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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (10177)	1/28/2006 8:24:37 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541582

Anyone who refuses to respect a duly negotiated peace treaty is not interested in clarity of communication but in giving the other side an after-the-bell poke. Pushing it pretty hard, huh. I gather you don't think talk differs by context. Some language is appropriate in certain circumstances, for instance, when we are all discussing/debating social policy issues with no serious negotiations involved. In that context, it makes sense to put everything on the table for discussion, so long as the conversation remains reasonably civil. (I use the other labels occasionally as a courtesy or to emphasize a point or in the spirit of collaboration. When you posted to me about "anti-choice" I used that label in my response to you as a courtesy. I would not use it when posting to Tim because it would be disrespectful.) Since Tim is a board regular, he sees all this stuff. It doesn't make sense to throw it in one another's face, but it does make sense to state positions cleanly (Tim, incidentally, does a good job of that). I'm not insisting that Tim call it the anti-choice movement, by way of illustration. Only that it be clear where my views are. To offer a different metaphor, it's best to make clear in which part of the park we are walking.