|Perl Monk, Perl Meditation|
Re^26: What is "aggressive" argument?by BrowserUk (Pope)
|on Nov 13, 2010 at 03:29 UTC||Need Help??|
I can only offer advice.
And I have repeatedly, and at length, rejected that advice. I've also stated my reason for doing so, repeatedly, consistently, and at length.
I will do so again, in short, one last time.
I did not ask for your
You, (and tirwhan; & Tye; & ysth; & herveus), have, unbidden, with neither mandate nor precedent, thrown your disparate,
The fact that I have had to reject that
Until such times as your collective
And that is at best discriminatory censorship.
Until such time, I will treat others according to my personal ethics. And that, simply stated, is I will treat others in the same way that they treat me.
Which means for instance, that we have continued a long, detailed, at times frustrating (no doubt for both of us), conversation. You have remained calm, lucid and free of sarcasm or other forms of one-upmanship. I hope you'll agree, so have I. You showed me respect, and I have returned it.
And so it is with all those with whom I interact. Whilst the discussion remains on-topic and devoid of attempted one-upmanship, so do I. But throw stones at me, and as sure as eggs are eggs, I'll throw them right back.
We are beginning to more than just repeat ourselves now, so the last words are yours. If this were a debate, it would be time to vote.
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.