VOLTAIRE'S PORCH-MODERATED Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : VOLTAIRE'S PORCH-MODERATED

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: abstract who wrote (60140)	12/24/2003 2:01:43 AM
From: Sully-	of 65232

Next point....... "I want to have a discussion. You want to "challenge" me. I have "inappropriate perceptions." You "accurately label a person." You have a "plethora of factual information."" I must disagree. We have been having a discussion. Perhaps it is more of a debate. I have challenged what I see are inaccuracies, false assumptions, misperceptions & false assertions by providing "plethora of factual information." to prove my points. That is fair game in a discussion. If you disagree, please point to each specific instance & state your case. It is, after all, an ongoing discussion. If I use "plethora of factual information" to prove someone lied, is calling them a liar an inappropriate or inaccurate label? If I can factually establish that someone not only lied more than once, but that they did so for purely partisan reasons regarding an issue pertinent to the war in Iraq; Is it not accurate to call that person treacherous? Since, in these instances, these people showed utter contempt for the truth publically, what is an appropriate "label" to use? Or are labels worse than the acts that caused these accurate labels to be applied?

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next