About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadBack one pagePage 0Page 1


Post 20

Wednesday, September 7, 2005 - 9:36amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Dean,
If you were making some kind of joke, playing around etc... you might want to add a ":)", otherwise people will take you frankly.
I do use emoticons every so often as intensifiers, but I prefer to rely upon the intelligence of readers to understand my tone.

Andy

P.S. Memo to Glenn:  Now I'm fencing. ;-)


Sanction: 22, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 22, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 22, No Sanction: 0
Post 21

Wednesday, September 7, 2005 - 10:21amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Andy,

What good are you doing?

I was asking you a trivial question to investigate your character. I picked something that could have been answered with a concise sentence or two rather than engage you in a substantial debate so I wouldn't commit myself to a waste of time. Given the length (edit: and nature) of your responses, it would seem that you care more about reading your own words than understanding the other party.

Speaking of not understanding, I'm honestly not sure how "Anyone who might be considered an 'evil capitalist' isn't really a capitalist, that's what you're saying? If so, I agree." can be any clearer.

Thanks for your time
Sarah

(Edited by Sarah House
on 9/07, 12:29pm)


Post 22

Wednesday, September 7, 2005 - 10:56amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Sarah,
I was asking you a trivial question to investigate your character.
[Deleted as not worth the effort.]

Andy

(Edited by Andy Postema on 9/07, 11:44am)


Sanction: 8, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 8, No Sanction: 0
Post 23

Wednesday, September 7, 2005 - 11:01amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL...

Sanction: 14, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 14, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 14, No Sanction: 0
Post 24

Wednesday, September 7, 2005 - 7:53amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Is it so terribly hard to stop and think about what others are asking before you post or do you only think when you have the chance to publicy deride someone?

Sarah it seems like the latter to me

This whole thread seems totally pointless, and becoming more "childish" than "womanish"

Don't let the bastards grind you down !


Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 25

Wednesday, September 7, 2005 - 3:11pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Louise,
This whole thread seems totally pointless ...
You're wrong.  This thread is an exercise in the virtue of benevolence.  Many misunderstand it as patience, generosity, civility, mea culpas, or "turning the other cheek".  These are at most methods of benevolence.  But benevolence doesn't require ignoring or playing down disagreements.  It does not require disarming yourself to keep the peace.  It doesn't demand surrender to avoid conflict.

Benevolence is a species of justice.  It is a judgment that others are acting in good faith in the absence of any evidence of malice.  Benevolence serves your self-interest by seeking harmony with another when there is no reason to believe that he poses any harm to your interests.

Benevolence is a useful virtue in an internet forum because there is almost nil prospect of suffering any harm from anyone.  Flames and insults are the worst that people can do to you, and they only hurt if you let them.  So why not give others the benefit of the doubt?

But as I said that doesn't mean shying away from disagreements.  It does mean assuming that your opponent, even if ruffled and unpleasant, is not acting in bad faith - at least until you clearly know otherwise.  Even then, benevolence in an internet forum will still permit second chances.  I am sincere when I say I hold no grudges here.

So, let's consider how benevolence has not been exercised in this thread.  I think if you take an objective look at who has said what here, the ones who have gotten upset or snarky with me have done so because they were caught in contradictions they refuse to admit.  That's understandable.  Pride is powerful.  However, another virtue called integrity should override pride to allow them to admit a mistake and move on.  When they move on, that's when they might recognize how failing to exercise the virtue of benevolence regarding me got them into the fix they were in.

Andy


Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 26

Wednesday, September 7, 2005 - 7:51pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Louise,

Bastard is a bit overly generous. This thread is basically a one-man-band staged by a very lonely dude trying to call attention to himself by any means possible - and gradually running out of gas.

Pity is more in order.

But I do understand why you got that impression.

Michael


Sanction: 17, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 17, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 17, No Sanction: 0
Post 27

Wednesday, September 7, 2005 - 8:31pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Andy,

Since you dropped my name into this thread, I have to say this for the record. I appreciate your effort at being a productive discussant on SOLO, but I consider it unfortunate that you occasionally still revert to trollsome behavior - and starting a thread devoted to deprecation of another productive participant is as trollsome as it gets. If I were managing SOLO, this kind of behavior (like others such as plagiarism, spamming etc) would get you one week under moderation for the first offense. Sarah House has contributed much more than you to discussions on SOLO to date, and your starting a thread just to diss her is something that I hope never to see again.

