Not quite sure where to start; addressing everything in my typical manner would not be useful, and would take too much time.
1- [nevermind; I can get more satisfaction in other ways]
2- I am not a furry. I was associated with that group of people from the ages of 15 to 17, meaning five years ago. This is common knowledge; I have posted on the subject myself. Da SDC (another piano forum that was, for a time, closely linked to this one in membership) is full of references to it, as a number of members associated with the group (exceedingly uncommon, but not nearly as uncommon as one might think, particularly at the time, when it was less. . . well, less about what it's about now, and gaining momentary traction) were members here, or on da SDC. To say I'm proud and/or completely lack embarrassment over it would be false, but as I said, it's not something I've ever hid. Perhaps it is in a particularly bizarre capacity, but I'm sure we all have things we equally (or near-equally) look back on in a bit of an embarrassing light. I have no idea what "link number 2" is, but I sincerely doubt it's a good example, assuming you're not familiar with the term and are interested in finding out more. Feel free, but I note that I warn against it.
3- I am a composer, but I'd prefer to think I challenge my audience at least somewhat, given the sporadic opportunities I have to do so.
4- I am loquacious. I don't do it for any, particular reason. I have things to say, and I have a way of saying them. I like to present my statements as unequivocal whenever possible (and whenever applicable), which often necessitates a large amount of explanation. Hence, loquacity. I prefer to explain my statements from the start to avoid the illegitimate arguments I foresee as being likely. It rarely works, because people don't usually read what I have to say, because I am loquacious. But, typically, I don't write that much more than I have to, in order to say everything I want to say. I do not write in a particular way to sound intelligent. I am too lazy. If I wished to do so, my writing would be much more inscrutable than it already is. I do not attempt to write in a style which is extremely difficult to follow, but I understand that my writing style is very academic in its syntactical formality, which is fairly idiosyncratic. Just as I don't write in a way to purposefully sound more intelligent than I am, I have no interest in writing in a way to purposefully sound less intelligent than I am. I understand that there's not much point in saying something if it's going to be impossible to read, but I don't consider my writing style to be of that level of difficulty, so I don't foresee myself changing it, nor finding reason to. If I write an amount of text that is going to dissuade someone from reading it, why should I bother also editing the content for that type of person?
5- I am not Narcissistic, nor do I have what one would call a "superiority complex". If anything, the opposite: I am often completely overwhelmed by the seemingly infinite subjects one could study in music (or in any of my other fields of interest) that I seem to know nothing about. Speaking to people more knowledgeable than me often makes me feel this way. However, I do not bother with a false modesty; I have put a lot of work and effort into my studies, which may seem trivial to anyone. Anyone is entitled to that opinion. But I am not going to exact effort to make it appear as though I haven't done that work, or don't know something that I do. I'm sorry to say that I don't see the point in it. I would not consider myself condescending, because I do not dumb myself down. This common pejorative of "Narcissism" or "egotism" or "superiority complex" constitutes a disconnect in my writing style and my intentions. Feel free to say I'm not an especially nice person, or that I have a short temper, or that I can be derogatory, but I am not a Narcissist.
6- Please keep in mind that I have been a member of this forum for 8 years. That means that I was a member when I was 14. Please don't confuse the me of 8 years ago with the me of 6 years ago with the me of 4 years ago with the me of 2 years ago. Bald derogatives have left my repertoire, and did so quite a while ago, except in extremely rare cases of utmost frustration, or responding to people who have done the same to me. Do not attempt to hold me to a double standard. Look around you, right here in this thread. What do you see? Do you see me starting trouble, or do you see me being involved in it? The latter; I don't start fights. I am just louder, so my name gets associated with a huge number of confrontations that were not my doing. Including this one.
7- I do not name drop. I used to, but I do not do this any more. It has been some time.
8- If I alienate people, then I will find new people. Don't worry about it, because I sure don't. I don't remember asking for anyone to be my BFF.
9- My response to Richard Black was not meant to be even vaguely mean. In no way did I intend to insult him. This is a misunderstanding of the way in which I speak. I suppose that means that it would be my miscommunication, assuming everyone agrees with this (I believe I am correct in saying that this refers to another active, rather hostile thread currently under way in the Repertoire board). I did not call Richard Black anything; I noted that there were fallacies in his logic, and that he misunderstood things. There is no way to argue with someone without telling them that they are wrong (or at least that you think they are wrong). I don't even think Richard felt the way you apparently do, Alistair, as I've known him long enough (as well as one knows another member on this forum, I suppose) to feel quite confident in saying that if he felt unduly insulted, he would have more to say about it than what he did. In fact, Richard is certainly one of the members I respect the most on this forum. But, again, I do not wrap my statements in downy comforters and gently lob them back. I am incredibly direct. Something is wrong, I say, "you are wrong." Someone misunderstood something, I say, "you are completely misunderstanding this." Someone has made a conclusion I disagree with, I will call their reasoning fallacious. I will call such thinking illogical. I feel that is fair. Taking offense to me explicitly stating what is otherwise quite obvious, regardless, seems silly to me. And do you know why? I am not socially retarded; maybe I am, but not that entirely so =P I understand that saying someone could lose 5 pounds is nicer than calling them a fat ass. But, here's why I don't go way out of my way to avoid stepping on toes: my experience is that whenever someone's had a chance to step on mine, they've done it. At least, when I'm dealing with someone who I know doesn't have kid gloves in their closet, I don't bother getting mine out. Richard Black is one of those people. He is a big boy. Please do not unjustly characterize my disagreements with people as unilaterally being anything in particular, and certainly not before knowing what I deem to be a justification. These enormous, wordy posts are not typical of me; they are just what stands out. They are what you guys remember when you think of me. That is definitely not my fault. However, I understand that was only an example. I am trying to improve, as is probably obvious. Give me time.
10- My tone is rarely sarcastic in matters where it is obvious I have put effort into responding. I'm sure it would be considered preferable if the opposite was the case, as my justifications for my writing style may be considered unacceptable.
11- Again, as I apparently have a bad habit of doing, I'm terribly sorry for making this about me. Oh; excuse me. That was you guys, with quite a range of vocabulary, ranging for "Narcissist" to "retard". Carry on. Feel free to blame it on me, considering I've now written the longest post on it. I see the issue is not actually with insulting someone, but how someone is insulted, as, if it was, that would make you a pack of hypocrites. I won't waver: that is illogical. Perhaps this post wouldn't have been so loquacious if you all didn't have so many things to say, or if I felt comfortable in simply saying things, without backing them up with reason. Perhaps your own posts would be longer if some of these points were explained more thoroughly. Perhaps. . . just perhaps. . . the length of a post doesn't really mean all that much. I'm sorry, but I'm much too busy staring into this mirror to answer these questions for you.
12- If someone has constructive ideas regarding how I can be less alienating and/or how I can change the way in which I interact with people on this forum, that will also not require me to compromise those things which I have previously mentioned, I'm more than interested.