Re: short of definitive proof

John Ashby <J.V.Ashby@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

boots wrote:

John Ashby <J.V.Ashby@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

boots wrote:

John Ashby <J.V.Ashby@xxxxxxxx> wrote:


So what is the deal, Ashby? Is every post now required to be
certified truth?

No. I was discussing what happens when, for some reason or another,
the truth of a post *does* become important.

I question the use of the word "important" here. In mw.


Fair point.


As I said to Ray, I don't understand the attraction of doing that over
and over again. Even Casanova grew tired of maidenheads eventually.

I don't understand it either, but I don't obsess over it. Folks have
things they've never worked out, and those stay with them until they
have been worked out. I assume that Ray's posting behaviour falls
into this category. Not my problem.


No, until it affects you in some way

How will that happen, pray tell? Will Ray give out my real-life
address (which he doesn't have) and cause me to waste costly
ammunition on some retarded shitwipe who thinks he has a serious
problem with me? Will my gross insercurity cause me to suffer a
nervous breakdown because Mikey Don't Like Me? Other?

it won't be your problem. But the
fall-out, in terms of its effect on this group is something we all have
to deal with one way or another.

"its effect on this group"? You mean the fact that it can cause
otherwise sensible individuals such as yourself to become embroiled in
idiocy? Boy, that's a real problem, we better protect those people
from themselves, I say we should consider a lynching since that's the
intelligence level we've clearly descended to.

You find some way of burying your head
(except when you don't), some look on in amusement or amazement, some
jump into the fray on one side or another. Some will leave the group
entirely, others might be enticed in or to de-lurk.

Darwin may have been an idjut, or he may have had a couple salient
points to his credit.

It's the converse of what Jackson, Sal and I (at least) have been
talking about with Sylvia - that if you are going to present outside
evidence in support of your case

Since when did the mw nosegrope become a court of law where cases
are built?


See above. The veracity of Ray's claims about his life has clearly
become important to several people.

Like Sylvia, who claims to be less than 3 feet tall and cetera?
Please, let's attempt to keep at least some perspective shall we?


The veracity of those claims has never been important to anyone.

Hello. No kidding John, for a pretty rational guy, you're sounding a
lot like some teenager who's been playing Mario Brothers and shoots up
a pizza parlor because he knows the princess is being held captive in
the back room. It's a usenet nosegrope, a place for writers to hang
out when they come to a slow place, maybe engage in some interesting
discussion, banter, whatever. It is not a historically critical
meeting of the Vatican or the UN or some shit.

Once it's an issue, then getting to
the truth is a process that should be carried out with rigour and
integrity.

Absolute truth may be mythical, and physically verifiable truth may be
useless; the point of truthfulness on usenet is arguable unless one is
a hacker or identity-thief looking for an easy mark.

Have I ever mentioned that two of my three children were born well
before I met my wife, and that our third child has cloven hooves just
like daddy?


Now you're just kidding.

Not in the least. My wife had 2 small children when we met. Our
third child's fingernails have a tendency to crack and split just as
mine do (probably some sort of vitaman deficiency resulting from an
absolute refusal to eat lima beans). Using the term "cloven hooves"
as a euphemism certainly, but neither kidding nor lying. Which after
all is the point.

Ray has clearly found the proper audience for misdirection and similar
sleight-of-hand, for the mw rube population abounds.

Would you care for some cake?


Delighted. More tea, vicar?

Oh, we're going to get vicarious about things now? I thought you were
a staunch truth-or-death man, which is it?

--
The sane answer, to madness, is insanity.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The Long Awaited TRUTH About Ray Haddads "I Bombed Hanoi in 1974" Claim: Twas MAGIC!
    ... and John Ashby instead replied: ... truth. ... It appears that I have been completely wrong in my opinion of you, ... My sincerest apology. ...
    (misc.writing)
  • Re: Eotvos.
    ... Reasons why are being debated ... Always kidding, and always with at least a grain of truth. ... Maybe all the chirality-proneness doesn't extend beyond ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: To Older Fans: Did You See This Coming?
    ... question is whether the sixties own him. ... Just curious, which interview was this? ... than kidding, often the kidding part is a manipulation. ... Now, I'm not accusing Bob, because one never ever knows the truth in the ...
    (rec.music.dylan)
  • Re: To Older Fans: Did You See This Coming?
    ... question is whether the sixties own him. ... Just curious, which interview was this? ... than kidding, often the kidding part is a manipulation. ... Now, I'm not accusing Bob, because one never ever knows the truth in the ...
    (rec.music.dylan)
  • Re: Evolution vs The Word of God
    ... Because your posts are too stupid to be genuine, ... to be kidding. ... you're afraid to consider the truth of what I say? ...
    (talk.origins)