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: Bridge Player who wrote (63797)	5/6/2008 4:30:34 PM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 541922

I'm not implying it, I'm stating it. I thought it was pretty obvious. It's attaching a pejorative label that seems to exercise people, both being labeled and needing to label. I've been fussed at for using labels that hit sore spots off and on so I've been thinking a bit about it. Perhaps it's enough to declare neither position "centrist" rather than give each one it's own tailored label. At least that's what I'm thinking of trying when referencing a POV that's way out there. I do think it's important to define the perimeter of reasonableness because it's within that perimeter that it's feasible for adults to maintain decorum. When you get outside that perimeter, you're dealing with too much "stuff."

To: Bridge Player who wrote (63797)	5/6/2008 7:43:36 PM
From: Cogito	Respond to of 541922

BP - Thanks for answering all three of my questions, explicitly and implicitly. - Allen

To: Bridge Player who wrote (63797)	5/6/2008 7:50:54 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541922

This kind of stuff really does make it hard to have conversations.

To: Bridge Player who wrote (63797)	5/6/2008 8:08:45 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541922

"If somebody agrees that we only have 3-5 years or so to start to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or the human race is in trouble, I call that global-warming catastrophe alarmist." What will you call them if they turn out to have been right? I can't say I think we only have 3-5 years, and I certainly HOPE we don't, but the possibility certainly exists that we have only that much time. (And of course it is also possible we have 10 years or 20 or 30) The possibility also exists that we have no time, and it's already too late. I'm not sure why you want to call people alarmists when there is an alarming scenario out there, and it is possible the folks with the more negative predictions are correct. After all, it's not like you can prove you're correct. When that kind of doubt exists, should you really be calling anyone an alarmist?