


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

I have been here since the early days.

Wanted to save my marriage. 

Didn't work out.

For those who cannot or will not see through the fog of their affair ... you will likely receive little welcome here.

For those who cannot or will not see through the fog of their betrayal ... you will likely receive little welcome here.

Moral of the story?

Heal.

And help others get through the same mud, blood, and tears that most of us participating here have already been through.

Thread closed.


----------

