Dave Barry <dave@xxxxxxxxx> did eloquently scribble:
> spike1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> Seems to me you need to read up on the correct methods of debating.
>> People on the same side don't demand proof from one another because
>> they know they're right already. (until proven otherwise)
> Seems to me you're completely full of shit.
> KKKohlmann, Willy Boaster, Mark Kunt, and 7, among others, make claims
> completely contrary to reason, or common sense.
Examples please?
> Not once have you ever stepped up to the plate to dispute their claims,
> which have been dubious at best.
Why would I?
I don't recall reading anything they said being dubious
So. paste a few proper examples next time.
Why would I jump on someone when I have no interest in what they're saying
in that particular thread?
I certainly didn't read those threads... whatever the hell they were about.
Presumably one was about microsoft's monopoly, what was the other wbout?
Hmmm?
Perhaps about people being insulting on usenet because they're insulated
from personal risk. If someone said half the things they say to people here
in a pub, they WOULD get punched in the face.
> Missed that post did ya boi, or do you share his opinion ?
As I have no idea of context, I couldn't possibly comment either way.
And so what if someone witnessed a crime (no idea what that crime was...
mugging, car theft, parking on a double yellow line, perhaps?)
Would you interfere with a mugging personally, jump in any play hero?
(at the risk of your own life?)
Or would you sneak around a corner and call the police?
Or would you just do nothing?
--
| |What to do if you find yourself stuck in a crack|
| spike1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |in the ground beneath a giant boulder, which you|
| |can't move, with no hope of rescue. |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)|Consider how lucky you are that life has been |
| in |good to you so far... |
| Computer Science | -The BOOK, Hitch-hiker's guide to the galaxy.|
|
|
