Dan Minette wrote: > > > Yeah, but that's often what is demanded, expectations aside. > > I don't see what I want as quite that demanding. I realize that I often use > data to back up my points, and have implicitly expected that contrary > opinions also be backed up by either a reanalysis of my data or by other > data.
Sounds like I got confused by the slight difference between expectation and demand. > Is finding information really that much easier for me than others? Maybe I > have unusal skills in internet searches, but I can usually find what I need > with a bit of poking around. I dunno. Time. > In the case where I upset you, I and Gautam had written 5-6 posts on the > subject, in the parent thread of the post you responded to. I admit that > seeing a post that ignored several posts that I thought were fairly clear > bugged me. I thought of reposting the conventions, but I didn't want to > waste bandwidth, and decided to ask pointed questions instead. I'm sorry if > you though that was rude, but I meant no more than for you to go back and > read my quotation of the convention and think about what it meant. I don't read every single post. If I did, I'd waste my life trying to keep up with massive posts designed to bury opponents under a barrage of intellectual goop. I'd rather have a reasonable discussion about topics then expose myself to endless, mindnumbing emails whose only purpose is to show off the author's intellectual prowess. > Does this make sense to you? Is there some way we can all come to an > agreement/understanding that doesn't stifle any of us? Probably. I'm not mad, not upset, simply not happy to let inconsiderate behavior towards me stand unchallanged. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong - and I'm far more happy to admit that fact than some people here. However, long, loud, obviously disdainful rants that approch (and sometimes exceed) 15-20kb is more than a little stifling. As for stifling.. I'll point you back towards Jim's post of yesterday (which I kept since I wanted to respond): "For me, it seems that there are about two handfuls of people on the llist that simply make it their business to be extremely well-informed about whatever events are being discussed. No one likes to go to a gunfight wielding a knife, so many people whose readings are not as extensive may stay out of many of the arguments because they don't wish to have "the smacketh" laid down upon their opinions. " I agree - this isn't a place I can contribute to or be part of when I get slammed for posting an idea, a thought, or so on that you find to be poorly based. Rather than dump a barrage of verbage on me, why not point out the problem in a respectful way? If you could manage to do that, I'd sure be a lot happier being here as a MEMBER of the community who contributes, rather than just a lurker who's afraid to say anything. -j- -- moo.
