patrick.net

Maybe from a manipulation standpoint we can understand Shrek. He wants to say what he wants to say, and he hates having it challenged. For him a conversation isn't about a back and forth, which might lead to mutual agreement on the truth. (this is why his referring to his competence as an engineer at finding bugs is so fascinating).

No he does not want to ever reach agreement, nor does he want to disagree with a lack of emotion in a way that might overturn or at least amend your viewpoint (see Troy). He wants to hold forth on whatever topic, and if you challenge him, he would like to make you regret that you tried (but not because you are wrong). He wants you to see it as futile.
Even he says:
shrekgrinch says

If I am SUCH an asshole, then why do you bother to respond to me or even engage me in this discussion at all?

As I said it's manipulation. If you think about how tough a time this guy is going to have, you should feel for him. I'll leave it at that.

shrekgrinch says

Scott Adams the other day dropped a nice Dilbert cartoon that totally backs me up. It’s so close to what is going on on this thread it is scary. I wonder if he is a patrick.net forum participant?

Maybe you're right. I guess the reason that people give up arguing with you long before getting to the heart of the matter is because of your towering and intimidating intellect. It's not because you for some reason(via insults and obnoxiousness) cause them to quit it, before we are able to drill down to the truth.

My mistake.

I didn't get the last square of the cartoon. Is it your clarity that makes you so angry ? OR should it be my clarity making me angry. I mean it, I actually didn't get that part. Is it your clarity that makes me angry ?