I said that Mullenweg's explanation of the buyout makes him come across as a petty tyrant.

I didn't say that poor communication is what qualifies someone as a tyrant.

There is no objective measure of what makes a tyrant. If one comes across as a tyrant, they are a tyrant!

You did say, as interpreted by the reader, that his poor communication skills makes him come across as a tyrant, and therefore that is what makes him a tyrant.

That may not be what you meant, but in that case we're right back to you and the poor communication skills of your own.

It feels like you're bending over backwards to misinterpret what I said, so I'm going to stop engaging with you.

I appreciate your interpretation. I too am a poor communicator, so I had no expectation of you interpreting it in line with my intent, but I am a bit saddened that I did such a poor job that it seems you didn't even begin to pick up the main point of the folly of trying to interpret statements absent of full context.

But perhaps you did and that realization frightens you. That would explain why you have decided to tell us that you are running away now. Logically, if you were just bored of the conversation you'd simply stop replying. Clearly something has gone haywire in your thought process for you to think it is necessary to share that you are going to stop.

Or maybe I'm just not grasping what you are trying to say. Such is the risk of dealing with those who are not good communicators.

They stopped engaging because you seem either unwilling or incapable of understanding the difference between personal attacks and criticism of an artifact.

To try and take the emotion out of it, it's the difference between saying "I am tired" versus "this comment I wrote makes me sound tired"

What personal attacks are you referring to? There are no personal attacks found anywhere in this thread, nor would there be any logical reason to bring emotions into it at all.

But perhaps I have failed to understand what you are trying to say? Such is the trouble with communication.

The whole point of this thread is that you're defending what you perceived to be a personal attack against Matt (calling him a tyrant) and the other poster was trying to explain that it was not, in fact, a personal attack.

So if you agree there's no personal attacks, I guess that settles things!

I made no suggestion that calling Matt a tyrant was a personal attack. Nor would I ever consider it to be. It is nothing more than a relaying of information about the state of the universe. There is no conceivable situation where pointing out that someone is a tyrant is an attack. That makes absolutely no sense.

But that's not what we were talking about anyway. The entire discussion has been about how communication is hard. Which I guess is what you have set out to prove by showing us that you have no clue as to what is going on around you. But I already established that communication is hard right from the very first comment, so what, exactly, do you think you are giving us by this live demonstration of what we already know?