Subject:
|
Re: Nothing personal, but...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 20 Jun 2001 08:27:41 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
484 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, James Brown writes:
> > Am I the only one around here who adds off-topic.debate to their skip filter
> > whenever the Scott & Larry show gets going at full steam?
>
> Everyone that is bothered by it ought to. I ought to, for that matter.
>
> > Like I say, it's nothing personal, but it is blatantly obvious that you two
> > don't see eye-to-eye, don't understand how the other one thinks, and can't
> > get around it. Why do either of you bother?
>
> I admit I ought to do a better job of ignoring Scott Arthur's drivel.
Youch, an insult.
> But I
> just don't suffer fools gladly,
Youch, an insult.
> and when he gets going full steam my
> perception of him as a debater is that he's acting foolishly and not adding
> any value to the debate.
>
> It may not actually be an accurate perception of Scott, but I'm not the only
> person who shares that perception, I'm just the one that he's best at
> getting riled up.
>
> Take this "what is the demographic composition of LUGNET" subthread going
> currently, and consider what he's actually asking for... he wants me to
> PROVE my assertion about something that was a throwaway comment meant to
> illustrate something. It's one that no one else challenges, ieither.
You are wrong on this. I am asking you to justify you quoting of a *fact*.
>
> When I say "enough, I've shown it to a level of detail that any reasonable
> person should be satisfied with" he keeps digging. And digging. I would ask,
> is there ANYONE that actually disputes it? All he seems to want is to keep
> asking and asking and I just don't want to play and I said so repeatedly but
> that doesn't seem to be good enough...
>
> Seriously, is there anyone that doubts that LUGNET is more white and more
> male than the averages? Really??? I just don't think that there is. So why
> does he keep digging? And that's just one example out of many many many I
> could cite.
As you well know this is not my point. It is absolutely not my point. As I
have said time and time again, I have become tired you making assertions and
accusation which you simply cannot/ will not substantiate. The point of the
thread you mention was to illustrate this. Read this post again:
http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/debate/?n=10894
This is a clear and simple question. I am just asking you to justify a tiny
statement - it has nothing really to do with Lugnet. There are two routes
you could have taken to answer my point:
1) Justify your comment
2) Retract your statement.
You could even have ignored my post. Instead, you just insult me:
http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/debate/?n=10895
The fact is, I expect you just guessed the white “population average for
the continent or the country or the state” – you are just too proud to admit
it. Am I wrong?
Scott A
>
> Yes, bringing this particular thread up to illustrate isn't polite but I'm
> just tired of it and him. I do apologise that he does seem to be able to get
> under my skin and get me to post in anger. That's my fault and I admit it.
> But he's just such a poor debater, and annoying poster, that it drives me crazy.
>
> Should I be a better person and rise above it? Yes. But I'm not perfect. I
> had too much ice cream for dessert at lunch too for that matter.
>
> This no doubt will get some post or posts from him pointing out what a bad
> person or bad debater I am for not playing the game his way. Tough.
>
> And anyone that feels it is both our faults equally needs to really think
> about that long and hard before they say so.
>
> ++Lar
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Nothing personal, but...
|
| "Scott A" <eh105jb@mx1.pair.com> wrote in message news:GF7zI5.LBL@lugnet.com... (...) Here you two go AGAIN! You obviously haven't gotten the whole point of this thread. I doubt many of us CARE who is right, who is wrong, who is insulting who, or (...) (23 years ago, 20-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Nothing personal, but...
|
| (...) Everyone that is bothered by it ought to. I ought to, for that matter. (...) I admit I ought to do a better job of ignoring Scott Arthur's drivel. But I just don't suffer fools gladly, and when he gets going full steam my perception of him as (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
67 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
|
|
|
|
