Hello everyone On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Horse <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Folks > > I think there is and has been a huge difference between the Platt/Arlo > exchanges and those between Steve and DMB.
Hi Horse I did qualify my statement with "bordering on it." Of course there is (and was) a big difference > > Platt tended to use this forum on many occasions to promote a > (far)right-wing political agenda and Arlo, quite rightly, called him out on > a number of issues which have zero support from the MoQ. Personally, I'm > glad that Arlo had the patience and tenacity to keep it up for as long as he > did. Thank you Arlo. Dan: I don't agree with Platt's political views nor did I care much for his musical tastes. But the man is entitled to his own agenda, just as we are. There are those on the forum who actively supported Platt's issues as aggressively as Arlo called him out on it. They weren't as mean-spirited, though. As an example, I cannot help but look at Ham's posts as a model of civility. When people "call him out" on certain issues in a belligerent fashion, he simply ignores them. In all the years he's been posting here, I don't think I've ever seen him write one rude word. Now, I may not agree with Ham and his philosophy but that doesn't mean I have to call him an idiotic weasel who is so slow on the uptake that Forest Gump is a genius compared to him. Or does it? Horse: > And I disagree about your exchanges having no value except as comments in > the archives - I think they had and still have tremendous value in showing > the low Quality of an ideology that has all but brought Western civilisation > to its knees. Dan: I don't know about your side of the pond but here in the US we seem to be swinging to the right again. It is interesting how we seem to alternately elect leaders that are either brilliant thinkers (Bill Clinton, Barrack Obama) or complete nincompoops (George Bush, George Bush). Now the right is looking at the likes of Sarah Palin, Tim Pawlenty, and Newt Gingrich as possible presidential candidates next year. Kind of scary when you think about it. But, this too shall pass... >Horse: > Steve and Dave go hammer and tongs at, for the most part I think, > philosophical issues. They have different interpretations of Pirsig (and > others) work and neither of them appear to be particularly aggrieved at the > treatment they both mete out to each other. Although having said that it > would be nice every now and again guys if you two took a breather and looked > at where you agree - because it seems to me that there are a number of areas > where this occurs. I could be wrong but I think that's true. Dan: Exactly. The name-calling begins to overshadow the real purpose of the discussions... to find a common ground on which to build and further the discussions concerning the MOQ. >Horse: > Anyway, there have been some excellent discussions of late so keep it up. Dan: Yes, I agree. >Horse: > And while I'm on I'll take the opportunity to comment on the topic > originally raised by this thread. > Pirsig's work is popular but, thankfully, not populist. > It has influenced a great number of people and continues to do so. > That it hasn't become a mere fad is, in my opinion, one of it's strengths. > I believe that it will continue to build and that folks like DMB, Ant etc. > will be around to fight for it both in and out of academia. Dan: I think you're right. Well said. Horse: > And the twat that said closing this forum would be the best thing I could do > for the MoQ can kiss my arse! Dan: I do love British humor. Thank you, Dan 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
