On 7/20/07, shiv sastry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Thanks for being frank. I will be frank too. It appears to me that  you were
disinterested even before you said this because you do not seem to have read
what Ashok said about me and my not having travelled to Pakistan. That in
fact is what started off this round of "tiresome ad hominem"

The proper resonse to ad hominem is to point it out, and ask for a
response to the points being made. Ad hominem in response may be
emotionally satisfying, but it does not advance the discussion in any
useful way.

Under the circumstances - your conclusion about my ad hominem remains as
unfair as Biju's statement.

What conclusion do you think I made? Only that everyone who is
induging in ad hominem, including you, is poisoning the well.

"But Daddy, he started it!" is not a justification for bad behavior.

-- Charles

Reply via email to