Kata Markon

["L. J. Swain" <larry.swain AT wmich.edu>]

JFAlward AT aol.com wrote:
> 
> In a message dated 10/22/02 4:16:40 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
> larry.swain AT wmich.edu writes:
> 
> << However, until you begin to respond to the arguments presented against
> your position, this will be my last post on the subject. >>
> 
> Well, now, there you go.  It's all right for you to demand that I respond to
> your questions, else you will stop posting, but it is not all right for me 
> to
> ask that Jeff respond to mine?
> 

a) I'm not demanding, your lack of response continues to underscore
hypocrisy and lack of professionalism on your part, so as far as I'm
concerned, I'm happy that you continue to not respond.
b) Jeffrey is hardly in the same boat you are.  Jeffrey asked for and
received critiques of his paper.  He made no commitment to respond to
all comments or arguments against his position.  YOU on the other hand
demand that he respond to your arguments but refuse to respond to those
asked of yourself.  Rather than I or this list having a double standard;
the double standard, sir, appears to be yours and justified only by you
and for your convenience.


> When and if Jeff chooses to answer the many questions I have asked him, then
> I will be happy to try to answer your questions, but I don't want to try to
> do both at the same time, if that is all right with you.  What I want Jeff 
> to
> respond to are these questions:

You've only had ONE correspondant on this issue, so being concerned
about trying to answer two or more correspondants simultaneously is a
problem that does not exist in reality.  It may when and if Jeffrey
decides your challenges are worth addressing, but to date, and for
several days, there has been only one.  

Larry Swain