I don't want to re-open some five year old argument, so let's please just move past this.

It's important to examine the dynamic here because I think you'll find it illuminating. I think others will, too.

I absolutely remember our last interaction. You picked a fight with me, I told you to back off, and then you opted to gripe to someone else about what an asshat I was. You went from zero to ad hominem in three posts, and decided to bring others into the dispute.

Meanwhile, you assume I don't remember it, while also arguing that it's fresh in your memory. In other words, the interaction was de facto more important to you than to me, despite the fact that I was the one who took action over it.

Moving on, I point out that what's really needed is an apology, an argument I have made at length. You claim to like my content, you claim to like my insights, yet the idea that I might want to not suffer ad hominem attacks for making them does not strike you as relevant enough to do what I'm asking point blank. And when I point out that you were insulting, you argue that you have a different view, not that my "hey dude try not to be such a dick" was actually an entreaty to not be such a dick. That is something you haven't considered: if we're conversing somewhere neither of us have any power, the only thing each of us can do is walk away. But if we're conversing somewhere I've staked a claim to? You have to converse on my terms.

FUNDAMENTALLY - I choose what I post and I choose what I say and I have the ability to choose how much I am attacked for doing so. You crossed a line, I told you that you had crossed a line, and you doubled down so I chose to force you to do that elsewhere. This is my choice, and frankly, the only reason I post at all: I'm not interested in engaging in gladiatorial combat every time I opt to share something, been there, done that, got nominated for commenter of the year three years in a row (turned it down each time because really, it was people who loved the beatdowns).

SO LOOK: I can avoid people who refuse to stop being dicks two ways. I can not post or comment at all or I can own my posts. Owning my posts means people interact with them on my terms. It's no more or less than what I'd get with a blog or a byline. And I'm here literally asking do you think you could say you're sorry? and you're literally here saying no.

So I'll try again: apologize. That's the way you get me to extend you goodwill. You had plenty, you burned through it, I'm telling you how to get it back and refusing to do so isn't going to change my mind because right now? Right now what I'm taking note of is that you still refuse to apologize five years later.

mk - this is the problem muting solves, and just because you don't have it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. On Reddit, content is owned by the moderators. On Hubski, content is owned by the poster. That is a good thing, not a bad thing, and ownership is meaningless without the ability to assert property rights.