--- In [email protected], new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: <snip> > As an aside, to me, saying that another's post "has a logical > fallacy", while meaning the same, per your usage, as "the poster is > intellectually dishonest", it is far less inflamatory. And less likely > to raise hackles, set off flame wars, IMO. To the extent that all of > us can use the least inflamatory words possible, and still get our > points across, could help greatly in the effort to enable FFL to > turn the cornor towards its more spakling past.
Yeah, but intellectual dishonesty isn't always so clear-cut as just a logical fallacy. And in this case, it was used in service of a gratuitous insult. I don't think you're going to get very far by advocating turning the other cheek here. But if you can stop the gratuitous insults, you'll stop the insulting responses automatically.
