SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Lane3 who wrote (204125)4/25/2007 1:01:33 PM
From: D. Long  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793968
 

Further, "assuming that they don't really mean what they say" is not the same as "acknowledging their idiocy." There's nothing respectful about acknowledging anyone as an idiot. I gave you the respect of assuming you meant what you said and you said "idiocy."


If someone says something that is "idiocy", you fail to respect the person when you assume they didn't really say something idiotic, but assume it was a joke. I give someone the benefit of the doubt when, in context, it is reasonable to do so. Given the context, which you apparently haven't paid much attention to, it wasn't a joke. David is a flipping nutjob enviro-celebrity. Crow isn't much better. They were entirely serious. I'm sure they thought it was a great idea, when it was just discussed amongst themselves, and didn't expect the reaction they received when they "shared" their brilliant idea to save the planet.



To: Lane3 who wrote (204125)4/25/2007 1:06:23 PM
From: DMaA  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 793968
 
The most plausible explanation is that her publicist told her that she was becoming a national laughing stock and that if she didn't tell the world it was a joke she'd forever after be known as the poop queen.



To: Lane3 who wrote (204125)4/25/2007 8:20:37 PM
From: MichaelSkyy  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793968
 
she's entitled to the benefit of the doubt as long as it's remotely plausible,

"BS"