07-12-2025, 09:54 AM
@bluetoes
I interacted with this post because something was mentioned definitively about 85r that wasn’t true. We do not know 85r is a literal reference to German manuscripts. We do not know that is a rosary. That statement by Rafal deserves correction. If you’re a person with authority, so to speak, in this forum, like Rafal, and you throw out falsehoods like that, then you are sculpting a narrative, a common “knowledge”.
My experience of this forum is witnessing a lot more people wanting to lead the way and play goalie than those lead by genuine curiosity. I was harassed on my TikTok by a continuous poster on this forum, one of the first people to throw an unwarranted personal jab/assumption at me in my Irish thread. This forum feels politically charged.
I respect the OP and this thread. My post is important for the integrity of this thread.I should also note, I’m finding overlaps between Irish and Chinese in terms of tonality and script in previous approaches and I have a lot more to say that I don’t. But I’ll absolutely call out what deserves a call out. If others are playing goalie, I should be able to as well.
I just know 85r is not a literal reference to the German manuscripts and I don’t have the resources to prove that. And if I call Rafal’s definitive verbiage out without any reasoning to refer to, I’ll be considered crazy or intentionally contradictory. Which is not my intent. So I mentioned my reasoning, I did not reference my work directly. Others have done this on the forum.
I didn’t mean to be an annoyance, I have my reasoning.
I think all of your validity in this forum goes out the window when you apply the same linguistic approach, with strict, definitive, precise linguistic rules, to the multi-scaled and layered ART involved, ESPECIALLY if you can’t read the accompanying text.
Again, apologies for the annoyance.
I interacted with this post because something was mentioned definitively about 85r that wasn’t true. We do not know 85r is a literal reference to German manuscripts. We do not know that is a rosary. That statement by Rafal deserves correction. If you’re a person with authority, so to speak, in this forum, like Rafal, and you throw out falsehoods like that, then you are sculpting a narrative, a common “knowledge”.
My experience of this forum is witnessing a lot more people wanting to lead the way and play goalie than those lead by genuine curiosity. I was harassed on my TikTok by a continuous poster on this forum, one of the first people to throw an unwarranted personal jab/assumption at me in my Irish thread. This forum feels politically charged.
I respect the OP and this thread. My post is important for the integrity of this thread.I should also note, I’m finding overlaps between Irish and Chinese in terms of tonality and script in previous approaches and I have a lot more to say that I don’t. But I’ll absolutely call out what deserves a call out. If others are playing goalie, I should be able to as well.
I just know 85r is not a literal reference to the German manuscripts and I don’t have the resources to prove that. And if I call Rafal’s definitive verbiage out without any reasoning to refer to, I’ll be considered crazy or intentionally contradictory. Which is not my intent. So I mentioned my reasoning, I did not reference my work directly. Others have done this on the forum.
I didn’t mean to be an annoyance, I have my reasoning.
I think all of your validity in this forum goes out the window when you apply the same linguistic approach, with strict, definitive, precise linguistic rules, to the multi-scaled and layered ART involved, ESPECIALLY if you can’t read the accompanying text.
Again, apologies for the annoyance.