On Sun, 24 Jun 2001 21:47:44 -0700, Kenneth Smith <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

>Reef Fish wrote:

>> And you Ken Smith has nothing but unsubstantiated ad hominem attacks
>> to make on me.  Try address the ISSUE or point out where I found
>> fault that was not fault, if you want to participate.
>>
>> Failing to do so, it doesn't matter how old or how young you are,
>> you're just an nuisance and a pest who has nothing to contribute
>> to this group or Scuba-L either where you practiced the same!  Get
>> a life, Ken.
>
>Bob,
>
>Just to let you know, I have a very successful life... and it does not
>normally include ad hominem attacks, but I am of nature to supply these
>both in business and outside where I feel that they apply...

I suppose you DO know that "ad hominem attack" is a logical FALLACY
of attacking a person, completely unrelated to a subject being
discussed.  And you think there is EVER an appropriate place for
an ad hominem attack, in business or outside?

That is a perfect self-character reference, Ken.  Pity.


>With deference to this list...you are right.. I have little to
>contribute..due to it's nature, although I am a regular diver...

And that's supposed to justify your self-appointed role of an ad
hominem attacker when you FEEL LIKE IT, as in "I am in the mood..."?


>but YOUR attacking of the 'facts' of Lee and Chuck
>...just attacking the verbage...is a ludrecrues method of rebuttal...

What exactly IS a rebuttal if the attack is NOT on what they WROTE?
Use your, and their, ad hominem methods?  You re-iterated that
absurd point:

>issue responsibly ( as you have suggested I do) and not attack the WORDS
>that they have written... (otherwise I would not have sent my first
>email today)

What is there to rebut or attack if NOT the WORDS they have written?
Written WORDS are all we have to go by, in a written discussion, Ken!


You've defended you first post VERY poorly.  And you sent your second,
and third, ... all you have established definitively is that you
used AD HOMINEM ATTACK on ME, without substance on the issue:

KS> ad hominem attacks, but I am of nature to supply these
KS> both in business and outside where I feel that they apply...

Your business is none of my business nor the business of this list.
But you have succeeded in indicting yourself and your business in
the manner you view a discussion/rebuttal, as one not rebutting
the WORDS written, but simply apply ad hominem attacks as one feels
like it!   You think that's the majority position too?

-- Bob.