Subject:
|
Re: Does God have a name for God? (was: 20 Years of TLC's Frustration with "LEGOS")
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 2 Apr 2001 19:32:02 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
q_harlequin_p@hotmail.com/AntiSpam/
|
Viewed:
|
2974 times
|
| |
|
|
On Mon, 2 Apr 2001 09:26:58 GMT, Jennifer Clark
<jen@vulture.dmem.strath.ac.uk> wrote:
> > Snipping out your previous texts no doubt helps you to try and pass
> > that off. If I was actually inclined to attack you I suppose I might
> > delve into that further, but I won't.
> So you'd like to think pal, but you'd be wrong :-)
>
> The reason I snip a great deal of previous text from these messages is that they become
> incredibly tiresome to wade through (more so than usual), with one ending up reading one new
> line per twenty quoted ones. If you wish to reread what someone said it is easy enough to read
> back through the previous posts in any case. I also tend to dislike totally linear
> "point-rebuke-point-rebuke" style arguments as I feel they grow stale very quickly. You are of
> course entitled to think of this as an avoidance strategy should you so wish.
Uh, I hate to point out your hypocristy...but on the one hand you say
it's easy to go back through the previous messages in the thread, and
yet you add spaces to the subject line which as you know breaks the
thread apart. Not only that but it's considered by most experienced
Usenet surfers as a form of cascade trolling. Just thought I'd let
you know. : )
> > Oh so we can only debate about one thing at a time? Hmmm, it seems
> > I've missed several meetings.
> Certainly not, but Focus Can Be a Good Thing for our Beavis and Butthead style tartrazine
> infested limited attention span generation.
Again trying to talk about focus when you snip out past responses
which really don't clutter things up when you format your posts
correctly. Not only that but I again mention your cascade threading.
How does that help "focus" things?
> > But then one could always argue that even though it is pointless is
> > still offers us a way to communicate with each other in a way that is
> > mutually beneficial to our ever growing understanding of ourselves and
> > humanity.
> Beautifully said - you should be a politician, one like the president in Mars Attacks!
> However, that is not the way Scottish people work or argue.
> > Okay now you're starting to read like stereo instructions.
> Fair enough. Is this better or worse than sounding like a politician though? I demand a vote -
> would you rather watch a party political broadcast or read the instructions to your new
> stereo? Answers on a postcard to the green guys.
Hmmm...which is worse, C-SPAN, or reading stereo
instructions....hmmm...tough call really.
> > Now maybe you can point out my seemingly blind ignorance one again and
> > show us where you said, "I gather that in most modern monotheistic
> > type religions" in that initial post (from which I was quoting
> > earlier).
> Here it is:
>
> http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/debate/?n=9608
Let me slow it down for you.
...from....which...I...was...quoting....earlier...
You know, the part you just snipped out, much to the convenience of
your strawman.
Now, tell me what part of that sentence you had such a hard time
grasping? I mean, if you want to throw out of context, backpedal,
sidestep lames out all day, be my guest, but at least offer some
warning.
> > Well of course I do, I know almost everything you could possibly say
> > before you even say it.
> Looks like you don't know everything I've said once I've said it though ;-)
Maybe if all your strawman would come true perhaps, but I don't think
that's going to happen any time soon, Kitten.
> But if so...
>
> Then it is you who is God, Knower of All, Forseer of The Wordeth, Guardian Predictor of our
> Newtonian Universe - or maybe even God of Gods! Many Meta-Hallelujahs to you.
I'm not a God, I just understand human psychology, that and I can
calculate things. Anyone can do it, it's just a matter of shutting up
for 5 minutes, analyzing your opponent and then calculating expected
responses.
Robert
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
137 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
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
