Re: virus: MAIDS

Paul Prestopnik (pjp66259@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu)
Wed, 24 Sep 1997 09:56:45 -0400

unfortunately people appear to be more inclined to respond when they
disagree with a statement, than when they agree. I noticed this first hand
while I was considering to which of the posts I should respond. This
coupled with the overprotective (maternal ) instincts that authors seem to
feel for their words and ideas, (probably more of a genetic base than a
memetic base) leads criticism to quickly escalate to personal attacks, if
both parties are not careful. Although this may lead to the perception of
an antagonistic population on this list, it is probably preferable to a
bunch of "ditto", and "yep, agree with that one also" posts. Although I am
certainly not saying people shouldn't post if they agree with a statement.

paul prestopnik, who, borrowing from Eva has placed an adjective phrase
after his signature, is trying experimentally to write in E-Prime.

(I think that "is probably" could be considered roughly equivalent to
"appears", as does "could be considered", or just IMHO)

----------
> From: Brett Lane Robertson <unameit@tctc.com>
> To: virus@lucifer.com
> Subject: Re: virus: MAIDS
> Date: Tuesday, September 23, 1997 7:06 PM
>
> Well, *I'm* interested in the contents of the post, but at the moment I
> can't think of anything to say about it. I'll post when I do.
>
> In the meantime, I'm busy weeding out the personal attacks you refer to..
> Sigh...
>
> <relurk>
> -Loki
>
> List,
>
> For some people there is no content there is only the dance...content
comes
> from within. Personal attacks (deconstructing someone else's argument
and
> taking the spoils) is the way some "think"...in fact, it is the social
> equivalent of thinking (Assume for a moment that each person were an idea
> and the combination of each person/idea produced a new idea which
destroys
> it's components).
>
> Brett
>
> At 03:47 PM 9/23/97 -0400, you wrote:
> >>I doubt it. Most seem more interested in personal attacks or
terminology
> >>dances than addressing the content of the post.
>
> >>So far.
> >
> ><delurk>
>
> >Well, *I'm* interested in the contents of the post, but at the moment I
> >can't think of anything to say about it. I'll post when I do.
>
> >In the meantime, I'm busy weeding out the personal attacks you refer
to..
> >Sigh...
>
> ><relurk>
> > -Loki
>
> Returning,
> rBERTS%n
> Rabble Sonnet Retort
> Anyone can do any amount of work provided it isn't the work
> he is supposed to be doing at that moment.
>
> Robert Benchley
>
>
>