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.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (47275)	5/14/2002 2:41:46 PM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 82486

Meant this for you. Message 17466768

To: Neocon who wrote (47275)	5/14/2002 2:53:00 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

I think his resentment is hurt feelings. He pushed me hard to accept the deal he was trying to broker, and when I balked and he didn't get his way, he turned on me. If that hadn't happened, if he had not tried to get in the middle, he might have the same objective viewpoint you do. But his feelings got hurt because I wouldn't take his advice. If he believes in the value of to-or-about agreement, IMO, he should model that belief and show that even people with strong feelings can abide by such an agreement on request. His inability or unwillingness to do so, IMO, is a clear demonstration that he only believes in them when they benefit his "side," not as a general principle of value. That's why I consider it a position of hypocrisy. He's saying "you should abide by a to our about when I or others ask you to, but I shouldn't have to when you ask me to." He would have much more influence on me if he could model the behavior he wants me to follow. But it's hard to have much respect for a self-appointed teacher of morals or ethics whose basic position is "do as I say, not as I do."