>> SJ: I did not say anything about Susan personally except that she "gives
the impression that this is the first time she had heard of it..." which is
honestly how it seemed, to me at least.
>> Bertvan: Susan now has something better than merely calling those who
disagree with her liars. [referencing Susan's comment about their being
"emontionally disturbed" in the same post].
>>FMAJ: Please explain?
>> DNAunion: There's your inability to grasp the obvious again. I suppose you
don't consider calling people "emotionally disturbed", on top of calling them
"liars", is inappropriate in any way, shape, or form?
>>Susan: Ad hominem. So it's ok to use an ad hominem when others do?
Fascinating.
DNAunion: And what about your original ad hom that is under discussion here?
So it's ok for *you* to use ad homs even when others don't do so first.
Fascinating!
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Oct 21 2000 - 05:47:39 EDT