|
In lugnet.events.brickfest, Erik Olson writes:
> It was a rhetorical question.
No, you began with a statement that I think was intended to imply quite
specifically that I am a whining child. It was also in direct reply to my
own post.
As it turns out, I don't take offense because I don't even know you nor do I
care what you think. But please admit when you are making, or attempting to
make, personal attacks. You could have stayed on point, but you chose not
to -- you chose to make it personal instead.
Larry chose to end his reply with a kind of personal attack also (this is
the guy that is allowed to moderate and curate newsgroups here and on
bricklink?).
James posed a famous trick question that cannot be answered yes or no
without admitting fault (in this case the *really sweet* assertion that I
beat women).
I might disagree with some of the views stated by Larry P., James B., or
even those of Erik O. but I don't think I go out of my way to insult them
personally. Maybe there is some confusion about the word "apologist" -- it
merely means "A person who argues in defense or justification of something,
such as a doctrine, a policy, or an institution."
Anyway, I don't see why some of you choose to attack me personally for my
views. Disagree with my opinions, mount your own arguments, etc. -- no problem.
Get in my face and we have a problem.
Frankly, I am not sure why some of you are not banned from posting for
failure to keep a civil tongue when replying to others' posts.
-- Hop-Frog
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
85 Messages in This Thread:
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|