Engaged:  1. having formally agreed to marry: 2. involved in something: 3. busy doing something.

"For example the above. WTF is that supposed to mean, why talk about agreeing to marry? You have not defined what you mean, and as I said this is the same sort of bs that you complain that others do. Exactly the same, and you know it."

 I very specifically utilized the second section in my explanation.  Was there any reason you needed further clarification than my using the exact words I referenced?

 I can outline it better so nobody has to go fishing:

"How exactly is any non-US citizen, not on US soil "involved in" American Politics?  If you are involved in any way other than personal research by means of reading and watching you have never said so."

 For clarification I am using the second section of the definition I use.  Those words are "Involved" and "In".  When used together I mean to say that for one to be engaged in a topic one must be "involved in" the topic directly.  These two words are a direct usage of section two of the definition I provided.  All other sections besides the words "Involved" and "In" can be exempt from the application of "involved in" utilized in the sentence I provided.  Those sections are specific to the bold, underlined and red colored words.  Only those words are implemented in the follow-up sentence and as such all other words in the definition of "engaged" that is provided should not be taken into account.

 I feel this will just lead to another process of defining the words I used to define the first word but here it goes:

Engaged = "involved in"

Involved = actively participating in something

 Is it necessary to explain "actively" and "participating"?

 I do not think you are "involved in" American Politics, or actively participating, or engaged in them.  As in you are in the US, or communicating from a location outside the US with people who are in the US that are active in, participating in, conducting or otherwise engaging in American politics.  

 By my definition you are not engaged in, or to use other words that mean the same thing, to me, "involved in" or "actively participating" in  American Politics.

 I think you are engaged, specifically in this forum, in the discussion of American politics.

 Ok lets define the words used to define the second set of words used to describe the first word.  Remember before you tell me this irks you, that you literally said I needed to do this.

"Actively" I am considering in this context to be an adverb.  Doing something in a way that intends positive action.  An example is: With the aim of making something happen, rather than just hoping that it will.

Participating I consider to mean: Take part in an action or endeavor.

 Do I need to further define any of the words used to define "Actively" and "Participating"?


 It thought it was clear when I outlined what I specifically meant with the words "involved" and "in" with this sentence:

"As in you are in the US, or communicating from a location outside the US with people who are in the US that are active in, participating in, conducting or otherwise engaging in American politics."

 I do not feel you are participating in American Politics.  Specific to being either in the US, or communicating from a location outside the US.  

 I do not think, given the information you have provided here, that you are in communication with people who:

 Participate in, Conduct, or Engage in American Politics in a way that aims to make something happen in a positive way.

 I think you are engaged in, meaning actively participating in, as in taking part in the action of, discussing American Politics.  

 

"Ok so are you saying then by 'participating' then you mean actually voting?"

 No.  I am saying that I do not think you are communicating with people who are participating in, conducting or engaging in American Politics.  I also do not think you are doing this yourself due to your geographical location.



"I mean this is a political discussion forum where member's 'participate' in a discussion."

 Yes.  I think you are "participating" in the discussion of American politics.  I do not think you are participating "IN" American politics.



"I'm really at a loss to work out exactly what you are getting at. And your continued reluctance to simply tell me what it is that you are getting at makes me wonder what you expect me to infer."

 You don't have to infer anything, I am doing my best to use clear words to describe why I think you are engaging in discussion, but not in American Politics.  

 If I do not ride motorcycles, but participate in this forum, I am engaged in the discussion of riding motorcycles but not in the activity of riding motorcycles.  I would not be, by my definition, engaged in riding motorcycles.

 

"I wouldn't consider reading and watching YouTube about American Politics to meet my definition of "engaged" but yeah he is Australian and consistently comments here."

 I thought this was pretty clear, but if I keep getting asked questions I will keep giving answers.  None of that is derogatory in any way, all this, it seems to me, is an attempt to find some way to turn it into an insult.

 Anyone else would have just said they do not agree with my interpretation of the word engaged.

verslagen1 wrote on 11/18/20 at 19:26:23:


More unwitting irony; you've just demonstrated what a being a troll is by posting something that has nothing whatsoever to do with the thread, and is simply a gratuitous attack, and a rather boring one at that. Again I have to say I'm amazed that you remained hidden for so long then after four years come out charging around with your obvious witless trolling.

... and we also have a Danish member that participates in our discussions.
I think it's very cool.

Not saying it's a fact, but Eau could be a US citizen living and working in Australia...
We don't know.  Didn't he say he voted early?
Maybe I'm mixed up,... no matter.
What I do know, is he knows what's going on better than I do.  
Welcome all opinions.
We don't exist in a bubble.

@Eegore,

OK we're getting somewhere, finally. So correct me if I'm wrong... so Apache, makes a comment concerning my 'engagement' with US politics, and then you decide that I am in fact not 'engaged' with US politics based on how you understand the word 'engaged'?

Is this correct so far?

And further, refuting Apache's assertion that I am engaged, was the actual point you wanted to make?

Yes?

At the considerable risk of venturing further into this rabbit hole...


So you implicitly concur that the definition of words are in fact important and not trivial because you yourself say that your conclusion about whether I'm 'engaged' or not is different to someone else's view of whether I'm engaged or not.

So this is why I was trying to pin you down. However you seem to have tangled yourself up a little bit. Let me explain. You claim that your definition of what 'politically engaged' means, is different to Apapche's definition.

That's what you just said.

However let me point out to your that Apache did not give 'his' definition. What you claim to be 'his' definition is merely your definition of what you somehow have concluded 'his' definition is. In other words they are both in fact 'your' definitions and they are both opposite.

This is another example of how you do exactly what you complain others do to you, that is, putting words you did not say into your mouth. You've just defined what someone else meant as being opposite to what you meant but you defined it for them. Curiouser and curiouser.

Let me clarify further, in order to be politically 'engaged' according to how you meant it what conditions precisely would I have to fulfil? Would I need to reside in the US or be a US citizen? Or are there some other criteria that I would have to satisfy in order to be 'politically engaged with US politics' according to your definition of engaged. Please be clear.