I'll just pick one of those for now: I challenge you to show where she made any nasty, snide suggestions on UD. Let's see them gordy! I also challenge you to apologize (here, on UD, on Mark Frank's blog, and on all of your websites) for EVERY nasty, snide remark you've made about MathGrrl.
You say: "to spread a potentially damaging false impression that you know or should know is not true or fair is deceptive." You also said that to do that is a lie gordo.
Well, gordon e. mullings of the kairos initiative and scum sucking douchebag, you're a WILLFUL LIAR. Lying is a sin, isn't it gordy? You're going to burn!
Some, but by far not all, of the other false things you've maliciously, dishonestly, and willfully accused MathGrrl of being or doing:
disrespectful and hostile
grossly irresponsible and disrespectful
making unwarranted projections of dishonesty on the part of design thinkers
false talking points
red herring- strawman- ad hominem trifecta fallacy remarks
her behaviour is now unfortunately willfully insistent and deceptive
continued with a rhetorical strategy of ignoring substantial answers and corrections
MG was part of a co-ordinated group with KL and another
making some pretty nasty snide allegations or insinuations.
crudity of thought is fuzzed out by using indirection, allusion and suggestion
eagerness to play the rhetorical game of pushing persuasive talking points through the tactic of drumbeat repetition
lose sight of the duties of care to truth, fairness, and reciprocity in a serious discussion.
subtly willfully deceptive; tantamount to lying.
project talking points and play the game of selectively hyperskeptical objection, not to actually engage in genuine exchange of ideas.
drumbeat repetition of the many talking point objections
the face of a cloud of angry mosquitoes tanked up on talking points and spreading them far and wide
the whole debate is a massive exercise in self-referential incoherence on their part.
She simply refuses to accept that there are answers on the table.
MG has needed to explain herself
MG has persistently ignored.
One of MG’s tactics seems to be to wait until something is buried under enough posts in a thread, or has been continued in a successor thread, before repeating the assertion that was rebutted.
She knows or should know better than she has acted.
MG: Perhaps it has not dawned on you that the situation has now fundamentally changed, once your side has tolerated outing behaviour and increasingly disrespectful rhetoric leading to the creation of an attack blog that resorts to vulgarity as well as slander-laced outing behaviour as its main tactics. Madam, you are now associated with and unavoidably tainted by a cesspit of misbehaviour, and have a lot to answer for. As was already noted long since above.
simply rudely out of order and disrespectful
outing behaviour and crude vulgarities
You ought to be ashamed of the level your side has sunk to.
deliberately dodged aside
this sort of clever selection tactic has to be seen as a willfully deceptive strawman tactic, not a mere accidental oversight. It has happened far too many times.
you have so assiduously and cleverly ducked again
you resort to rhetorical tricks of distraction because you have no serious answer on the merits
not a responsible reply
MG cleverly refused to respond
the sort of vulgarity and outing behaviour already seen, comes across as disrespectful and uncivil.
The attempt to discredit and dismiss those on the other side without seriously addressing issues on the merits comes across as outright rude.
repeated refusal to address reasonable response, comes across as arrogant.
It is your side that has worked very hard to polarise the situation
You have a lot of fence mending to do, to even begin to come across as a reasonable person engaging a reasonable discussion on reasonable terms.
your ilk of objectors associated with MF’s blog
you and others of like ilk have to first establish that you are civil persons acting in good faith to be entertained for reasonable discussion.
And many more. I'll be adding more as I come across them.
You also blame her for things that other people have said on Mark Frank's blog. Guilty by association, eh gordy? Hmm, if you can use guilty by association, so can I!
You associate with joseph, barry arrington, dense o'leary, clive hayden, mung, uprightbiped, pav, nullsalus, chris doyle, gil dodgen, bornagain77, news (o'leary), stephenb, illion, cuntyuckianyankee, barrybowen, medsrex, allanius, junkdnaforlife, and all the other IDiots on UD, so that makes you automatically responsible for everything they say, and especially all the nasty and snide remarks they make or have made, anywhere, anytime. Of course you're also responsible for all your own nasty and snide remarks.