Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 13:38:38 -0500 From: Paul Schmehl <pschmehl_lists@tx.rr.com> To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: BSD logo Message-ID: <FBFD52991C1E46C80945B631@utd65257.utdallas.edu> In-Reply-To: <20100727002048.GB91286@guilt.hydra> References: <E1OcU31-0002Iw-00.vic_sk-mail-ru@f138.mail.ru> <20100724062446.GD78741@guilt.hydra> <1E1FB8AF2B3AD9F567716164@utd65257.utdallas.edu> <20100727002048.GB91286@guilt.hydra>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--On Monday, July 26, 2010 18:20:48 -0600 Chad Perrin <perrin@apotheon.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 01:24:21PM -0500, Paul Schmehl wrote: >> --On Saturday, July 24, 2010 00:24:46 -0600 Chad Perrin >> <perrin@apotheon.com> wrote: >> > >> > When this is the way someone starts a "discussion" about wanting to use a >> > new OS, I tend to believe there is no genuine interest in using the OS in >> > question. >> >> When this is the way one answers a simple question, I tend to believe >> there's no genuine interest in dialog. I am therefore left to wonder who >> really is the intolerant one. One cannot claim to be tolerant while >> demonstrating intolerance any more than one can claim to be educated >> without every having read a book. > > How perspicacious of you. I'll quote myself basically saying exactly > that -- that I am not particularly interested in "dialog" with someone > who, I'm sure, has already made up his or her mind: > > In any case, I didn't claim to be "tolerant". In fact, I very > specifically said I was sure someone would accuse me of intolerance, and > went on to explain that I am guilty of intolerance of those who are > intolerant themselves. Why are you just repeating what I have said, but > in the tone of an accusation? How intolerant are *you* today? > We can let the readers decide that. (Not that it matters to me one way or the other.) The man asked a simple question. You then launched into a lengthy diatribe against intolerance, and you continue to lash out at anyone who takes issue with your responses. I made no value judgments about you. I simply parroted your own words. Yet you rise up in self-righteous anger in response. Then you cement your apparent ntolerance of any criticism with "pot, kettle, black". Perhaps the mote in your eye is obscuring the mite in others. >> >> It's amazing to me the ridicule heaped upon the man for asking a question. >> Would it have been too difficult to simply answer the question, as the >> first response did? No, we have to attack the man for having beliefs that >> are different from our own. Because we're so enlightened? Or because we >> are even more ignorant than we suppose he is? > > I *did* answer the question before heaping ridicule on someone who, as I > stated, I believe had already made up his or her mind, and had no genuine > interest in dialog in the first place. > So now that you know you were wrong, will you apologize? (I'm not holding my breath.) At a minimum, get some help for the anger issues. -- Paul Schmehl, Senior Infosec Analyst As if it wasn't already obvious, my opinions are my own and not those of my employer. ******************************************* "It is as useless to argue with those who have renounced the use of reason as to administer medication to the dead." Thomas Jefferson
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?FBFD52991C1E46C80945B631>