[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Packet radio and foul language

On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 09:28 +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 01:13:06AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 19:13 -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > > On Mon, 09 Jan 2006, Benjamin Seidenberg wrote:
> > > > Miles Bader wrote:
> > [snip]
> > > 
> > > I, for one, am far more interested in the message than the way which
> > > the message is conveyed.
> > 
> > The way the message is conveyed *is* part of the message.
> Yes. When somebody puts on a smart suit and tells you, in 'polite' and
> clipped tones, that everything you believe in is wrong and that you
> should instead do things *his* way, then you know that not only is he
> a self-obsessed bigot, he's dishonest about it too, and furthermore
> that he thinks you're stupid enough to believe that he's being nice to
> you.
> At least if he didn't *pretend* to be polite then there would be a
> certain amount of integrity in his actions, and probably less actual
> insult.
> Dishonesty is *not* an equivalent substitute for respect. If you're
> being nice to somebody even though you don't like them, that doesn't
> make you a better person, it just makes you a liar.

With beliefs like that, no wonder this world is going to hell in a
hand basket.

Manners/politeness is social lubricant.  It makes society run 
smoother and less violently.

Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson, LA USA

"Diplomats were invented simply to waste time."
David Lloyd George, British prime minister

Reply to: