Subject:
|
Re: Larry's behaviour
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 23 Oct 2001 16:09:21 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3438 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton writes:
> > > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> > > > > What do you mean acceptable? I have accepted it. And so have you, since you
> > > > > have no choice. But I don't think it's constructive or nice, and I don't
> > > > > think it reflects well on Larry's manners. But so what?
> > > >
> > > > The more people that come to that conclusion the better as far as I am
> > > > concerned.
> > >
> > > Ok, here's what I don't get. Better to what end?
> >
> > Maybe because I think what he has done is wrong? Maybe I think that by not
> > sorting the situation that is worse? Maybe I think he should apoligaise?
> > Maybe he will? Who knows? Who cares?
>
> That's not what I asked. I *KNOW* you think he should apoligaise. I *KNOW*
> why *YOU'RE* doing it. You're way too proud to bother giving it up. You're
> addicted to the idea that you'll win.
I have "won". The moment Larry called me a liar without basis I "won".
> But that's not what I asked. I asked
> why is it better that OTHER people come to the conclusion that Larry's
> actions don't reflect well on his manners?
I would have thought that was clear.
> As for "Who cares?", you do. He does. That's it. The rest of us have our own
> opinions about the two of you formulated on our own experiences based on our
> intereactoins. The only reason anyone else cares is that we're tired of
> seeing useless name calling cluttering o-t-debate, and want to read the
> worthwhile stuff. Name calling seems hardly worthwhile. That's why I asked.
> Why is it important that *WE* see your spats? Why *SHOULD* we care? You said
> we should, so tell me why.
See:
http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/debate/?n=13906
> If your opinion is really a worthwhile one, then
> you can back it up. So, one more time, why do you think it's important that
> we hate Larry, for any reason but so we can all love you?
I do not hate anyone (honest). I do not want anyone to hate anyone. I view
the truth as a rubicon. If you think it is ok to pass that, that is up to
you. I do not. I think Larry should retract is statement. I think it is
important that he does. If I am lying, I think it is important that I
apologise. Those are my values.
If people think Larry is a donkey for not addressing this, that is good as:
1. It makes him more likely to address it.
2. It makes him less likely to do it gain.
Scott A
>
> DaveE
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Larry's behaviour
|
| (...) That's not what I asked. I *KNOW* you think he should apoligaise. I *KNOW* why *YOU'RE* doing it. You're way too proud to bother giving it up. You're addicted to the idea that you'll win. But that's not what I asked. I asked why is it better (...) (25 years ago, 23-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
118 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
