--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <jflanegi@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <sparaig@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <sparaig@> wrote: > > > [...] > > > > > You enjoy laughing at people who argue about topics > > > > > you raise that you don't care about? > > > > > > > > You may have a hope of getting it after all. :-) > > > > > > [Researching how to implement a troll filter in the > > > Safari browse] > > > > Reminds me of a lowlife I went to school with who used to enjoy > > starting fights over CB radio... > > The topics themselves do not invite argument. > Some people bring argument to the topics because > they like to argue, that's all. Who could *not* > laugh at them? > > Look at the topic above, in the header to this > post. I posted it, inviting people to participate. > So far, the only person to post to it as if it > were a real topic was Rick. He posted a balanced, > reasonable "middle way" view of the question. > > On the other hand, look at what you (Jim), sparaig, > and Judy brought to the topic. All you could possibly > see in it was some kind of setup for a putdown, so > you turned it *into* a series of putdowns and argu- > ments. Again, who could *not* laugh at such people?
To reiterate the point, have a look at the other topic I started recently, the one with "Why would you believe that..." in the Subject line. There have been 58 responses so far. From my point of view, the *only* responses in that thread that are the least bit argumentative came from you three. The other people just presented their ideas and *discussed*. You guys argued. Was the cause of that effect the post itself, or its subject, or could you three possibly have brought something of your selves along and tried to impose them on the thread? The first line of the "starter" post was, "A new topic, hopefully bias- and argumentation-free." That's how it turned out, as far as I can tell, for all of the participants in the thread except for you three. Do you honestly believe that the fault for that lies in the thread itself?
