Re: Death in Greenwich Park - verdict

[Terry]

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
(Nick) wrote:

> What? How old are you?

Old enough to walk away from those who imagine that they can paper over
a flawed argument with immature abuse.

 

[Nick]

Terry wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
> (Nick) wrote:
>
>> What? How old are you?
>
> Old enough to walk away from those who imagine that they can paper over
> a flawed argument with immature abuse.

Classic.

I make a number of points regarding your comments. But you choose to
respond to me "papering over" the very serious and important argument of
whether you implied I was hard of thinking or not.

 

[Terry]

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
(Nick) wrote:

> Terry wrote:
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > [email protected] (Nick) wrote:
> >
> >> What? How old are you?
> >
> > Old enough to walk away from those who imagine that they can paper
> > over a flawed argument with immature abuse.
>
> Classic.
>
> I make a number of points regarding your comments. But you choose to
> respond to me "papering over" the very serious and important argument
> of whether you implied I was hard of thinking or not.

Go ahead. make my day. Show me where I implied that /you/ were hard of
thinking.

 

[Nick]

Terry wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
> (Nick) wrote:
>
>> Terry wrote:
>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>> [email protected] (Nick) wrote:
>>>
>>>> What? How old are you?
>>> Old enough to walk away from those who imagine that they can paper
>>> over a flawed argument with immature abuse.
>> Classic.
>>
>> I make a number of points regarding your comments. But you choose to
>> respond to me "papering over" the very serious and important argument
>> of whether you implied I was hard of thinking or not.
>
> Go ahead. make my day. Show me where I implied that /you/ were hard of
> thinking.
>
>
Who cares?

We were debating why I felt it ok to boycott restaurants based on the
chance they were associated with a killer driver and you didn't think it
was ok.

Why get distracted by some petty side issue of exactly who the "hard of
thinking people" you were talking about were. You seemed to be implying
they were out there listening in. I hoped if I mentioned them it might
encourage you to make your arguments a bit simpler and clearer so that
even I/They/whoever could understand. So would you answer some of the
more relevant points I made?