Subject: Re: Why is Scheme not a Lisp? From: Erik Naggum <email@example.com> Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 06:36:30 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> * email@example.com (MSCHAEF.COM) | I've tried to be balanced in the posts I've made. I apologize if you don't | think it's sufficient. I think you blame me for Thomas Bushnell's behavior, and question only my role, not his. This is not particularly smart. | Agreed. Despite my differing opinion, I _have_ tried to understand more | of the context in which it was said. To make that context easily | available from my own posts, I've posted links to Google so that others | reading them might read them to make their own judgement. Google is not news. Despite the usefulness of this tool, a Google search tells me that somebody generally fails to understand that news is dynamic -- it is interaction -- things on USENET are generally only _responses_. | As far as my own understanding of context and Usenet, maybe it's my lack | of understanding of your use of language. It's trivially easy to find | posts on google in which you write of ripping people's throats [1, 2] | out, people that need to be committed or are fit to die. But what have I responded to? How much abuse should _I_ take? Why do you blame the victim? Why am I _not_ the victim of the abuse of Thomas Bushnell? This is your lack of balance, and it colors your entire approach to your reasoning. | I did _not_ say that I _would_ respond in that manner. I just said it | would be my gut instinct. I'd like to think I'd catch it before it | escaped. :-) Look, perhaps you are wrong? Perhaps I am the one who _responds_ to abuse from morons who cannot take criticism professionally? Just go back and look at things with that _possible_ perspective. Perhaps what we have here is a general consensus that it is OK to respond with rabidly insane hostilities towards _me_ if I point out a technical mistake someone has made, and that somebody has the intelligence and prejudicial disposition of a racist, and therefore believes he is mistreated because of said consensus instead of reading the actual article? Perhaps evil morons like Thomas Bushnell are _only_ after making me a villain so he can escape judgment of his character, which I have exposed? Also, let me know what you think about such phenomena as S Campion/ Adam Tissa/Israel Ray Thomas. What do you think makes these lunatics tick? | At any rate, I appreciate your responses to my posts. If I'm going to | avoid becoming any more hypocritical than I already am, I should probably | stop my contributions to this thread. I fail to see the hypocrisy. /// -- In a fight against something, the fight has value, victory has none. In a fight for something, the fight is a loss, victory merely relief.