dmb, If you say I am a weasel, it must be so.
Marsha On Jun 27, 2011, at 1:50 PM, david buchanan wrote: > > Marsha said to dmb: > You left off your last statement the "You freakin weasel" part., which was > way out of proportion. Now your neglecting to include the last statement is > even more ironic, but not surprising. > > dmb says: > "Weasel" is just the casual, slang version of the complaint I explained at > length. Making stuff up to avoid the actual argument is to weasel out of it. > According to my dictionary "weasel" is not just a small, carnivorous mammal, > the term can be used figuratively and informally to mean "a deceitful or > treacherous person" or as a verb it means to "achieve something by use of > cunning or deceit" as in the sentence, "she suspects me of trying to weasel > my way out of the accusation". To "behave or talk evasively" is to be a > weasel. > > I also asked Steve if he had been taking lessons from you, Marsha, because > you are the mayor of weaselville. Insult and evade, insult and evade. Your > standard operating procedure is an endless loop of weaseling. > > Obviously, there was nothing misleading about deleting the term "weasel". > That move was only intended to turn down the temperature while still pressing > the same point about the illegitimacy of this evasive behavior. Turning the > heat back up only gives Steve an excuse to bail out once again. > > > weasel |ˈwēzəl|nouna small, slender, carnivorous mammal related to, but > generally smaller than, the stoat. • Genus Mustela, family Mustelidae (the > weasel family): several species, in particular M. nivalis of northern Eurasia > and northern North America. The weasel family also includes the polecats, > minks, martens, skunks, wolverine, otters, and badgers.• figurative informal > a deceitful or treacherous person.verb ( -seled, -seling; Brit. -selled , > -selling ) [ intrans. ]achieve something by use of cunning or deceit : she > suspects me of trying to weasel my way into his affections.• behave or talk > evasively. > > > Here's the entire quote: > Steve said to Matt: > ...Then there is the issue of _pre_determination which I think is only a > concern if you imagine an omniscient super-being, but it still manages to > keep James and dmb awake at night. > > > >> On Jun 23, 2011, at 12:22 PM, david buchanan wrote: >> >> dmb said to Steve: >> James and I are imagining an omniscient super-being? Huh? > > >> I don't expect all that much from you, Steve, but I didn't think you'd stoop >> so low. My main argument has been that freedom and constraint are both real >> because both are known in experience. Super-beings, whatever that's supposed >> to mean, don't have anything to do with it. I would accuse you of >> misconstruing my position but that would be too generous. You're just making >> stuff up, probably to avoid the burden of addressing the actual argument. >> You freakin weasel. >> >> ---------- > > >> >> On Jun 27, 2011, at 12:29 PM, david buchanan wrote: >> >>> >>> dmb also said: >>> Hey Steve, here is one example wherein I complained about your tactics >>> precisely because they spoiled any chance of having a real conversation. I >>> accused you of inventing the omniscient super-being, the one that >>> supposedly keeps me and James awake at night. (James hasn't had any >>> concerns for over a hundred years, of course.) If you make stuff up instead >>> of disagreeing with the things I actually said, then isn't fair to say your >>> tactics have spoiled the conversation? I think it's more than fair. > >>> As you can probably see, I'm only pressing this point again because Marsha >>> re-posted these earlier complaints. How you get irony out of this is a >>> mystery to me because I think it clearly shows that my complaints are valid >>> and that your tactics are bogus. Your comments can only be justified if you >>> have a legitimate reason to believe that I was pressing an omniscient >>> super-being. I'm sure you have no evidence of that because there isn't any >>> evidence of that. And so it's more than fair to say you're making stuff up >>> and then attributing it to me. And since that's the case, who is the >>> offended party? > >>> It's like you want me to apologize for saying "ouch" too loudly when you >>> stepped on my foot. > > > 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 ___ 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
