Re: [silk] You farted - was Wikipedia
On 11-Dec-07, at 7:13 PM, shiv sastry wrote: Too late. You're hopping mad now :D and I am not playing your game. Once again, thanks but no thanks. You may have heard of this new game. It's called bait the skeptic. Here's how it works: Person A, our hero, makes an exaggerated claim. Person B, the skeptic, demands to know the basis of this claim. Person A narrates the details of the farting game and claims he's been baited. Person B reiterates that he merely wants the basis of the claim. Person A insists he will not fall for the bait, laments on the poor quality of research in general, and effectively comes out having painted person B as the villain. You win, Shiv.
Re: [silk] You farted - was Wikipedia
At 2007-12-11 14:40:20 +0530, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So you're saying that you're too cheap to get a real survey done, but expect to be taken seriously on facts you admit to making up yourself. If that is not an ad homimen I don't know what is. It's not ad hominem. If he'd said you're a right-wing Hindu murderer, so the results of your study are wrong, it would have been ad hominem. But he's saying you have no data to substantiate your argument. That he says you're cheap may be a nasty dig, but it's not ad hominem. Really, ad hominem is a very specialised description. Every instance of someone being nasty certainly doesn't qualify. Jace has just played the you farted game on me. Thanks, but no thanks. Two can play at that game: I have not been so lucky and have often been branded a right wing RSS supporter, which makes me a murderer of Christians. That makes you a murderer of Christians only insofar as it allows you to exaggerate what you perceive as a bias against anyone who identifies themselves as Hindu. Or do you think Thaths really can't or doesn't see any distinction between you and the people who burned Graham Staines? -- ams
Re: [silk] You farted - was Wikipedia
On 11-Dec-07, at 2:40 PM, shiv sastry wrote: Jace has just played the you farted game on me. Thanks, but no thanks. Thanks for the nice backdrop, Shiv. As I see it, I'm commenting on the emperor's new clothes. Where's your research data?
Re: [silk] You farted - was Wikipedia
On Tuesday 11 Dec 2007 3:13 pm, Kiran Jonnalagadda wrote: On 11-Dec-07, at 2:40 PM, shiv sastry wrote: Jace has just played the you farted game on me. Thanks, but no thanks. Thanks for the nice backdrop, Shiv. As I see it, I'm commenting on the emperor's new clothes. Where's your research data? Too late. You're hopping mad now :D and I am not playing your game. Once again, thanks but no thanks. shiv
Re: [silk] You farted - was Wikipedia
On Tuesday 11 Dec 2007 3:25 pm, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote: It's not ad hominem. If he'd said you're a right-wing Hindu murderer, so the results of your study are wrong, it would have been ad hominem. But he's saying you have no data to substantiate your argument. That he says you're cheap may be a nasty dig, but it's not ad hominem. Everyone is entitled to his view. You have yours. I have mine. That makes you a murderer of Christians only insofar as it allows you to exaggerate what you perceive as a bias against anyone who identifies themselves as Hindu. Or do you think Thaths really can't or doesn't see any distinction between you and the people who burned Graham Staines? Cut the boring rhetoric boss. I have no idea what Thaths thinks. But I can see that Thaths is a decent guy. shiv
Re: [silk] You farted - was Wikipedia
At 2007-12-11 19:21:51 +0530, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cut the boring rhetoric boss. OK. -- ams
