Subject:
|
Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 21 Dec 2000 21:52:05 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1042 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> >
> > > I still think that education should be based on ability to learn. I still
> > > think that healthcare should be based on need.
> >
> > In an abstract sense, do we agree on this?
>
> If "we" includes "me", then no.
A well reasoned response.
>
> More generally, I'd like to see a cite of a .debate post where you admitted
> you changed your mind about something that you had been exposed to here. I
> may have missed it. You need to be a bit crisper sometimes, something that's
> been repeatedly pointed out to you.
>
> I realise coming up with a cite for something that happened a while back is
> hard given search is currently non available. So I'd take your word for it
> if you could name the topic and what you changed your mind about.
Go back an read my reply to Chris.
>
> Now, you may choose not to answer which is fine, but until you do, I don't
> believe your earlier assertion to Chris.
Which assertion was this? Can you at least give the date Chris posted it?
>
> You also might re-read Paul Baluch's excellent post about good debating.
Why, does he suggest I not ask a staight question - which is just what the
post you replied to was? Does he suggest one avoids making a reasoned
response - that is just what you did.
Was there any point to your post Larry, other than trying to waste my time
and play to the crowd? I'd really like to know what the point was of
replying to my post. There are questions which I have asked in the past -
and you just avoid them. But now you take the time to answer a question I
raised with Chris. Funny that.
Scott A
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
| (...) My default in interpreting your words is to assume sarcastic intent. If you actually were complimenting me, sorry... but otherwise: What is the issue? Seems a pretty clear cut answer to a question. Was it that you didn't want anyone to answer (...) (24 years ago, 21-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
| (...) If "we" includes "me", then no. More generally, I'd like to see a cite of a .debate post where you admitted you changed your mind about something that you had been exposed to here. I may have missed it. You need to be a bit crisper sometimes, (...) (24 years ago, 21-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
90 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
|
|
|
|
