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

[Sil Greene <quack AT ibiblio.org>]

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