From: Olga Bourlin (fauxever@sprynet.com)
Date: Wed Oct 09 2002 - 20:18:37 MDT
From: "Lee Daniel Crocker" <lee@piclab.com>
> > (Damien Broderick <d.broderick@english.unimelb.edu.au>):
> > At 07:13 PM 10/8/02 -0500, Lee Daniel Crocker wrote:
> >
> > >Nobody mistakes Olga for being a rational person interested in
> > >real discussion of issues, either.
> >
> > Preposterous and totally uncalled for. (I realize that to Lee Daniel
> > Crocker I would fall into the same category.) One more notch of the dial
> > toward my unsubbing from this increasingly dismal list, at any rate.
> > Damien Broderick
>
> Why would you assume I think that of you? Quite the contrary, I
> consider you one of the most valuable contributors here. Indeed, I
> am baffled why you would think otherwise. You are not the slightest
> bit evasive and deceptive like Olga; you have meaningful ideas, you
> express them clearly, and you respond to others.
All right, Lee Daniel, you are probably not reading this, but just in case,
and for the record:
I am assuming what you are saying is: Even though certain people may have
liberal/left-leaning tendencies they just MAY be considered rational by you
if you personally find them valuable (for expressing their ideas
meaningfully and clearly, and for being responsive in a way that you approve
of).
As to those other people who may not meet your lofty standards and strict
criteria, it is not enough to simply put them on "ignore" - they must first
bear your scorn and your accusations about their character.
> What more could a rational person want?
At the risk of taking advantage (evasive and deceptive irrational creature
that I am) of a phrase that was not directed at me, and stepping into the
fray anyway (women can be so uppity sometimes), my answer to that question
would be that I would want SWEETNESS ... as well as clarity.
Olga
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:17:29 MST