To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 26172
26171  |  26173
Subject: 
Re: Is lgbt dead in the water?
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Fri, 15 Oct 2004 15:42:30 GMT
Viewed: 
1380 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:

   Too often an imprecisely-disclaimed statement is bludgeoned out of context, or an unintended ambiguity is taken as a explicit forfeiture of the argument.


Shouldn’t that be “declaimed”, and not “disclaimed”? On no! Your entire argument now has now been forfeited! Nyahh. Nyahh, nyahh, nyahh. ;-)


-->Bruce<--



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Is lgbt dead in the water?
 
(...) I guess my posts could sometimes be declammed when I've cited too many shellfish. Dave! (20 years ago, 15-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Is lgbt dead in the water?
 
(...) I did not rip you. I cautioned you against the use of a Straw Man falacy in misapplying the definition of tolerance, but that's a discussion of rhetoric. If you perceived my addressing of your rhetorical shortcomings as a "rip" on you (...) (20 years ago, 15-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

70 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
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR