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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MrLucky who wrote (120658)	6/17/2005 7:50:52 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793914

Your post seemed to be changing the subject If you were interested in and following the subject of Durbin, which has had some commentary recently, I suppose it might have looked like I was contributing to that discussion because the subject was foremost in your mind. But I was not chiming in on Durbin. The way you could tell that I was not chiming in on the Durbin discussion was that, first of all, I posted nary a word about Durbin or his comments. And secondly, my post was a reply to the original post of a news item by LB, which he posted to the thread at large, not in response to any post that was part of an on-going discussion on Durbin. I had two other subjects on my mind. I was using that clip from Russ to illustrate a subject that is discussed regularly on this thread, media bias and the deficiencies in article headlines. I also tied it to the more recent subject of logical fallacies triggered by JDN and discussed most recently by CB, Bridge Player, and me. Am I wrong? As promised, here is my response to your question. The short answer is yes, your inference is wrong. The long answer is that I second CB's comments on the subject of Durbin, which she expressed very well so I don't need to restate. Not answering a straight forward question, suggests to me your support of Durbin's comments My not answering your straight-forward question is about me going on strike. Over time I have gotten sick and tired of answering every question asked of me and explaining and re-explaining my points and rationales in hopes of getting the same effort and courtesy in return. But that has not worked and I rarely get my questions answered so it just occurred to me that I'd try something different and negotiate for an answer. (It's a longstanding problem that doesn't necessarily have anything to do with you.) However, at the time you asked me the question, you did not yet know that I wasn't going to answer it, so my declining to answer it could not have provoked your inference that I supported Durbin. It must have been something else. Carts and horses. I would still be interested in hearing what about my post provoked your question. But I have nothing left with which to negotiate. <g>