On Fri, 4 May 2001, John Hall wrote:
--]>> Manners are usaly the last resort of a weak argument.
--]
--]The normal rules of civility do not protect weak arguments. Indeed, they
--]encourage conversations of substance. I wasn't referring to that form of
--]'manners' which says it is bad manners to criticize.
Neither was I. I was reffering to the Manners such that the show is the
substance, the manner is the meat and the judgment falls on the trappings
rather than the thoughts.
I think fork, taken as a whole, which is a scary place to go , , has an
amzaing ability to cut thru the bullshit and get to the meaty meat of the
matter. The threads where I have gained the most understanding and insight
are the ones that sought not to prance to the tune of the Marquis of
Landsbury rules but instead moshed the topic itself.
--]
--]It is the poorly mannered cretin yelling insults when he has nothing
--]productive to say that is protecting a weak or non-existent argument.
Your definitions of such loose terms as Cretin, Insults, NOthing
Productive may be your own, but that does not mean they are shared by
others.
It is always acceptablel to filter your own words and thoughts but when
that action seeks to so change the thoughts and words and manners of
others, then we got us some problems, yes sire ree bob.
So as long as the free flow goes on and on, its all good. Filter the list
how ever ya wnat or need, but the raw sewage should still be on tap as the
source.
Just my 2 cents, you may wnat to make change.
-tom_wsmf
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun May 06 2001 - 08:04:39 PDT