On 03/29/2013 02:26 PM, ru...@yahoo.com wrote:
On 03/28/2013 02:31 PM, Ethan Furman wrote:
On 03/28/2013 12:54 PM, ru...@yahoo.com wrote:
On 03/28/2013 01:48 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
For someone who delights in pointing out the logical errors of
others you are often remarkably sloppy in your own logic.
Of course language can be both helpful and excessively strong. That
is the case when language less strong would be equally or more
helpful.
It can also be the case when language less strong would be useless.
I don't get your point.
I was pointing out the fallacy in Steven's logic (which you cut).
How is your statement relevant to that?
Ah. I thought you were saying that in all cases helpful strong language would
be even more helpful if less strong.
Further, "liar" is both so non-objective and so pejoratively
emotive that it is a word much more likely to be used by someone
interested in trolling than in a serious discussion, so most
sensible people here likely would not bite.
Non-objective? If today poster B says X, and tomorrow poster B says
s/he was unaware of X until just now, is not "liar" a reasonable
conclusion?
Of course not. People forget what they posted previously, change
their mind, don't express what they intended perfectly, sometimes
express a complex thought that the reader inaccurately perceives
as contradictory, don't realize themselves that their thinking
is contradictory, ...
I agree, which is why I resisted my own impulse to call him a liar; however, he has been harping on this subject for
months now, so I would be suprised if he actually was surprised and had forgotten...
Lying involves intent to deceive. I haven't been following jmfauth's
claims since they are not of interest to me, but going back and quickly
looking at the posts that triggered the "liar" and "idiot" posts, I
did not see anything that made me think that jmfauth was not sincere
in his beliefs. Being wrong and being sincere are not exclusive.
Nor did Steven even try to justify the "liar" claim. As to Mark
Lawrence, that seemed like a pure "I don't like you" insult whose
proper place is /dev/null.
After months of jmf's antagonist posts, I don't blame them.
I hope that we all agree that we want a nice, friendly,
productive community where everyone is welcome.
I hope so too but it is likely that some people want a place to
develop and assert some sense of influence, engage in verbal duels,
instigate arguments, etc. That can be true of regulars here as
well as drive-by posters.
But some people simply cannot or will not behave in ways that are
compatible with those community values. There are some people
whom we *do not want here*
In other words, everyone is NOT welcome.
Correct. Do you not agree?
Don't ask me, ask Steven. He was the one who wrote two sentences
earlier, "...we want a...community where everyone is welcome."
Ah, right -- missed that!
--
~Ethan~
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
