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: