Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

internetworkers - RE: [internetworkers] Makes Me Sick

internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Sil Greene <quack AT ibiblio.org>
  • To: kurt AT kurtschlatzer.com, "Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/" <internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Cc:
  • Subject: RE: [internetworkers] Makes Me Sick
  • Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2004 02:01:25 -0400 (EDT)


Reported 04.07.09 20:24 from Kurt Schlatzer:
.:Tom Boucher wrote:
.:>
.:> Good god man, shut the fuck up if you're going to spout off without
.:> reading it.
.:
.:I read it end to end, looked at all the well placed pictures and didn't fall
.:hook, line and sinker for it. Do YOU believe everything you read? You don't
.:personally know this guy, nor were you there to verify that this whole story
.:is a crock of shit to get him some attention and stir up shit.
.:
.:Just like you posting the link in the first place ;-)
.:

So we now need a disclaimer before any linkage, any post? "Warning: I
haven't personally verified this"? You buy it or you don't. I'm not
advocating believing everything you read, but I'm certainly under the
impression that if you're going to debate something, and you DON'T BUY THE
ASSUMPTIONS, your argument is going to BOTHER TELLING ME WHICH ASSUMPTIONS
YOU DON'T BUY. Hopefully, it will also tell me WHY, but maybe that's
hoping too much.

I found the link reasonably well-written AND within the bounds of
believabilityu. I'm happy to debate it on the assumption that things
happened as written. If you want to call the description into question,
do me the curtesy of saying so UP FRONT.

It is granted, in civil discourse, that all previous debate is null and
void should the assumptions be proven false.

--Sil





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page