On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 17:45:04 +0000, Michael Bryant wrote:



Another gem from Oz. Can any of you pick out the spelling or grammatical
errors? If you can, let me know. I know Oz won't since he claimed to have
plonk'd me long ago for being an anti-Semite. In Oz' world anyone with any
opposition to Sharon and Israeli foreign policy is anti-Jewish.


Duh, I was talking about "There's" which should have been
"There are" and "lot's" which should have been "lots."
I put "specialized" in quotes because you used the word to
make light of other people's expertise as opposed to what
I suppose you believe to be your implicit superior "general"
intellect.

And for the record I don't think you are an antisemite.
I just think many of your political opinions, including
those about the Middle East are uninformed and knee-jerk.

Oz

From: Larry Ozarow

Duh, I was talking about "There's" which should have been
"There are" and "lot's" which should have been "lots."
I put "specialized" in quotes because you used the word to
make light of other people's expertise as opposed to what
I suppose you believe to be your implicit superior "general"
intellect.

Aren't I lucky to receive your grammar lesson? Never claimed to have perfect
grammar. But you failed to respond to my observation that my grammar and
spelling are good enough to convey what I mean or that the people I was
responding to were using far less correct grammar and spelling. And we all know
that N8KDV never displays a superior or arrogant tone, right? RHF is never
superior and never uses imprfect grammar, right? And receiving your little
lesson, as you called us a "newgroup," was particularly humorous.


And for the record I don't think you are an antisemite.
I just think many of your political opinions, including
those about the Middle East are uninformed and knee-jerk.

Well, it's delightful to know that we hold each other's political opinions in
such similar high esteem. ;-)

Michael Bryant wrote:

Aren't I lucky to receive your grammar lesson? Never claimed to have perfect
grammar. But you failed to respond to my observation that my grammar and
spelling are good enough to convey what I mean or that the people I was
responding to were using far less correct grammar and spelling. And we all know
that N8KDV never displays a superior or arrogant tone, right? RHF is never
superior and never uses imprfect grammar, right? And receiving your little
lesson, as you called us a "newgroup," was particularly humorous.


Neither Steve nor RHF assert or imply that they are intellectuals as you
did. Both of them contribute more in the way of useful information than
you do, but of course that falls into the category of "specialized"
intellect. As for the word "newgroup," why are you accusing me of
that? I didn't use it on my own. It occurs in my post as a direct quote
from your preceding post! I don't comment on other people's typos.

While your grammar and spelling may be sufficient to convey your
arguments, I'm not the only one to have observed that your logic
is not. You often refuse to respond to legitimate points, pretend
the point people are responding to is something other than it was
(combining this tactic with a loss of temper), or resort to ad hominem,
reducing the argument to a slugfest.

I still don't understand this whole thing of insisting on mailing people
directly when you respond to posts of theirs,
then refusing to stop doing it when they ask, and furthermore barely
even acknowledging that you do it when people bring it up. This is the
simplest courtesy one can perform and you refuse to do it. Is your news
reader very complicated? Do you need someone to show you how to respond
only to the newsgroup? Or is it just that you are so hostile and angry
at the world that you have to just stick your finger in someone's eye
when you're arguing with him. I think most people in the group know
which of these is the reason.

Oz

That was confusing. I created the "Ernie" nym to so
I could avoid this kind of stupid ****ing match. Never
did work out, so I dropped it, but accidently used it
here. Of course the post by "Ernie" quoted below is
from me - please Mike, don't think I didn't respond to
your plaintive call for attention.

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:01:00 +0000, Ernie wrote:

Michael Bryant wrote:

Aren't I lucky to receive your grammar lesson? Never claimed to have perfect
grammar. But you failed to respond to my observation that my grammar and
spelling are good enough to convey what I mean or that the people I was
responding to were using far less correct grammar and spelling. And we all know
that N8KDV never displays a superior or arrogant tone, right? RHF is never
superior and never uses imprfect grammar, right? And receiving your little
lesson, as you called us a "newgroup," was particularly humorous.


Neither Steve nor RHF assert or imply that they are intellectuals as you
did. Both of them contribute more in the way of useful information than
you do, but of course that falls into the category of "specialized"
intellect. As for the word "newgroup," why are you accusing me of
that? I didn't use it on my own. It occurs in my post as a direct quote
from your preceding post! I don't comment on other people's typos.

While your grammar and spelling may be sufficient to convey your
arguments, I'm not the only one to have observed that your logic
is not. You often refuse to respond to legitimate points, pretend
the point people are responding to is something other than it was
(combining this tactic with a loss of temper), or resort to ad hominem,
reducing the argument to a slugfest.

I still don't understand this whole thing of insisting on mailing people
directly when you respond to posts of theirs,
then refusing to stop doing it when they ask, and furthermore barely
even acknowledging that you do it when people bring it up. This is the
simplest courtesy one can perform and you refuse to do it. Is your news
reader very complicated? Do you need someone to show you how to respond
only to the newsgroup? Or is it just that you are so hostile and angry
at the world that you have to just stick your finger in someone's eye
when you're arguing with him. I think most people in the group know
which of these is the reason.

Oz

Ernie wrote:


snip
While your grammar and spelling may be sufficient to convey your
arguments, I'm not the only one to have observed that your logic
is not. You often refuse to respond to legitimate points, pretend
the point people are responding to is something other than it was
(combining this tactic with a loss of temper), or resort to ad hominem,
reducing the argument to a slugfest.


In a debate, "winning" is more important than finding the truth.

See the following link for helpful information on logical fallacies.

http://www.ncpa.org/debate2/fallacies.html

snip

From: Ernie

I still don't understand this whole thing of insisting on mailing people
directly when you respond to posts of theirs,
then refusing to stop doing it when they ask, and furthermore barely
even acknowledging that you do it

Nor do I understand why you keep changing your faked address when people have
made it clear they really aren't interested in your opinions. Pick one address
and keep it, so I can keep you blocked. Is that so unfair to ask?