At 18:04 21-11-2002 +0100, John Giorgis wrote:
Which civilization are you a member of? Your civilization seems to be the Dutch civilization, and you have regularly framed your positions in terms of Dutch interest.
I consider myself a member of the Terran civilisation.
IIRC, you have also argued that if the international community would (in theI, on the other hand, have regularly argued that America should make sacrifices for the good of humanity - such as by providing assistance and liberation to the oppressed people of the world.
UNSC) vote against an US invasion of Iraq, the US should then ignore the
international community and attack anyway.
Hell, IIRC you have argued that the US should ignore the opinions of the rest of the world, period.
>> Neglecting also of course that you also have been violating community >> standards of decency with regularity for at least the past few weeks. > >Which is also irrelevant, because (1) I am not responsible for your >behaviour and (2) someone else's behaviour does not make it OK for you >to misbehave. According to your own words, however, those who violate community standards are less qualified to criticize others' violation of community standards, however. So, do you wish to retract your statement, "Given your history on this list, you are not exactly in a position to complain about someone else violating Netiquette"?
Of course not! Why should I retract a factually correct statement?
My exact words were: "Which is also irrelevant, because (1) I am not responsible for your behaviour and (2) someone else's behaviour does not make it OK for you to misbehave." So, I did not say that "my behaviour is irrelevant to my criticisms of your behaviour". And as it is impossible to retract a statement that I did not make...Or do you wish to retract your statement that it your own behaviour is, quote, "irrelevant" to your criticisms of my behaviour?"
Sheesh, you cannot even get your quotes right.
In other words, you believe that a person can make any claim s/he wants, no matter how ridiculous, without having to provide proof for that claim.>Maybe I can figure it out myself, but it is *you* who makes the claim, >so it is *you* who should provide the data. But unless you actually >provide that data (which is highly unlikely), the only conclusion can be >that you do not have that data are therefore making statements that are >not based on facts (which is not all that unlikely). Actually, I have no obligation to prove anything to you.
With an attitude like that, you do not belong in a discussion forum.
You are overlooking one little detail: before I can choose to not believe the evidence you present, you must first actually *present* that evidence! So far, you have only made a claim, but have not given any evidence that your claim is correct.If you choose not to believe the evidence I present, then we simply agree to disagree.
True, but given your attitude, I must now strongly recommend that you reduce your list time to absolute zero.You, however, have no control over how I spend my List time.
I do not need your permission. Besides, you have not explicitly forbidden me to reply to your message on-list (but do not bother: it will be ignored anyway).Permission to reply to this message on-list is not granted.
Jeroen "Shape up or ship out" van Baardwijk
__________________________________________________________________________
Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
