|
|
Posted by Steve on 01/25/08 21:54
"Adam Frame" <mistraal@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:CtKdnfRlOf5ilQ7aRVn_vwA@giganews.com...
> Steve wrote:
>> "Adam Frame" <mistraal@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:Ya2dna-v0czkHRLaRVn_vwA@giganews.com...
>>> Do you get a kick out of insulting people on the internet? You, sir are
>>> in need of a mouthwash with a bar of soap. If you cannot contribute to a
>>> civilized discussion without swearing and insults then don't contribute
>>> at all.
>>
>> first of all, 'mouthwash' is the generic term for a product used *TO*
>> wash one's mouth. i think you mean that i need my mouth washed
>> with...that would be 'in need of a mouth wash with...'
>>
>> the space is important. :)
>
> However nitpicking your response may seem, I did realise that once I had
> posted it and I thank you for your correction.
good. now if you could just muster a smile...i was playing with you!
> Now back to the matter in hand, why is it that on the internet people find
> it more acceptable to swear, call people names and (god forbid) threaten
> others? I've never understood that.
i'm not 'swearing'. i'm using words that could be immediately considered
offensive. grow up. the intent behind words are more offensive than those
used in declaring them. 'bad' words are simply words. i have a large
vocabulary and refuse to limit my use of any because of some religous or
social moray.
and, i don't threaten anyone...whether on the net, or in person. if i mean
someone harm, i simply inflict it. it is counter-productive to announce my
intentions to the object of my attentions.
> For me a much more damning response to a post you do not agree with is one
> which refutes each and every point you intend to without resorting to
> insults. You just debase your very own argument and make it much less
> likely that you get your point across.
yes, that's worth about 0.02. none of that applies on usenet. very few argue
this way. if you notice, i do argue point/counter-point/refutation. note
also that whatever language i use, the facts i present stand on their own.
as for 'debase'...that seems a bit wordy for you. :)
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|