In a message dated 11/21/01 7:13:17 AM, jr@shasta.com writes:
>Isn't a mixture of conjecture, anti-Americanism, and urban (global) myth
>sufficiently close to blithering idiocy to justify the attack on this idiotic
>opponent's character
No. Criticize the claims, and if they don't hold, people will make their
own judgements about idiocy. Claims should be supported. A particular false
claim about Afghanistan might be addressable in the limits of an email
forum. Claiming "so and so is an idiot" requires a lot of evidence, more
than belongs on this list, and tends to produce flamewars, which *really*
don't belong on this list. Samantha has been remarkably civil about this;
if similar insults had been hurled at certain other flamewar-prone
individuals the list would be in quite a pickle.
PS While I agree with jon clark on almost everything factual discussed
I think it's abundantly clear that Samantha is *not* an idiot.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:20 MDT