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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SI Bob who wrote (434615)	7/28/2003 9:37:25 AM
From: Thomas A Watson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

You use a vulgar term and imply or equate I used such vulgarity. That implication is false. Your post to me in implication is fundamentally dishonest and a lie and what I call a very poor or stupid analogy. If a person posts material of his mind and that material is stupid or idiotic then the messenger is exactly what his posts proffer in that instance. If the poster posts no rationale or justification to repudiate the idiot or stupid identification assertions then so what. If a person posts on the PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH and attacks libels and lies about that person then it seems that in and of itself is a violation of the TOU. That is the logical implication of what you seem to be saying by the way. I commented on the facts that a lie had been told and I repudiated that lie. It was not expressed as a report of a lie but an authored declaration of such a lie. The lie was a libel of PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH. And I just asked why do you lie. I then used third person descriptions of what lying implies about a liar. And it seems to me that in the post I was replying to that individual spent many many words essentially saying I was stupid and posting ridicule. I mention that not as complaint as much as the fact that to me it make your attempts to justify your analysis look even more stupid. ???Calling someone stupid in flowery language is not an attack by what definition??? If so that implies ???? And of course if someone posts a falsehood because they are ignorant of the facts, in the case that they post libel then ignorance has become stupidity. Ignorance has crossed the line. Using a vulgar term to express an opinion is a violation of the TOU. The vulgar term make it so. But expressing in proper english what one believes to be true is not a violation of the TOU. Now if one exposes personal or private information then that is different. If one attacks using insult on sexual orientation, or race or religion I see that over the line. But pointing out in clear terms stupidity or idiotic thinking or percieved dishonesty is not. I consider the game playing of obscene acronyms also be a violation of the TOU and I don't use them. If I say I think you are a A thoroughly contemptible, detestable person am I violating the TOU. That is the argument that you have just made. It seems to me you are attempting to enforce some fuzzy politically correct concept. But you don't have a well thought out plan that allows real free speech. Or you have a liberal politcal agenda. There are individuals who post endless attack drivel and libel about PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH. They are stupid, they are idiots and often they are thoroughly contemptible, detestable persons. There are threads all over SI where idiots rant and say all kinds of stupidity. I don't go to the house of the stupid idiots and post they are idiots. If stupid idiots want to come here and be all they seem to be then stupid idiot identification is reasonable in my opinion. It is the context of the thread and the history of the thread that frames variations in reasonable, proper and civil. In general I do not speak of anothers family or profession in any ridicule. There is one exception where one individual post never ending stupidity and has spoken of his profession on several occasions. In any case I would us very general lame insults if at all. The people who get really really really upset with me do so because they lose all arguments with me. I cut to the chase and usually take what they say and use the other side of their sword to make them look foolish. And in that I say I'm one tech smart person and have dozens and dozens of published web pages just infuriates them. That is their weak egos. And the fact that techically I have far superior web browsing tools and techniques I reply often with speed. good 64.252.116.214 3d.homeip.net good 64.252.116.214 acute.ath.cx good 64.252.116.214 in.kicks-ass.net good 64.252.116.214 toms.homelinux.com good 64.252.116.214 watson.homelinux.com good 64.252.116.214 ship110.mine.nu good 64.252.116.214 idiots.mine.nu good 64.252.116.214 bulk.ath.cx good 64.252.116.214 wmd.homeip.net good 64.252.116.214 250eng.homeip.net good 64.252.116.214 therightman.homeip.net good 64.252.116.214 letfreedomring.homeip.net good 64.252.116.214 joe2004.homeip.net good 64.252.116.214 america.ath.cx good 64.252.116.214 lizandmatts.homeip.net good 64.252.116.214 gam.gotdns.org good 64.252.116.214 gam.homeftp.net good 64.252.116.214 theoriginal.homeip.net good 64.252.116.214 tomwatsons.homeip.net good 64.252.116.214 toms.homeip.net