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 (76230)	10/2/2003 4:05:36 PM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Yep...Yada, yada, yada. So can we move the essential "insincerity, condescension, and manipulation" down to her level?! Let us not allow her to escape through a loop-hole--the sordid creature! Or is that remark about insincerity still an essential component of your "argument" on behalf of the fellow with the "chip"?? Is it still meant to identify Karen even though she is not HR? Is it still important that you attach the label to her in some fashion? WHY? Why condemn an entire group if you intend to insult Karen? And why mention any group at all if you do NOT intend to condemn Karen? Do you see the problem? When people post things, there is always a question of motive. As I said to you before: If you have something derogatory to say to Karen, then say it directly. So far as I know the "HR people" were not a part of this discussion. And, in any case, individuals are neither exonerated nor condemned by their colour, gender, or work-place. So why don't you just drop that crap...OK?? It ought to be possible for a big boy such as yourself to remove the character insults without losing the argument.