Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Trading the SPOOs with Patrick Slevin! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jerry Olson who wrote (3899)	3/7/2000 12:12:00 PM
From: Patrick Slevin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7434

"Forensic", as in the art of rhetorical debate. An argument, in such a sense, is a point of view which (during debate) is supported by it's proponent with persuasive points. This argument is then attacked by it's detractor with counter-points. In other words, a more refined manner of discussion than just hitting the idjit over the head with a freakin' bat. In the matter of engaging with someone who just rants, the preferred rhetoric is merely to just continue to pound the ineffectual mad dog rhetoric with facts. Usually they just walk away because you do not get ruffled. Works especially well on opinionated people with closed minds, narrow vision and a pedantic sledgehammer approach. I do not know this fellow that you were engaging with, so I have no opinion about his capacity for such debate. Having witnessed and been a participant on SI in some of the most moronic debates I've ever encountered, I would guess that the Cretin Debate is the tool of choice as a rule.