Subject:
|
Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 15 Sep 1999 14:54:25 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
4363 times
|
| |
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote in message <37DFA51E.EF0A5623@voyager.net>...
> OK, who "lost"(1) this debate? Scott because he officially said the word
> "Nazi" first, or Sproat, who mentioned "Nurenburg Defense" which,
> although it does not explicitly contain the word, is clearly related?
>
> If it wasn't Sproat (judges, do we have a ruling?) does he get style
> points for inciting Scott to go out of bounds, or does he get an
> admonition for flagrant provocation?
>
> <BIG HUGE GRIN>
That was a cheap trick on Sproat's part. Without actually coming out and
saying it, he got Scott to say it. So its cheating, no doubt about it, and
Sproat loses (anyway, I agreed with Scott's take on orders, in case you were
wondering).
> Now see... THIS would be fun to debate. All that murder stuff is just
> too unfun...
> 1 - under defacto Usenet rules which say that the first person to
> mention Nazis or Hitler automatically loses a debate, no matter what the
> topic. :-)
> --
> Larry Pieniazek larryp@novera.com http://my.voyager.net/lar
I thought it was just Hitler, so its encompasses all Nazis now? Has it
always been this way and I just didn't know, or not?
--
Have fun!
John (who has a few things to learn about Netiquette)
Auctions and Trading and More at my Lego site:
http://www114.pair.com/ig88/
MOC,CA++++(6035)SW,TR,old(456)+++TO++PI,SP+#+++++
ig88888888@stlnet.com & IG88888888 on AOL
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
276 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
|
|
|
|
