On 6/14/06, Brice Yokem <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Yes, and when he posts his own words, you will then want 'supporting'
> statements.

At first, I was just going to post, "Huh?" and leave it at that
becuase I'm not sure I understand what you are talking about.  Let me
see if I can address what I think you mean.

Denys can say whatever he likes, with whatever degree of "support" he
cares to offer.  If he advances an argument as to what is or is not or
what should or should not be, I would expect him to offer support for
that argument as I would expect anyone else to.  Failing that, his
argument is not cogent, as anyone else's would not be.

My primary concern at the moment is not the cogency of Denys's
argument, the statistics cited are compelling whether or not I agree
with the interpretation, but with the ownership of the argument made.
Denys presented it as his own thoughts on information he collected.  I
have provided what I believe to be compelling evidence that he took
someone else's words, rearranged them, and presented them as his own.
Such an act is both dishonest and immoral.

Rather than suggest, as I believe that you have, that I will never be
satisfied by any argument that Denys makes, why don't you address the
remarkable similarities between the message sent by Denys and the
article I quoted.  As a conservative, I would expect that you have an
atttachment to certain values, although I could be wrong.  Are deceit
and word-theiving acceptable to you?

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *