Subject:
|
Re: stopping topics vs. dealing with troublemakers and nonconstructive participants
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 18 Dec 2002 16:47:37 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
750 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> > It was only in part a request to ignore you. It was not a total troll post.
>
> Obviously, I'm look at this from a different perspective.
It was not a total troll post. Feel free to show that it was.
> > > > At least he admits he knows he shouldn't do it.
> > >
> > > Is that good or bad?
> >
> > It is better than not admitting that he behaves wrongly.
>
> You've not answered my question.
Yes I did. It is better to admit than not.
> > You could have explained how to fraudulently post instead of actually doing
> > it.
>
> Indeed. Did I not apologise? Was my apology not good enough for you?
The apology was acceptable. But your criticism of Larry for the same seems
hypocritcal.
> > You could also show someone how a store is vulnerable to shoplifting by
> > actually doing it. Or you could just tell them about it.
>
> Given that shoplifting is a crime with a victim, I'm not sure your analogy
> holds water.
The victims were people who thought your post was by someone else.
> > > > Does how it was viewed matter? Shouldn't what matter be that you
> > > > impersonated someone?
> > >
> > > Can I impersonate someone by using my own name? Take a look, I did [IRC].
> >
> > That is not the point.
>
> I think it is. I object to your use of the word "impersonate".
If you do not think you impersonated someone, they why did you apologize?
> > > > Complaining about not justifying statements? I would like to see you
> > > > justify more of your statements in the future, and fewer 1-liners.
> > >
> > > Youch – a 2 line attack ;) Does your view of me make Larry's rather ugly
> > > antics acceptable?
> >
> > Again, that is not the point.
>
> I think it is. Feel free to show otherwise.
Obviously the point here was you justifying your statements. Not Larry's
'antics'.
> > > [BTW: I was actually complaining about not justifying accusations.]
> >
> > A statement can be an accusation.
>
> Indeed it can, but that is not always the case. Are you saying I have directed
> unjustified accusations at anyone?
I am saying your statements are often made in o-t.debate without sufficient
justification.
DaveE
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
38 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
|
|
|
|
