--- In [email protected], "curtisdeltablues" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote:
> >
> > Was it Vaj recently who commented on Judy's tendency
> > to obfuscate? And Judy who denied she does it? And
> > was it Curtis who commented on her tendency to glom
> > onto some unimportant word or phrase and argue about
> > it endlessly in an attempt to derail the real sub-
> > stance of the discussion? I think she denied that
> > as well.
> > 
> > For Judy, the only important thing in this thread 
> > is how high the fences are.
> > 
> > :-)
> 
> Turq,
> 
> You are getting perilously close to the dreaded "intellectually
> dishonest" label.

No, actually he's gone way over it into actually
lying (and so have you, if you read the posts in
question). In fact, Barry was already heavily
into intellectual dishonesty in his first reply
to me.

The height of the fences, as Barry knows (and as
you know if you read my posts) is only one
consideration. That they have openings in front
but no gates to close them off is another; but
the most important is that they're no different
(except for being *more* open) than the fences
most non-SUV houses have around them.

In other words, Barry's rant about how TMers
close themselves off from the rest of the world
via the fences around their houses (complete
with quote from "Masque of the Red Death") was
just a stupid blooper that Barry made because
he never looked at the photos of the houses in
question.

It was intellectually dishonest for him to
pretend that his comments still had merit--
and to attack me for pointing out that they
didn't. And it's intellectually dishonest for
you to attempt to defend him (and attack me).

Why is it so difficult for you and Barry and
Vaj to simply say, "Oops, I goofed" when you've
been caught in a mistake?


Reply via email to