You might want to pay closer attention to who it is that insists on bringing this issue up over and over and over and over, and who has been repeatedly counseling those people since last September that the best thing they could ever do is shut up about it.

You going to be teaching the Lashing Out 101 course next semester?

Stop talking about me in front of my back.

I work under the assumption that you are literally in my phone.

Eerily similar to a party I was at where Gallagher schooled Carrot Top on his contributions to the comedic arts.

2p2 has a pretty good search function. BruceZ posts matching "apologize" finds this one:
Similarly, searching for "sorry" finds this one:
These are pretty classic non-apology apologies. "Sorry I got caught" and "Sorry you misinterpreted me". Maybe somebody else can fill in all the sincere and heartfelt apologies I missed.

That is silly. Get off my lawn.

You assert non apology by making an appeal to such a thing being a classic. What classic non-apology directly addresses the issue people are hurt about? Meanwhile, examining Bruce's overall post patterns, he is a fairly sincere person, helps with homework, has a wild imagination. If someone with those attributes makes a direct apology for specific behavior it is more unreasonable to conclude insincerity and is quite reasonable to conclude sincerity.

He was sincerely mad when he called people lady parts, he was sincerely knowledgable about how stupid prejudice is formed, a sincere apology fits better.

An insincere apology also serves his critics. It's an easy way to avoid all the other bad arguments by jumping to conclusion where one can find easy doubt by unsupported assertion. Trolls disrupting their own trolling as a way out is poetic.

So are you able to find any such sincere and heartfelt apology that I missed?

Duker, if you meant to be a huge *******, I'd hope you'd offer a heartfelt apology. But if that's not what you meant, if I just misconstrued the meaning of your words, no apology is necessary. You might still offer something like an apology though, just to acknowledge my feeling were hurt.

Turns out that when you say something that sounds exactly like you are intending to be a huge *******, saying that you didn't mean it and the other party is too stupid to see that you aren't actually an ******* rings pretty hollow

I would think the urge to apologize would be switched. Why would you offer an apology if you meant to be an *******? How would such an apology be heartfelt?

@Foldn:There's no need to hypothesize. An actual event happened. It has a pretty robust historical record. I thought we were talking about how Bruce's many sincere apologies were snubbed by the uniformly unreasonable and mean politards. If your new line is going to be "no sincere apology was offered because no sincere apology was warranted" that's fine, but I'm not sure if that's progress or not.

I disagree with your framing btw. If my actions or words cause injury, I'd like to think I would offer sincere apologies regardless of my initial intentions.

Isn't kind of awkward that MrWookie suddenly can't remember apologies and a person's apology is bent treated like a political statistical fallacy which requires a cite? It's a tragic mistake to have an orange color and a super reputation and not know the key details of the big interpersonal conflict that spanned the forums still disrupts conversation with accusations to this day. Give us all a break. Even the dukers credibility can't save the opinion that Bruce is a racist and justify trolling chez and others based on all that thin reasoning.

False accusations of racism remain often objectionable. Accusations of racism remain serious and volatile. Justifies a higher standard than the mere popular opinion of a troll community and the posts created while trolling for entertainment. People with infallible opinions supported by little more than mockery and derision qualify for the task how?

So no olive branch twigs were happening then?

one quote will do just fine

toilet bowl echoes itt

"HuHuh! I was in the right!"
"Yes, absolutely in the right!"
"I certainly was in the right!"
"You was definitely in the right. That geezer was cruising for a bruising!"
"Yeah!"
"Why does anyone do anything?"
"I don't know, I was really drunk at the time!"
"I was just telling him, he couldn't get into number 2. He was asking why he wasn't coming up on freely, after I was yelling and screaming and telling him why he wasn't coming up on freely.
It came as a heavy blow, but we sorted the matter out."

Yea, probably best to avoid any serious conversation after that last post.

Ask supermod and irresponsible orange MrWookie about the apologies. Oh by the way I am intentionally not providing a cite so your shallow gotcha game can play out in futility, but thanks for providing zero substantial content.

It is not unfair that y'all's opinion that Bruce is a racist is so weakly supported that an honest open-minded counter assessment is actually painful to you. You have behaved the opposite of serious on this matter, though you do try to fake being serious. Kudos though- you did not join in the apology doubting this go around.

Either accusations of racism are serious or they are meaningless. Explicit racists would greatly benefit from meaningless accusations of racism. Why? Look at how treating accusations of racism unseriously is literally disruptive to a community of people who are not explicitly racist . Look the **** around.

Everyone, enjoy the displays of empty reactionary mockery. It's a great tell of having stupid indefensible arguments in the end game. Until next time...

And also note we are at the point of the discussion where MrWookie and his posting is criticized and the same few posters followup with the aforementioned empty reactionary mockery. Why doesn't mrwookie stand up for his ideas without all the smokescreens and surrogates?