Post 28

Thursday, September 8, 2005 - 2:04amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Andy

Thanks for the reply.   I respect your opinions, and to admire your determination.

You're wrong.  This thread is an exercise in the virtue of benevolence.

If this thread had been set up to discuss the virtue of benevolence, great, I wish it was, but it doesn't seem to read that way to me. It appears to have been started to name & shame, hence the name of the subject:      "Sarah gets a Reading Lesson".
I think the heading in itself could be hurtful and I'm not sure why -  because Sarah wouldn't agree with you or will not apologise  for in your eyes being wrong ?? 
Pride is powerful.  However, another virtue called integrity should override pride  

Yes I agree completely,  there is always a time when this should happen! 


Louise




Post 29

Thursday, September 8, 2005 - 5:54amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Adam,

You have done me an injustice.  Not a grievous one, but one I am surprised you would make.  I think I been here long enough to know that you would not have tolerated any more than I have Sarah's distortions of your statements to make you the patsy of a word game.  I called her out on it in a jokey way.  (Seriously, does anyone here actually believe Sarah needs to learn how to read?)

Now I do understand that my tone is not often delivered clearly in this forum.  That's unfortunate because of the ruckus that has been raised around me.  I would prefer not to have it, but I see how I caused it.  So I have apologized for not making my tone clear.  In my defense, the substance of what I write is solid whether one agrees or disagrees with it.  I think you would agree that substance should take precedence over perceived tone in a forum like this.

Would you also agree that we should extend to each other a little benevolence and focus upon the substance of each other's statements rather than look for grievance in the tone of those statements?  If so, then I don't think we need to create infractions worthy of moderation out of heated words.

Andy


Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 30

Thursday, September 8, 2005 - 6:05amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Louise,

Thank you for taking the trouble to consider the value of my little experiment here.  You asked one question that I should respond to ...
I think the heading in itself could be hurtful and I'm not sure why -  because Sarah wouldn't agree with you or will not apologise  for in your eyes being wrong ??
Actually Sarah agreed with the substance of what I had written in the anti-gouging thread, and I was not seeking an apology.  However, the title of this thread was plainly a poke at Sarah.  I intended it to be nettlesome.  There's no crime in that.  It should not be seen as a source of harm.  It's part of the give-and-take in a forum.  Sarah wanted to play a game with my words instead of simply engaging me in a discussion, and so I posted a big billboard to draw her attention to the error of her ways.  I regret it because I failed completely to communicate the light-heartedness of what I did.

Andy


Post 31

Thursday, September 8, 2005 - 6:18amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Notice to all:

I've said my piece about the conflict of personalities here and elsewhere.  I tried to use real conflict between me and the others to show that the virtue of benevolence is something other than turning the other cheek.  Part of showing goodwill to another is not giving him a free ride when you think he is in error.  Benevolence is about engaging another when in dispute without rancor or ill will.  Whether I accomplished any worthwhile in this exercise, I honestly don't know.  But it's over and my apologies to those of you who were upset by it.

Andy


Post 32

Thursday, September 8, 2005 - 7:47amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Andy,

Practice some benevolence on me now. I want Sarah around at least until the next photo update. I have a hunch…

Jon

Post 33

Thursday, September 8, 2005 - 9:44amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Sarah has asked me what I’m talking about, so others must wonder also. I wrote to her that I have a hunch she possesses an outward beauty to match her inner one. I hope I haven’t offended her or anyone else.

I like seeing everyone’s picture. Gives me a concrete to attach their ideas and positions to, helps me remember who’s who, saying what.

Jon

Post 34

Thursday, September 8, 2005 - 10:10amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
You just want to see how she stacks against Carrie... :-)

Post 35

Thursday, September 8, 2005 - 1:11pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Jon,
I want Sarah around at least until the next photo update.
That explains why my photo hasn't been posted yet.  They do it in batches here, right?

Andy


Sanction: 10, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 10, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 10, No Sanction: 0
Post 36

Friday, September 9, 2005 - 9:01pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I'm only posting because I do not want your name listed last!

Sarah kicked your wussy ass!


gw


Post to this threadBack one pagePage 0Page 1


User ID Password or create a free account.