Quote:
Originally posted by candygirl
Okay, you don't like the word disheartened it all means the same thing. As for follower, I wanted to convey the idea that being a follower is not always a bad thing. It seems as if you're so vested in the idea that being a follower means you don't have purpose. Of course DST or any organization doesn't want members who take little to no initiative. I understand that.
My dictionary defines follower as an adherent or disciple. Which means that a follower is someone who supports a leader or a particular cause. This definition goes way beyond someones ability to follow directions or to take head to a leader.
As for your comment about my class. I don't need a refund or your snide remarks about feeble attempts and what I need to do.
I completely understood your point. I just wanted you to see it from a different perspective. You stated that DST doesn't need followers. Well, in my eyes I feel that every great organization needs followers. Followers support the leader as well as the cause and are often the back bone of the organization. And I don't think there is anything wrong with that. You may disagree and thats okay but I don't appreciate you trying to belittle me like my opinions aren't valid or valued.
"Because someone you know is a Delta has told me NOTHING about your reasons for wanting to be a member of DST!"
I don't understand this comment. Was this comment directed toward me or was it a general statement. If so I would love for you to tell me who that person may be.
|
And guess what, Delta doesn't need you, which is why you are NOT a member! And by the way, thanks for further proving my points. I hesitate to entertain debate with someone who is clearly an intellectual inferior (anyone who cannot understand disheartened insinuates there was some hope there initially, and you dear are one of those who really needs to rethink your interest in Delta) but here goes. The comment about people knowing Deltas as part of their interest reason was directed toward anyone who wrote that as part of her response (yet another example). And again, try READING what I write before you repeatedly embarass yourself. I wrote "Any great leader is definitely able to follow directions, and learn from others, however, a "Follower" is someone who takes little or no initiative, and whose judgment is a string of contingencies based on in whoms presence they are." and you wrote "It seems as if you're so vested in the idea that being a follower means you don't have purpose..... Well, in my eyes I feel that every great organization needs followers. Followers support the leader as well as the cause and are often the back bone of the organization." Here's a new word "consistency" if you're going to use the dictionary definition of one word, why not use them for all? You used "your" definition for the word "disheartened vs. disgusted etc." but the dictionary version of follower. Now, I gave you my definition of a follower (which is widely socially accepted) and still..no comprehension, we conveyed similar ideas, however, I guess since your aim was to get me to "see it from a different perspective" vs. actually conceptualizing what I wrote, you never bothered to remain consistent. So, basically stated, your comments, to me, are not valid, valued, warranted, solicited nor intelligible (there's a whole slu of words for you to "look up" in your dictionary). And, if you're really so interested in being a member of MY organization, how about you do some research instead of negating members, and "hanging out" online?