Subject: Re: contra graham From: Erik Naggum <email@example.com> Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 02:15:31 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> * Gordon Joly | Please expand. This is my impression of your "objection": Your concern for a "measured debate" starts and ends with words, not with the contents of the debate. An ad hominem argument that contains no words on your word list, will pass your "measured debate" detection scheme. Invalid reasoning, lack of foundation, etc, are all hard to spot, but you rose to object only when you found some objectionable words. This is, in my opinion, stupid, and an hypocritical ad hominem argument to boot. Your desire for a "measured debate" has no bearing on your behavior, but you use it to judge others. I have never seen your name before you stood up from the anonymous crowd to denounce something you had not participated in as not being to your liking and only to attack the person making the argument. You made no argument of any sort, only implied that "measured debate" is the alpha and omega of an exhange. What is _wrong_ with people like you? -- 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. 70 percent of American adults do not understand the scientific process.