|laziness, impatience, and hubris|
Re^31: What is "aggressive" argument?by BrowserUk (Pope)
|on Nov 14, 2010 at 06:57 UTC||Need Help??|
the traffic constabulary has the legal authority to infract you for "reckless driving".
Yes. They do. But you don't.
And even their power is subject to checks and balances in the form of peer review and counter arguement (defense). In essence, they have to demonstrate that you actually committed the offence for which they charge you. Simply driving faster than they consider safe in a given set of circumstances, is not sufficient to cause you to be adjudged to have committed "reckless driving".
On the subject of this thread, there is no requirement for proof; no peer review. Just "I don't like what you are doing, so stop." In short: "You must apply my standards to your writing.", despite that the "my"s in that don't even apply those same standards to their own writing, much less that of those they seek to defend.
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.