Dear Mr. Poohbah: You still haven’t answered the question I asked after your accusation.
I will try one more time to get a direct response from you.
Please Refer me to the post where: > “I insist that only (MY) way is the true way.” <
You can’t: because there is no such post.
You write: >And now you presume to lecture me on the purpose of this forum.<
No, I simply posted the mission statement from the front page!
Why would you abject to that?
You write: > “you lob insults freely”<
I wrote you in a very cordial way on the forth line of my post as follows:
“I would certainly welcome your comments on the substance of what I wrote.”
However, I still await even one comment on “the substance“ of anything I’ve written
Your whole “argument” seems to be based on the fact that I’m a newbe!
Please explain what that has to do with the validity (or fallacy) of my argument. Or any argument for that matter?
It’s irrelevant!
You write:> I've been around long enough to recognize the Delphi Technique.”<
And I’ve been around long enough to recognize the: “Evade The Issue Technique.”
You seem to be a Master at this Technique.
No, my friend , I don’t employ the “Delphi Technique” Rather I employ the system of a certain Philosopher, that the Oracle at Delphi proclaimed to be the wisest man in Greece. It’s a system that purports to get at the truth.
This Philosopher also “stirred a few pots.”
He was loved by many, but certain little people didn’t like him very much!
The agitated “little people” that opposed him are long forgotten.
But the name -- the influence -- of this great man lives on even to the present time!
You write: >“you ‘insist’ on ‘stirring up the pot’ on an issue that cuts across multiple layers of conservative thought in different ways.” <
Some times pots need to be stirred.
The problem with “pot steering“ is that you never know what kind of muck is going to come to the surface.
However it’s the only way to get rid of the rot. The longer it stays in the pot, the worse it smells!
You write: >Lots of people have done that I've just described over the past five years, just to start food fights.<
The above should read: > Lots of people have done “WHAT” I've just described.< Not: > Lots of people have done THAT I've just described (to ere is human; to forgive is divine. we all make mistakes)
I came here to have intelligent discourse; Not “food fights.”
.
You write: > I am sorry that I am relying on personal experience in making this judgment... <
Well, I’m sorry that you have had some sort of bad experience in the past. I assure you that if you approached me a little more gingerly, you would find me a very agreeable person.
You write: > “you lob insults freely”<Yes, you do. Go back and read your remarks. Everyone who smelled something fishy in your actions got remarks about their low intelligence, about how they love serfdom, about how they're too blind to see what you see (which, incidentally, also satisfies the "your way is the only true way" issue).
Your whole “argument” seems to be based on the fact that I’m a newbe!
Yes. You are a newbie. That makes you suspect. It is incumbent on you to prove that you are a serious contributor and not a troll. After the 2000 elections, we've had a string of self-proclaimed "true conservatives" show up and start food fights.
Please explain what that has to do with the validity (or fallacy) of my argument. Or any argument for that matter?
By itself, nothing.
In conjunction with
Tell me this: do you support law enforcement when they use "profiling" to catch criminals?
You're being profiled, and your profile says "troll." If you didn't intend for it to be such, that is your problem, and not mine.
It’s irrelevant!
It's entirely relevant.
No, my friend , I don’t employ the “Delphi Technique” Rather I employ the system of a certain Philosopher, that the Oracle at Delphi proclaimed to be the wisest man in Greece. It’s a system that purports to get at the truth.
Did this technique include insulting your opponent's intelligence?
That is a hallmark of the Delphi Technique.
So are attempts to engage in secret communications via FReepmail with someone you have an antagonistic relationship with.
The above should read: > Lots of people have done “WHAT” I've just described.< Not: > Lots of people have done THAT I've just described (to ere is human; to forgive is divine. we all make mistakes)
When you can post in standard written English, free of idiot-grade spelling errors, fractured syntax, and bizarre punctuation that conforms to no style manual I've ever read, then you will have earned the right to lecture me about minor lapses in grammar. Until then, it just makes you look like a fool. If such is your intent, then knock yourself out.
I came here to have intelligent discourse; Not “food fights.”
Then start engaging in intelligent discourse; nobody is stopping you. The problem is that you haven't actually engaged in intelligent discourse yet, but you demand to be treated as if you are.
Please do not post further to me. Also, do not send me FReepmail.