--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <jflanegi@>
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin"
<jflanegi@>
> > > wrote:
> > > <snip>
> > > > > > Nothing 'exceptionally dishonest' about it- where *that*
> > > > > > coloring came from I don't know...and don't *want* to
> know...
> > > > >
> > > > > That's the problem, you *don't want to know*.
> > > > >
> > > > > "My mind is made up, don't confuse me with the facts."
> > > > >
> > > > Facts?
> > > >
> > > > Merriam-Webster dictionary defines a fact as such:
> > > <snip>
> > > > 3 a : something that has actual existence <space exploration
> > > > is now a fact> b : an actual occurrence <prove the fact of
> > > > damage>
> > >
> > > 3b, an actual occurrence: I made some posts about
> > > Curtis's post and his replies to my posts, in which
> > > I gave my reasons for calling Curtis's post and his
> > > replies dishonest.
> > >
> > > You don't want to know the facts of "where that
> > > coloring came from," i.e., the facts of what my
> > > posts said.
> > >
> > > Whether what I said was factual or opinion is a
> > > different issue. The facts in question are *what*
> > > I said, which is what you don't want to know,
> > > because your mind is made up.
> > >
> > I read your posts to Curtis and your reasons, and you have
reached
> > fundamentally different conclusions with regard to your
interaction
> > with Curtis than I have.
>
> OK. You said you didn't want to know "where that
> coloring came from."
>
> So I am not reaching my conclusions out of
> > ignorance. I have different opinions than you do on this.
>
> I'd be interested to know on what basis, but I'm
> sure you're not going to tell me.
>
Its boring for me at this point. And nothing personal- Really. Let's
wait for another opportunity and talk about something else instead
if the occasion comes up. Thanks.
