> FMAJ: What do the rules say about calling people liars and using Nazi
> references? Is that a breach of good manners?
> DNAunion: Why don't you first tell me what the rules say about calling
> others dishonest? Or insulting them in some other manner (as in Susan's
>intended insult of my being a creationist)? And is one not allowed to
> counter attack in writing to an unprovoked written attack?
>FMAJ: Why are you trying to distract from my question?
DNAunion: And why are you deflecting mine?
>DNAunion: ... intended insult of my being a creationist)? And is one not
allowed to
> counter attack in writing to an unprovoked written attack?
>FMAJ: If you believe that accusing people of dishonesty and using nazi
accusations is a useful counter attack then I have proven my case.
DNAunion: You are so confused. It was Susan who called me and others at ARN
dishonest, not the other way around - and she did so without even knowing me
or them: go back and read the original post.
Is not calling someone a Creationist about the most insulting thing one could
say to a scientist - as someone here listed, there are very many negative
attributes related to science that are inseparable from the name. And Susan
meant Creationist in its fullest insulting meaning. Since this site deals
with science, and since Susan unjustly labeled me and the others with the
most insulting name possible in science, then I consider Susan to have
insulted me greatly.
>DNAunion: Look, it is simple. If people treat me fairly, I respond in
kind. If
> people call me names, I respond in kind. Note the trend. They act - I
react:
> they attack - I respond.
>FMAJ: People did not call you names.
DNAunion: Sure, whatever you say. Then by your own criteria, I did not call
anyone a name either, so what are you going on about?
>DNAunion: Once you and the others like Huxter let this incident drop, I
will go back to being polite - as I was before Huxter and Susan made their
comments. Until then, I feel totally justified in "defending" myself as I
was not the instigator.
FMAJ: Your attitude is duely noted.
DNAunion: Would that be my original
pre-Huxter/Susan-insult-implication-of-wrongdoing attitude, or my defensive
post-Huxter/Susan-insult-implication-of-wrongdoing attitude? If you will
note, they are completely opposite each other.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Oct 04 2000 - 13:59:58 EDT