Subject:
|
Re: LP POINT 3.2
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 28 Nov 2000 13:43:19 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
839 times
|
| |
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message
news:G4qF2F.EyC@lugnet.com...
> Reminder: Everyone gets to spend his free time as he chooses. I choose to
> devote a certain limited amount of my free time to this, *and no more*.
> Scott does not have a blank check on my time for me to educate him on how • to
> properly debate or for me to answer every silly snipe he raises. Why • should
> I? What is in it for me?
Lar-
I'm pretty much in agreement with what you said in your post. And sometimes
I dunno why I keep skimming o-t.debate. :o)
So what is in it for you? We already know Scott irritates you to no end, by
the way we've seen your volleys go in the past. Now we see you spending
extra time on it, but setting up guidelines on how you will spend your time.
Its your time, no biggie. I suppose as long as these arguments don't
consume you, you're safe. And I doubt that they would...you've got much
more of a level head than that. I guess at this point in the game, I don't
see how Scott becoming educated on debating, becoming a critical thinker, or
shutting up (well maybe the latter) is such a reward for you.
> On the one point that I am responding to, I will make sure that every side
> issue Scott raises is identified as such and deferred. I will do a depth
> first drill down on that point and that point only. Scott has to learn how
> to stay on topic.
Alrighty, fair enough.
> Those are the conditions under which I undertake to even debate uncritical
> thinkers.
I know it takes up more of your free time, but if you don't mind, what are
they? I'm curious.
> My payment, such as it is, for doing this, is that either we will teach
> Scott how to be a critical thinker, we will teach Scott not to engage in • the
> (mildly) antisocial behaviour of post-sniping, or Scott will leave
> Lugnet.off-topic.debate, or at least stop causing huge messes in it.
Well, I think that might be payment for all - the antisocial behavior part.
For gits and shiggles I I keyed in 'Scott Arthur' to the search form, and to
my utter un-surprise, I was greeted by about 95% of the results posted to
o-t.debate. I see little 'constructive' talk coming from him on Lugnet. In
fact, I've been hacked at him for months, as I've seen him play devil's
advocate at just about everything, and pick big fights in here. No doubt he
thinks he's up to something with this one.
> > Oh well, still think its unnecessary.
>
> Nothing short of this, or short of *everyone* completely ignoring Scott
> everywhere, was going to resolve this antisocial behaviour of his. Look at
> his track record in admin.general (where it is much more important in the
> scheme of things that one not be disruptive, after all being disruptive • here
> is not a big deal, really, one can safely ignore this whole group and not
> miss much LEGO talk)... Snipe after snipe to the point where he • exasperated
> Todd. Todd may be stubborn but he does NOT anger easily, it takes a lot to
> ruffle his feathers.
I agree with you 100%.
> And this idea of mine might not work either. But I am not alone in • disliking
> his disruptive behaviour and his inability to think critically.
Nope, you're not. But here's a twist on your idea: Scott is obviously
bombarding you with 'attacks' on the LP views. He wants your answers and I
think he's going to collect them and use them as his cannonballs in some
spray of fire afterword. His attacks are pretty low too. Now, what about
not reducing yourself to this level by falling into the attacks of his
debates? I dunno if you see it this way or not, and I only kinda see it
this way, but look at who you are arguing with. SO WHAT if he thinks you
are squirming (and I don't think you pay much attention to that)....look at
who this is and evaluate whether or not its worth spending your free time
on, really.
What I think (and I could be wrong) is that if you follow Scott down his
path of debating too much, people will begin to think of you not much better
(but better still) than he is (in this area). I've already thought that a
little bit, just from seeing you take debating issues quite far. I think
you have enough sense about you to pull out if this is really the case, but
I'm just putting this up for suggestion.
--
Tim Courtney - tim@zacktron.com
http://www.ldraw.org - Centralized LDraw Resources
http://www.zacktron.com - Zacktron Alliance
ICQ: 23951114 - AIM: TimCourtne
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | STUPID QUESTION?
|
| (...) Is there a way to search for a phrase without getting results for each component word? For instance, can I search for "cypress tree" without getting 1000 results for "tree," 200 results for "cypress," and no results for "cypress tree?" I don't (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | Re: LP POINT 3.2
|
| <tim's text zapped> Tim, Larry could have ended this days ago if you had just answered my points. He asked me to state them here, look down to "Sorry. Stipulate..": (URL) did stipulate (URL) failed to answer me, instead he cherry picked a point made (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: STUPID QUESTION?
|
| (...) How many grapes can I fit in my mouth? (...) D'oh! And here I thought I was smarter than the average bear. Thank you for your help! Or, since it's been suggested we're the same person: Thank me for my help! Dave! (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: LP POINT 3.2
|
| (...) What I actually said was this: (from) (URL)Tell you what though, Scott. Pick one point, one thought, one item that (...) and again: (from) (URL)I'll repeat my offer though. If Scott picks one point or small topic and (...) Note the use (in (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
27 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
|
|
|
|
