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 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Page 5


Post 100

Wednesday, March 19, 2014 - 12:33pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Robert::

 

This is why going to the transcript is critical for accurate representation of others. They do teach this in law schools, as a matter of fact.

 

The record of what I wrote:

 

Yet, not advocating "ruling over discretion"; talking about 'The Moral Case for Discretion by Owners Over Rules Over Discretion by Owners"...

 Based on the personal arguments of "efficiency"  ... "planning"   and ...social disruption...  

The nicest thing I can say about this is that it is lawyerly.

 

Your ratcake weasel innuendo, directed at Fred, in response to the above:

 

Fred - You've discovered the importance of semantic hygiene. Modify even a single word in an author's writings - "rules" to "ruling" for example - and it can drastically affect the meaning of that author's argument. This is why going to the transcript is critical for accurate representation of others. They do teach this in law schools, as a matter of fact.

Let's be clear about something. There are games that I play, which some find distasteful, but I am not a cheater. Misrepresentation is for the MSK's of the world. In the rare instances where I have made a mistake of this nature and realized it, I have corrected myself and apologized to the individual publicly. I want to "win," but not that way.

 

Your words, your rope.  You hung yourself, counselor. The choices are liar, cheater, incompetent, or malevolent.   You think you’ve danced along some deft edge; you have not. You’ve fallen right over.

Now wear it.   Because the tip jar was far away on the counter, your Honor.

 

Boilerplate: the above will by my standard response to any post of yours directed to Fred.   Every time. Guaranteed.   Ctrl-C/Ctrl-V.  When I was referring to your use of 'boilerplate' I was referring to the vague/non case specific argument ("You are wrong.") ... you could cookie cutter that kind of non-argument 'argument' at anybody for anything; it said nothing except "got nothing."   When I’m using another defition of the term ‘boilerplate’, I'm using it better than it has been used in decades: this post will be my standard, re-ueable appropriate response to any post of yours even remotely referring to me..   Next time you want to see it again, direct a post at me, directly or indirectly, weasely or not.   It's a promise.  I'm done with weasels.

 



Post to this threadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Page 5


User ID Password or create a free account.