"Every so often, Chris, a little brutality is good for the soul."
You must mean that it feels good to you to be brutal now and then. This may be true, but there is a price to pay, and yours is the highest. On Aug 8, 2:35 am, gruff <[email protected]> wrote: > "... On Aug 7, 10:30 am, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> > wrote: ..." > > > One person's idiocy is another person's epiphany. See Mullah Nasruddin, and > > the Sufi riddles for more on that. Your lack of appreciation of the idea, or > > the delivery method of the idea, does not justify your characterization of > > any poster as idiotic or lamebrained. I don't know what to say to make this > > any more clear. > > Okay, then. The idea and how it was presented ... well actually it > was difficult to detect an idea which made the presentation seem all > smoke and mirrors. My complaint is that neither these "ideas" nor > their presentation seem to be very productive of anything anyone > appreciates as worthwhile and a lot of the time they get in the way of > what otherwise might be the sort of discussion many of us have come to > enjoy here. > > > 2. You have no idea who Tinker is IRL. You only address the character Tinker > > on the list. Your personal characterizations, then, are utterly baseless, > > beyond what YOU perceive based on a series of debates in which you are > > opposing parties. Again, this is a failure in YOUR position. Tinker could > > very well be a PhD in Socio. Anth. writing a paper on the nature of > > religions, and how little it takes to start one. He could have a 190 IQ, a > > $250K tenured position at an Ivy League Uni, a smoking hot wife and two kids > > who love him dearly. The NYT just raved that his last novel was "dynamic, > > brilliant...the clearest insight into the human condition in the last 100 > > years..." > > None of us have any idea who any of us are on here. We are all > virtual characters to each other. Fortunately this does not prevent > an exchange of ideas. However, if Tinker were sporting the > credentials you proffer, I think I'd be able to detect a few of > them. > > > ...and here you come calling him a lamebrained idiot. Who's wrong? > > I'm sorry. I meant to say the ideas and presentation were lamebrained > and idiotic. > > > Ad Hom's are for those who are incapable of formulating a real position, > > rebuttal, statement. They are a sign of weakness in intellect and > > understanding, above and beyond being uncivil and rude. > > Every so often, Chris, a little brutality is good for the soul. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
