Mom given custody back..

[Muzna]

Re: Mom given custody back..

@NomiCA

@Muzna

if very few people actually stuck to the topicand you agree that people participating in the thread are “intelligible” then the following must be true:1. either your post was clear to you but not to others,…**the reply of the ‘few’ proves it was clear
**

Actually the opposite is true…if many had replied then the message was clear…because the rate of accurate reply was low means the message was, in fact, not clear.

@NomiCA

2. people were not interested in discussing the subject matter that you presented/intended,
3. people were pre-occupied by a recently launched discussion in another thread and parallels were drawn between this and that
   … **probably… the reason for my responses and ‘namecalling’ in my 2nd post
   **

so are you justifying your “namecalling” by suggesting that perhaps 2 and 3 were true?

@NomiCA

**perhaps you overlooked this part of mehnaz’s post…
**

@Mehnaz

and NomiCA, if you want to discuss the effects on the child, then clearly state that in your opening post rather than posting a video link saying "oh the child is crying and has to go back to the mom". Learn to communicate effectively in the future.I’m out of this thread.

**what she said highlighted above, was" insulting and she was obnoxious in her approach to suggest that i should’ve learnt to communicate…and suggesting i was out to portray the mother as evil or soemthing… therefore i responded accordingly
**

first and foremost…two wrongs don’t make a right.
using someone else’ transgressions as an excuse does not work to justify your own.

perhaps less important but significant nonetheless…when she told you to “learn to communicate more effectively” it is obvious that she is one of those participants in the thread that did not clearly understand what you hoped to accomplish in the discussion thereby proving the original point that your message was not conveyed well. maybe the sentences placed below the video link would have been more strategically positioned above it…

if I count you amongst the “intelligible” folks in the thread then it should be crystal clear to you that this thread, launched in close proximity to the other thread that discussed similar subject matter, might be sub-consciously linked in the members’ minds and parallels drawn… the onus was on you, the OP, to ensure that your distinct message was not mis-communicated in any way.

@NomiCA

**sorry about that…its really hard to figure when you are being a mod or posting as an ordinary member…i see you are trying to re-rail the thread…i apologise for the accusation.
**

no worries.

PS..i am still interested in your response to the question i raised.
[/QUOTE]

I’ll put my response in a separate post to keep the message clear.