| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton writes:
> > > > Yes you did. You acted because you *thought* that he didn't want it.
> > >
> > > No. Because he SAID he didn't want it.
> >
> > And that's what made you think he didn't want it.
>
> No. Remove "think". He SAID it. Either it is true, or he's a liar. (I am
> not going to argue epistemology with you on this)
I found the following:
Scott:
> Your post is amazingly similar to junk mail I received today
Larry:
> > Are you getting mail from someone or some organization that you didn't sign
> > up for, • Scott:
> Yes. I think it is somebody’s idea of a joke.
Larry:
> > > > or have tried unsuccessfully to unsubscribe from? • Scott:
> > > No. • Larry:
> > So you're too lazy or clueless to unsubscribe, then, but *not* too lazy to
> > cluelessy and unjustifiably carp about it? • Scott:
> No.
Scott:
> Its content is mostly junk. I did not sign up for it. It is junk mail. QED.
I don't see anything where he said he didn't want to actually recieve the
email. I mean, I can imagine wanting to read free Scientology propoganda
just to get a laugh out of it. I might still call it junk mail, but not
particularly want to go and unsubscribe myself. Plausible interpretation
applicable? I'd say so. Correct? You'd have to ask Scott.
Did he lie about not signing up for it? Maybe. About whether or not he tried
to unsubscribe? Maybe. But I don't really see anything specifically
indicating enough to convince me that he didn't want to recieve the
mailings. Certainly it would be my HUNCH after seeing the above, but not
enough to convince me. (Darn you for making me not delve into semantics!
That's my favorite part! Especially when we've got words like "think",
"lie", and "want" :)
> My mistake was twofold (1) First, forgetting that he's a consistent liar and
> thinking that I'd be doing him a service in doing what he said he wanted
> done, and second in violating his privacy to do him that service.
So, just to clear up here then-- your reasoning was (in part) to provide
Scott a service? IE something both you and he would benefit from (he
wouldn't get the email and you wouldn't hear him gripe about it,
presumably). Knowing that he may in fact want it or that in fact by forcing
the issue that he's MORE likely to gripe about it would then lead you to be
less likely to do it again? Note I'll refrain from saying "will" or "will
not", as you rightly point out below.
> > Interesting then. On threat of being banned from Lugnet/LP group/whatever,
> > would you do it again? IE do you hold that it is up to Lugnet Admins/LP
> > Email Systems to enact punishment? Such that until you're presented with an
> > actual threat you'll keep going? Regardless of whether or not you think you
> > *should* be punished?
>
> I am prepared to face the consequences for my actions.
Well, the question was whether or not you'd be more or less likely because
of punishment you're *assured* versus punishment you *may* get versus
punishment you think you're *deserving* of.
> I can't honestly say I wouldn't do it again, even though I know it
> was wrong. I'm calmer now than I was a few hours ago, I know I probably
> wouldn't do it again even if provoked.
Ahh.. I suppose that's more of what I was looking for.
> But if you ask me to swear I won't... I cannot in all honesty so avow.
And nice call on your part, might I add.
DaveE
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Apology.
|
| (...) Perhaps he should have. (...) No. What would the point of that be? I'll even admit I subcribe to "talk.politics.libertarian " for the bile. (...) I did not. (...) Thank you. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 24-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Apology.
|
| (...) No. Remove "think". He SAID it. Either it is true, or he's a liar. (I am not going to argue epistemology with you on this) My mistake was twofold (1) First, forgetting that he's a consistent liar and thinking that I'd be doing him a service in (...) (23 years ago, 23-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
31 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
|
|
|
|
