Krimel said to dmb: I will respond to your posts when Horse provides some guidance on how to approach them. Civil discourse and restraint don't seem to be effective. I have already addressed the smidgens of substance in the rant below several times elsewhere. You might take time to review my responses while waiting for Horse. You should consider this a grace period and use the time wisely. Horse said to Krimel:
To me it looks like you've been trying to provoke a fight for the last couple of days and to be honest I've got better things to spend my time on. Here's a couple of examples: [deleted for brevity's sake] ...And you seem to be getting pretty het up about Dave's comments - definitely getting a 'threatening' comment in first: Krimel to DMB "This is immature frustrated schoolyard bully bullshit. Much as I think it reflects the shallowness of what follows, I advise you to watch your mouth." So I'd say that you probably need to look at your own behaviour before complaining about others. dmb says: I'll confess that I deliberately turned up the heat in response to your "threatening" remarks. You're flinging profanities and scatological imagery all over the place in order to evade about nine different outstanding issues - but I need to watch my mouth and use my "grace period" wisely? To be generous about it -- Kettle meet pot; pot, this is kettle. Strangely, the language that you take to be merely insulting is, as I see it, the boiled down essence of complaints that are both legitimate and appropriate to the situation. The language that you take as justifying responses filled with scat, porn, and gratuitous hostility is language that refers to the arguments and responses you've made. They're harsh, I agree. But they are quite sincere and I stand by them. More specifically, the list you used as evidence of my naught behavior in your case to Horse. "Arguments like: "Krimel's nonsense, lame excuses and bogus evasions, it's nonsense, nothing but distraction, diversion, smoke screens and snark," deserve a different sort of response than reason allows," Krimel said to Horse. These complaints refer to many actual instances that I complained about in greater detail when they happened. I think you're still avoiding both the arguments and evidence in every single case. You've evaded every major issue, one way or another, mostly by changing the subject and/or deleting the evidence. Most of the heat in my language is produced by frustration with this sort of behavior. I think it's dishonest. That's not just an insult, but an actual feature of your arguments and lack thereof. That's a real criticism, even if it hurts to hear it. Now that the matter has been settled (and my "grace period" is over), maybe you could take these complaints seriously and stop with the evasions. If I say it's "nonsense", maybe you should consider how or why it might really be nonsense. There really is such a thing as a contradictory state, as the misuse of terms, illogical claims and 50 other flavors of nonsense. This sort of complaint is totally within the fair rules of the game. I have tried to explain exactly WHY this or that is nonsense, right? That's one of the many things you evade - in this case, by dismissing it as mere insult. It's not. Maybe you don't like it but given the context, I believe you are almost obligated to come up with some kind of intelligent, mature and honest response even if you like it. No, especially if you don't like it. And if you don't understand it, you ask questions until you do. Why do I even have to say things like this? C'mon, you must know these little rules already. Who doesn't? ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Arlo said to Krimel: > > Yikes. You're using the terminology, but you're completely in a different > > ballpark than Pirsig. Maybe that's where you want to be, maybe that works > > for you, and all power to you. But when you say things like this I think > > there is really no common ground between what Pirsig is saying and what you > > are saying; same words but completely different discourse. > > > > dmb says: > > Exactly. If the various participants insist on using their own private > > definitions of the MOQ's key terms, then moq-discuss will continue to be a > > tower of babel. And Krimel's nonsense only serves to add more noise and > > confusion. > > > > > > Krimel replied to Arlo: > > I find it impossible to believe that Pirsig endorses the new MoQ > > terminological shift you endorse. It utterly undoes everything he says. > > > > > > dmb says: > > Arlo not only understands the key terms and uses them properly, he provided > > you with a clear explanation and the textual evidence to support his > > explanation. The only thing that this "utterly undoes" is your misconception > > and misunderstanding of the key terms. It utterly undoes your misreadings of > > the MOQ. How many times have you dismissed, disregarded or deleted this > > evidence so far? Have you faced up to it even once? No, so far you've only > > produced lame excuses and bogus evasions. > > > > Krimel said: > > In fact I take his silence on this point as clear evidence that he either > > does not read this forum or does not give a shit. > > > > dmb says: > > Back in 2005, he told me that he reads it every morning. I haven't asked him > > about that lately but I'd guess he still does. He also said that he has to > > actively resist the urge to chime in. If he did, he's afraid, his authority > > would squelch the conversation. So he remains silent. I think Ant stays > > pretty quiet for the same reason. > > > > Krimel said: > > Claiming that Pirsig endorses this shift is in effect saying that since he > > had done nothing for the Tao in his first book, he wrote a second for the > > sole purpose of killing it dead. > > > > dmb says: > > Kills it dead? What does that mean and how did you come to that conclusion? > > I can't make any sense of that, probably because it's nonsense. > > > > > > Arlo said: > > This seems to be a point of fundamental disagreement you have with Pirsig, > > maybe that's your point, and that's fine. > > > > > > Krimel replied: > > I quite agree there is a radical departure from Pirsig at stake here but you > > are confused if you think I am the one to have made it. > > > > > > dmb says: > > It seems clear to me that you'd have to ignore, delete and dismiss the > > textual evidence in order to maintain that view. I guess that's why you have > > to keep evading the evidence from Pirsig's books. If you took an honest look > > at the arguments and the evidence your position would immediately collapse > > like a cheap card table. - Apologies to all the cheap card tables of the > > world. > > > > If you were playing fairly and honestly, you'd engage with the substance of > > the matter, the arguments, the criticisms, and the evidence above all. I > > just not seeing any of that from you. Quite the opposite. > > > > I don't know how many times this has to been placed before your eyes > > already, but apparently you are not seeing it. > > > > Here is some solid evidence from our primary sources for the terminological > > shift that you find so impossible to believe. Do you have any legitimate > > reason for rejecting the clear and obvious parallels in conception on > > display here? Nope, your replies have been nothing but distraction, > > diversion, smoke screens and snark. > > Pirsig said: "The quality that can be defined is not the Absolute Quality." > > > > Pirsig said: "Quality is a direct experience independent of and prior to > > intellectual abstractions." > > > > Pirsig said: "Dynamic Quality, the source of all things, the > > pre-intellectual cutting edge of reality, always appears as 'spur of the > > moment'." > > > > Pirsig said: "This preintellectual reality is what Phædrus felt he had > > properly identified as Quality." > > > > And there are about a hundred more pieces of evidence that'll support this > > use of terms. Compare that to the pieces of evidence you've provided for you > > position. I believe that number is zero. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > -- > > "Without music to decorate it, time is just a bunch of boring production > deadlines or dates by which bills must be paid." > — Frank Zappa > > 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
