>>>>>>>Yet another approach would be for all of us to try a bit harder to get along and be respectful of others' points of view. That doesn't mean agreeing, it just means being respectful of their opinion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Another approach would be for people who are twitted to look at the behavior that got them twitted and take accountability for those actions, instead of whining about it non-stop.
>>>>>
>>>>>You are suggesting here that it's always the fault of the twitted person. Which is ridiculous and illogical if that's all you can say about it.
>>>>
>>>>There is an old saying. It takes two to tango. It is illogical to assume the twitted also never did anything.
>>>
>>>On the contrary. It is illogical to assume the twitted did anything. It is a fallacy. Suppose I twit you right now. Would it be logical to assume that you did anything? Sure, that's how the human mind works. But it's not logical.
>>
>>I am disagreeing with you. That is my choice. It may be the reason you twit me. We have both done something. It is extremely rare that someone twits someone else without provocation.
>
>Extremely rare? Not rare here on the UT.

Then obviously our definitions of provocation do not match. If we disagree on something and you continue to pester me and push your point at what point do you leave off before I get to call foul?