| |
David,
I have a couple of issues with your post which I'd like to highlight before
tackling the other points you raise:
1. Issue 1
> > > > > Oh most definitely not. Whether a post needs further justification is often
> > > > > a matter of opinion. But I have yet to find an opinion other than your own
> > > > > which accepts your posts in general as having sufficient backing.
I'm not being clear on this one bit. In fact I've made a bit of a mess. Let's
rewind[?]. Asking me to find *opinion* to oppose your argument is no
replacement for you proving what you have to say. Can you list the posts which
make a clear case that my posts don't have sufficient backing? Can you show
where I’m not willing to back my views? As I have said in my last post
regarding your argument:
“Part of the problem is the lack of good evidence you have been willing to
produce. The text in this post contains a quote that I said “contains a great
unjustified opinion”. In a different post this week I also highlighted another
unjustified opinion [actually a group of 3]. Can you offer similar evidence
against me?”
BTW: Interestingly, I can’t remember any of Larry’s attacks on me supporting
your case against me… but I may be wrong on that.
2. Issue 2
I have noticed that you tend to delete text without inserting the customary
"<snip>". I've no real problem with people doing this unless they appear to be
doing it to avoid issues being raised. Can you clarify why you deleted the text
which started with your text: "2) http://" and ended with my query: "What did
you say victimisation meant?" [600+ words]. Ideally, I'd like you to answer
the questions I raised in the text you chose to delete.
Scott A
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
38 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
