On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 5:24 AM, Andre Broersen <[email protected]>wrote:
> Platt to Andre: > > > I'll take the superiority of what works to what is superior in theory any > day. .. > > Andre: > I thought we were discussing the MOQ. I thought we were discussing what is > considered in the MOQ as a higher expression of morality. Intellectual > patterns of value are assigned a higher 'status' than social patterns of > value. > > In this little response you place yourself squarely in the SOM camp. You > place yourself in the camp which does not recognize morals and all of a > sudden you throw up that the MOQ is just a 'theory' anyway, the analysis of > which you do not share because it is not sq convenient. > > My reference to the bucket with snot still stands. Platt Nice. Your insults are getting tiresome. Anyway, you ignore DQ, the highest morality of all. > > > Platt: > Since such balance is impossible to define, I would choose the system which > is more open to DQ -- the free market -- and take my chances with ending up > among the degenerate. > > Andre: > It is not 'impossible' to define Platt, and you know it. You just don't > want your precious little sq's re-generated by applying moral (in this case > intellectual) considerations. Platt Like I said, tiresome. > > > Platt: > If I fail to make myself clear, please let me know and I'll try to clarify. > > Andre: > You are making yourself perfectly clear Platt and I find your distortions, > bendings and twistings of the MOQ embarrassing and, I imagine, very > confusing for newcomers. > Platt Of course, you are the correct interpreter of the MOQ. Yeah, right. > > If dmb feels like needing a shower after your posting, I feel a strong urge > to defecate. > Platt May you both enjoy yourselves. Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
