Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: social democracy
Debating and learning are at the core of what we are trying to do. Personal attacks get in the way. > > No thanks, Kick me off the list anytime you want. I shall continue to > respond in the style that I respond. I am not here to share > information as if I am an information processing machine but to > discuss and debate and learn. I of course have my own explanation for > why Marxists such as Carrol, Jim D, and Paul Phillips get into > arguments with me and themselves resort freely to ad hominem > arguments. At any rate, I certainly can't be accused of laying into > Phillips first! And the whole idea that debates among Marxists should > not be disputatious is just--well--so not like Marx himself. > Rakesh > -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: social democracy
- Original Message - From: "Rakesh Bhandari" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> No thanks, Kick me off the list anytime you want. I shall continue to respond in the style that I respond. I am not here to share information as if I am an information processing machine but to discuss and debate and learn. I of course have my own explanation for why Marxists such as Carrol, Jim D, and Paul Phillips get into arguments with me and themselves resort freely to ad hominem arguments. At any rate, I certainly can't be accused of laying into Phillips first! And the whole idea that debates among Marxists should not be disputatious is just--well--so not like Marx himself. Rakesh === Disputing and discussing ideas and strategies is one thing but you *still* aren't winning friends and influencing people. Ian
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Nathan is correct that it is the software, which, as far as the school is concerned, is fixed in stone. However, what I thought Michael was suggesting was that people manually remove the re's before they send the message. On Wed, Jul 18, 2001 at 10:04:46AM -0400, Nathan Newman wrote: > The fault is in the PEN-L listserv software; it is the only list in which I > participate that adds an extra "re:" when I reply to a post. It has to do > with the fact that every message header is automatically changed by the > software with a new number that eliminates the re: in front of the previous > header, thereby fooling software into thinking the header subject has > changed. > > I wish Michael would look into having the numbering of posts removed for > that reason, but it is too valuable then we will just have to live with the > multiplying re:s. > > Nathan Newman > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.nathannewman.org > - Original Message - > From: "Michael Perelman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 9:50 AM > Subject: [PEN-L:15277] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: > Re: Re: > > > > Thanks for reminding us. > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2001 at 03:10:22AM -0400, Michael Pollak wrote: > > > > I don't suppose there's any chance of getting people whose mail programs > > multiply re's to change their settings? It soon makes the subject lines > > useless for no gain that I can see. > > > > Michael > > > > __ > > Michael PollakNew York [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > -- > Michael Perelman > Economics Department > California State University > Chico, CA 95929 > > Tel. 530-898-5321 > E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The fault is in the PEN-L listserv software; it is the only list in which I participate that adds an extra "re:" when I reply to a post. It has to do with the fact that every message header is automatically changed by the software with a new number that eliminates the re: in front of the previous header, thereby fooling software into thinking the header subject has changed. I wish Michael would look into having the numbering of posts removed for that reason, but it is too valuable then we will just have to live with the multiplying re:s. Nathan Newman [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nathannewman.org - Original Message - From: "Michael Perelman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 9:50 AM Subject: [PEN-L:15277] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Thanks for reminding us. On Wed, Jul 18, 2001 at 03:10:22AM -0400, Michael Pollak wrote: > > I don't suppose there's any chance of getting people whose mail programs > multiply re's to change their settings? It soon makes the subject lines > useless for no gain that I can see. > > Michael > > __ > Michael PollakNew York [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Thanks for reminding us. On Wed, Jul 18, 2001 at 03:10:22AM -0400, Michael Pollak wrote: > > I don't suppose there's any chance of getting people whose mail programs > multiply re's to change their settings? It soon makes the subject lines > useless for no gain that I can see. > > Michael > > __ > Michael PollakNew York [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I don't suppose there's any chance of getting people whose mail programs multiply re's to change their settings? It soon makes the subject lines useless for no gain that I can see. Michael __ Michael PollakNew York [EMAIL PROTECTED]
