No love without freedom. No freedom without love. Dido Regards Ian What's so funny 'bout ....
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 5:50 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > I can, dmb, leave the substance out of it, and object to your treatment of > Marsha. Don't confuse the two. Your venom is the issue. > > This makes my fourth post. So please chill out. > Sent by DiGi from my BlackBerry® Smartphone > > -----Original Message----- > From: david buchanan <[email protected]> > Sender: [email protected]: Fri, 3 May 2013 > 10:54:18 > To: [email protected]<[email protected]> > Reply-To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [MD] Exist > > > Khoo said: > Well, have it your way dmb. You have proven your "obsession" with deriding > Marsha personally and its getting rather distasteful to have to read them > day after day, post after post. And moreover trying to justify it. There is > no justification for the treatment you mete out to her. Whatever she does > or says, if you persist on an eye for an eye, you will both end up blind. > Just recognize you have gone way beyond argumentation and it does not do > you nor your reputation any good. > > > dmb says: > Since you haven't said a single word about the substance of the dispute, > how can you pass judgement as to whether the criticism is justified or not? > Since you have said nothing about the content of the argument, on what > basis are you declaring that I've gone "way beyond argumentation"? Like I > said, it's no accident that nobody ever defends Marsha against the content > and substance of my criticisms, as if the ideas are just incidental. Aren't > you, in effect, putting social values over intellectual values here? I > think manners are relatively trivial and petty compared to the content of > my concerns. If you or anyone else wants to step up and defend Marsha on > the ACTUAL SUBSTANCE OF THE MATTER, that's fine. That's fair. I'd be glad > to hear it. But, again, let's not pretend that she's an innocent victim. > > In this particular case, for example, my so-called "venom" is a response > to a series of aggressive provocations aimed directly at me. When that > failed to get any response, she cranked it up even further. But your > complaints, Khoo, make no mention of her part in this. I'd say it's Marsha > who's obsessed with personal derision and I think anyone who took a fair > and honest look at the larger context would come to that conclusion too. > But, of course, one cannot come to ANY conclusion one way or the other in > the absence of the content of the dispute and its context. Without that, > complaints about table manners empty - or trivial at best. > > > > > > > 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 > 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
