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

Re: documentation x executable code

Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au> wrote:
> right.  even after 6 days you can't come up with any answer to over 70 lines
> of argument in that message, so you retreat to the position of a coward and a
> cretin - delete all but one flippant throw-away line and make a stupid
> ad-hominem attack based on that.

You call it a "flippant throw-away line", but for me it pretty much
matches the tone of all of your messages that I've read on this subject.

> PS: and, frankly, my opinion is worth a lot more than the opinions of lamers,
> zealots, and cretins.  i, at least, back up my opinions with evidence and
> reasoning.

Opinions are like arseholes. Everybody's got one and nobody wants to see
the other guy's.

Your comment again underscores the superior condescending tone of your
messages. The tone of your messages does not promote logical,
level-headed discussion, and you're a fool to expect that it will.

Proof by repeated assertion does not constitute "evidence and reasoning".
I see your argument as at least as zealous as your opponents, and no
more based on objective reasoning as theirs, perhaps less so. I'm not
even sure that objective reasoning is entirely sufficient to resolve
this argument.

I have nothing to add directly to the discussion because I think others
have already covered it. I simply wish to point out that you're not
helping either side.
Sam "Eddie" Couter  |  mailto:sam@couter.dropbear.id.au
Debian Developer    |  mailto:eddie@debian.org
                    |  jabber:sam@teknohaus.dyndns.org
OpenPGP fingerprint:  A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05  5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: