Re: Statistics on non-free usage
I believe disagree rather significantly with some of John's philosophy,
however...
On Thu, Jan 15, 2004 at 01:26:01PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > > so, you ARE a liar with an extremely short memory.
> > >
> > > Message-ID: <[🔎] 20040107003320.GA22699@taz.net.au>:
> > > Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 11:33:20 +1100
> > > (in reply to: <[🔎] 20040107001300.GB1697@complete.org>)
On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 09:14:36PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> > Calling me a "lying fuck" hardly proves that I am; and in fact, it seems
> > to me that you are losing your ability to have a dispassionate
> > discussion. That message contained no evidence that I lied about
> > anything.
On Thu, Jan 15, 2004 at 06:49:43PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> 1. i told you not to contact me again.
This isn't evidence that John lied about anything. At best, it's evidence
that he's not following your instructions.
On top of that, while you have the right to ask him not to contact you
privately, it's completely unreasonable to expect him to not reply to
you in public forums.
> 2. there was more in there than me just calling you a lying fuck.
> there was also direct evidence of you lying. you conveniently ignored
> that evidence. is this more lying, or is it mere stupidity?
While there might be such evidence, I couldn't recognize it.
In part, this might be because the formatting of that text was so bad
I had trouble reading it.
But I suspect it's also because the evidence you presented was inadequate
-- I believe that there wasn't enough there to prove anything.
Finally, I'd like to ask the same thing of you that I asked of Branden:
please spend the time you spend posting here on rational arguments,
not on this other stuff.
--
Raul
Reply to: