I believe you guys are putting too much thought into this (except that one comment).
There was quite a few moments of noticing how big of a challenge that would be and how likely it is to fail. There was admission that she/he has competitive character and prefer to be over ambitious. Doing psycho analytics is not really fair.
We can just wait and check if she/he notice that this one comment was a bit too much to swallow.
EDIT:
I will also add that being wrong and holding even the most stupid opinions is not a sin. If it would be we would all end up in Hell. If somebody believes he is 51% or more correct in general then I strongly advise to test it at stock market. With 51% success rate you will be the richest person in the world in no time.
If that would happen just remember it was my idea and a billion $ or two would be nice thank you gift for that
This thread should be locked, just to save everyone some time . I would if I could. Also @solaero I think we should have a Japanese only part to the forum, it would help people practice. Even if we make mistakes, using words is better than not at all.
Since most of you clearly did even bother to read I think I will have to defence @Lorenswan a little bit. Granted: taking offence was childish but other wise most of claims about him/her are straight up false or unproven:
So it is not 6 months.
Just a question about reasonable time line with grammar point. Nothing impossible here.
another admission that it is not from zero
asking for opinion which is not crime
just being competitive
admission there are more talented learner out there.
asking for opinion which is not crime
just answering question about his linguistic history. No a crime again.
O, she a lady. I donāt know why I thought her āwifeā plays chess xD
Admission that this is all about being goal oriented.
Admission it is likely to be impossible
Admission she is all about unique approach and personalised study plan
as above
again about being just competitive for sports sake
I hope you donāt feel like youāre getting attacked! I like having you in the community.
But I will say, the overall tone has not been one of earnest humility. Iāve already spelled out everything that rubbed me off the wrong way, so Iāll just leave it at that. (Well, aside from this: when she said
this was not like you characterized it:
Instead, it was literally a response to
So basically, just responding by saying āyes, I am gifted, so thatās why I can ignore normal human limits.ā
EDIT: After discussing with MacFinch below, I now think this is interpretation is a bit over the top. It would have been better if I just said, āshe wasnāt just answering a question about her linguistic history, but rather giving her credentials to justify going at a rushed pace.ā Then that would be a 100% objective reading without digging into potentially rude āpsychoanalysisā territory.)
I think most peopleās problem here has been that itās clearly an unrealistic goal, and she has not been humble. That will be a problem if/when she goes to Japan, so you could see this backlash as practice for that.
On the bright side, knowing how competitive she is, my post may just end up motivating her to prove me wrong. In that case, I will gladly take credit for pushing her harder (and Iāll be genuinely happy for her), but I do hope she works on how she presents herself to others because it rubbed a lot of people the wrong way.
You are doing psychoanalising here. Do you want me to do the same with you?
There was a lot of context framing this question into question about linguistic baggage. Just read the conversation. And there was even admission that she does not feel as talented person but experience.
Thatās why it is rude as hell to psychoanalyse somebody. I will always get what you want to see.
I donāt. I just donāt like people jump in group on one person, so I felt obligated to interrupt.
Well, I like that we have dissent. Itās valuable to have people who disagree so that there is no groupthink, so thanks for being that voice. I will continue to voice my opinions though, and if people want to join, thatās fine.
If you want to debate me on the value of interpreting peopleās motivations from their external behavior, Iām fine with that
But no, I donāt want a bad-faith representation of my psyche just to score points in the debate. But if you genuinely have a problem with how Iāve been conducting myself, Iām open to hearing it. Depending on the nature of where you wanna take the convo, maybe itās best if we take it to the PMs again xD
Look: most of us are adults here. We all should be able to not get personal. This topic is not about if somebody is a good person or not.
We have whole civilisation build on those values: ādonāt judgeā, āJudge the philosophy not the philosopherā etc. That maybe upsetting but: WE ARE NOT JAPANESE. Or culture does not disallow disagreement. It is morale virtue to be able to disagree in our culture.
I am absolutely not going to do that. It was fan in elementary school. Now it would be embarrassing.
But guess some people should not enter threads about methodology of studying if it is that personal.
Here is example of how our culture works:
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.
Hmm, I donāt think we disagree so much. I tried my best to keep it civil, and I wonāt have any issues sleeping tonight at the thought that I might have taken things to a personal level, but I can see where youāre coming from. This is where I exercise one of the virtues of our culture: the ability to disagree.
And as Iām sure you can already tell, Iām always invigorated with the idea of having a good-faith debate, so any time youāre like ādamn this motherf***er again,ā just hit me up in the DMs.
I think at this point, thereās too much back and forth between us in this thread and we should avoid drowning it with this side convo.
I am sad I am not allowing myself to do psychoanalysing. It would be so easy to assert you are running away because you canāt accept you are wrong. And that EXACTLY the reason it is rude to do it at all.
I will only state the obvious: I am not offended. And I assume you are not as well since it would be rude to assume otherwise.
Donāt take it like that: I only illustrated why it is not something you should do. Because it is low blow.
Edit: Let notice what happen: I only suggested that I could do some psychoanalysing and it in one second become offensive and personal. I wonder why?
I donāt have an opinion about your motives to stop conversation. As far as I am aware you house can be on fire and you try to be polite before leaving. I said I will not do it so I will not do it. Simple. No offence intended.
Welp, Iām not sure if I can recover from that, gg well played. Iāll have to think about that. I will respond though with my overall impressions.
It seems that you donāt like it when people read othersā intentions between the lines. In your view, I gave an uncharitable reading and I am running when you offered to do the same to me.
I admit, when you said
thatās a decent reading of the situation. So Iāll just tell you and clear it up: I was running away from a public airing of your āpsychoanalysisā of me because I donāt believe that you were about to do it based on genuine issues you were taking with me. On the other hand, when I voiced my genuine opinions, I was civil and substantiated it in several ways.
But if it comes to you actually taking issue with my conduct, I am open to hearing that.
So, no, I wasnāt running from you doing the same thing to me that I did before, but rather running from an intentionally distorted airing of fabricated grievances. And you donāt have to take my word for it, because I said this explicitly before:
That was my motivation for being ācowardlyā and you did manage to infer something correct, but probably not for the reasons that I actually had.
That being said, I can see your point about being overly psychoanalytical, especially in my last post where I characterized her by saying:
I stand by this as a valid interpretation, but I think itās overly uncharitable. Youāre right, that was probably overly psychoanalytical and uncalled for. I stand by my original thread though (the long one with the 5 concerning issues I raised).
Obviously! I love our convos. Iām glad to hear I didnāt get on your bad side today (I was starting to worry about that). You havenāt gotten on mine. My overall impression of you is overwhelmingly positive because I love debating. I just hate mudslinging, heavily emotionally charged debating, and I will always run from that. (In real life, I never debate anything, nor in general, but with you I generally feel ok to do it because you have tough skin from what I can tell)
Edit: And I donāt see debate as something someone wins as much as a vehicle for sorting out oneās beliefs. I think we did that well here. The āgg well playedā is a gaming term and I was using it not as āyou won the debateā but as āyou made a compelling point.ā It made me re-evaluate how I said one of the things that I said, so itās been a fruitful debate.
Thatās why I constantly remind everybody my English is not so good. I speak like angry person not because I am angry but because it is hard for me to put it in more cheerful way xD
I feel like moron whenever I try.
ć¾ćęę„
(being hypocrite at the end is always good xD ) @solaero
ćć¤ćć¤ćć¾ććć
BTW, I edited my first response to you when I criticized your characterization of one of her quotes. Now it should hopefully be clear that Iām doing my best to interpret things objectively. Thanks for the good discussion.
More true than it was even a few hours agoā¦ I flagged the OP ā maybe if enough of us flag it, then the moderators\bots will lock for usā¦ (wink-wink @Rion)
. I would if I could. Also 
