|Perl Monk, Perl Meditation|
Re^4: What is "aggressive" argument?by BrowserUk (Pope)
|on Nov 21, 2010 at 00:58 UTC||Need Help??|
I just discovered this post; I hadn't realised that you were double dipping.
His opinion is basically locked in at this point.
I'm replying now, to try and persuade you that you are...you'd never believe how many next words I've rejected before selecting this one--dead.
I realise that this will be contrary to your opinion. Quite possibly diametrically opposed to your explicitly stated, on the record, written opinion. But I still want to inform you that there are at least 5 other people that agree with me that you are, in fact, dead!
Therefore, your stubborn rejection of our council that you should stop walking, talking and doing whatever else you are doing--that in fact you must simply stop "doing" anything--is a character flaw. A definite sign that you are overemotional. Perhaps even that you are mentally unstable.
We have concluded that you are in fact dead. Therefore, your continuing to hold an opinion to the contrary is bad, uncouth, irreverent and rude. You should therefore, stop holding that opinion immediately. By order of the ...erm...us.
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.