does not make your lack of dissent irrelevant.
In fact the lack of dissent over a decision is the very textbook definition of silent assent
"What are you talking about your honour? She didn't say "no" when I mounted her! I already told you she was unconscious!"
Are you on the "ordinary language" train this morning or back on the "hyper-literalist" train? In the latter case I do apologize for your sensation of being raped. I'm not sure what I had to do with your being unconscious, but perhaps I should go ahead and apologize for that also.
You have, unfortunately, failed to grasp the point.
Jarhyn claimed I was responsible or condoned -- via a silence-as-consent model -- for the thread title you created without consulting me, and then, after I suggested the title I would have created had I split the thread, you ignored that and chose something else.
Jarhyn appears to pay a lot of lip service to 'consent' but evidently has a limited understanding of it. I tried to explain it with a stark analogy.
Of course, Jarhyn claims I 'engineered' the thread derail, so maybe I really was
asking for it, aye?
And now you have in fact assented directly to... A JAQ title.
No. I suggested a specific title for the split, and that title was not used.
Your suggested title was "is understanding the speech of others relevant to being a Senator"
I felt that the more specific "Is Fetterman's aphasia relevant to his being a Senator?" would be more appropriate. I thought this was close enough to the suggested title to avoid further whingeing. I was wrong.
You are wronger than you imagine. I did not whinge about the new thread title. In fact, Jarhyn first
kvetched at me for not whingeing about the thread title! I objected to Jarhyn's false characterisation that I chose it, or that I was 'assenting' to it by not objecting.
Having devoted this much time to a long derail that began with a hyper-literalist whine, I suppose I might change the title again, if there's ample support. But again ...
To receive prompt attention from Staff it is best to click on the Report button and type a brief coherent explanation of your objection(s) or what change you would like to see. As in real life, you will often get better service if you can manage to avoid a whingeing insolent tone.
I did not click 'report' because I had nothing to report. Jarhyn's reasoning problems and bizarre, retrogressive ideas about consent were not caused by your thread title.
If
you, Swammerdami, feel like changing the thread title to what
I would have called the derail thread, had I created the new thread, you already know what that is. But since you did not do that when you had the chance, why should I expect a different response this time?
Note also I did not request a change in the name of the thread in the first place. I was responding to Jarhyn's
you were asking for it nonsense.