Alright, let's review this entire thread in one post, shall we? Since the whole thing has been derailed anyways and has transformed into a thread about how not to come off as condescending on the internet. I posted the following...
And this was the response by Revahcah...
In this response, there are a couple of things that could get the discussion off on the wrong foot. First of all, there is the claim that something is "silly", without anything to substantiate it. If you are going to claim something is silly, it helps to substantiate why it is silly, because otherwise the other person might take it as though you are assuming that you should know something that they clearly don't. The next post was not directed at me, but at Prism, though the overall tone matches the tone of the initial post...
"Ugh... I just... I don't get it. What's the matter with you?" THAT is what I personally inferred from the tone of this post, and I am not sure if the same was picked up by Prism, but nuances of vocal conversation can often be difficult to interpret online, which is why I generally try to approach with caution when I am writing responses. One could even draw the conclusion that Revachah was implying that the notion that the introduction of pigs could "really help" Southern Californian tribes was somewhat racist. I gave the following response...
Admittedly, I was kind of taking the bait, here. This was the reply I got...
Now, maybe I am reading a tone into this response that was not intended, however, from my reading of it, it can be summarized with the following, "Oh come on... why don't you know this stuff? I mean... really? You're really that dumb? This is a stupid idea, man. Get over it."
The canoes in question were not really claimed to be war canoes, and my question was about Polynesian colonization, not about how a couple of spurious contacts with Polynesia that allegedly only left behind the kind of knowledge that could be transferred in a matter of hours without needing to speak the same language could alter the Native American socio-political scene. Revachah here is putting words in not only my mouth, but the mouth of everyone else posting in here, and at least, from how I read it, trying to make fools out of people for things they didn't even say. Likewise, at this point, and really at no point, did myself or anyone else argue that a single contact event or even a handful of contact events was enough to visibly alter the history of North America. Revachah drew this conclusion all on his own, without anyone even implying it. He then proceeded to accuse me and other posters of implying that the Jones and Klar papers on the tomol canoes held any weight, and called such notions "disproven and quite frankly fanciful", when nobody actually ever argued anything of the sort, but merely asked what was so "silly" about this theory to begin with. And to top it all off, he said, "Anyone who studies Oceania and Lapita who believes Polynesians were the only peoples in the entire Pacific Rim to make Sewn Plank canoes and spread them is probably a bit of a polynesian cultural supremacist as far as I am concerned."
So, Calbear... that doesn't fit the criteria for being rude? Really? Putting words in people's mouths, accusing them of saying things they never said and then indirectly calling names? Cuz if that's the case, I don't really know what to say. I am not upset here that an idea I had for 700 years in the future of my timeline is probably not going to work according to the arguments Revachah has made. I am upset that Revachah couldn't come on this thread and make these arguments in a manner that did not involve inferring that everyone who didn't know what he knew was an idiot, and putting words in people's mouths.
This is when I reminded him that at the end of the day, what is written and posted here is fiction. That IS the point. We are all asking questions about things that did not actually happen and then writing stories about what the world could have looked like if said imaginary event had happened or imaginary person was born (what if Mary Tudor was born a boy, for example). Yes, we strive to make it as plausible as possible with the available data that we have about history, but at the end of the day, everyone writing a timeline has an agenda in writing that timeline that they use historical realities (or the best that we understand them) to justify that agenda. Alternate History as a genre, IS creative writing. And in reminding Revachah of this very simple reality, I was attempting to remind him that being as rude as he was with that post was unnecessary, although admittedly I took the bait and was equally as rude in the latter part of that post.
So I apologize for returning rudeness with rudeness. I'm 24, and a professional nanny. I definitely should know better. But if you are going to dismiss the idea that Revachah was rude here and denigrate my response to a childish tantrum I threw because Revachah was right and I was wrong, I don't think there is anything left to discuss.