 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
| (...) We British are a subtle bunch Chris. (...) I really do not think I do "insult as a debate tactic". (...) It is pertinent to highlight that an individual may not have a belief on an issue, but may still question that of others. Or do you (...) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
| (...) rights, (...) valid, (...) What does that mean? :-) (...) to (...) then (...) Scott, I think that Larry meant you specifically, and others who behave similarly. I think that's clear. But at least his insult to you was thinly veiled. It would (...) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
| (...) <tummy tuck> (...) Chris, The paranoid part of me makes me think that Larry’s text above is, at least in part, aimed at me. The irony is, off course, that Larry’s well chosen words are nothing but contradictory subjective prattle themselves. (...) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
| (...) I see the potential value in .debate, but the way it has started to go recently, I find I am getting frustrated and angry more and more frequently, to the point that I'm not getting anything out of it. One problem is that potentially each time (...) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
| (...) Not sure of the answers to either of those, at least not in an idealised society. (...) I think my threshold is somewhere around large tanks and fighter jets. Any sort of nukes just sort of "feel wrong" to me. It's a fuzzy argument. (...) (...) (26 years ago, 21-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
|
