Show me this parody I seem to have missed.
Me: Do you have any examples of the MM using creature to mean Monster not creature?
JaronK: "Feel free to actually read the book and find that out for yourself."
Me: "No JaronK, you don't get to insist I read the MM again to try to find an example proving you right. You have to provide that evidence if you want me to take you seriously."
Jolt (quoting the above sentence of mine): "Wrong." (Followed by unrelated stuff, I'm going to assume because he directly quoted that statement and told me it was wrong, that he wsa negating that statement and as such would agree with the statement "JaronK does get to insist that I read the MM again to try to prove him right.")
Me (In parody): (Statement disagreeing with what he said.) "Feel free to actually read all my posts and find that out for yourself."
Now, I would argue that a flaming douche bag must be someone who flames IE makes "a response is usually not constructive, does not clarify a discussion," which I would argue my response do. But that's an aside point, since the douche bag attache makes it entirely subjective and just demonstrates that jolt is taking this opportunity to flame me, and not interested in an actual discussion of any kind.
Just out of curiosity Bozwevial, would you characterize the statement: "Hitler, just like Goebbels, was a jerk. Nazis are jerks." as a Godwin? Keeping in mind the definition of Godwin would probably be, "the use of arguments in the reductio ad Hitlerum form."
And if it is not such a Godwin, if a poster should perhaps before declaring something to be such, know whether or not the accused Godwin is an actual comparison to Hitler? And additionally, are false accusations of comparison to Hitler appropriate?
As regardin my uncivility, or JaronK's "civility" yes, I can gather from your post that you are exactly the type of person who takes great delight in all insults be just deniable enough to never be blamed for, and are therefore a proponent of BGs recent unfortunate shift into a gitpesque troll playground where civil insults and purposeful deliberate stupidity to provoke ire are the accepted norm in disagreement and those who call out others for anything at all, from lapses of argument to stealth trolling are the problem.
As such, someone who actually is blunt about disagreement I could only imagine would be annoying.