Re: Intimation of breakdown of communication that has plagued SRQ consistently
- From: downsizingmylife <delightdarling@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2007 01:36:06 -0700
On May 29, 5:09 pm, "Yowie" <yowie9644.DIESPAM...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Carl" <pchristain...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
Instead of following the usual, nonsensical game of Engineer, let's
SRQers criticize Engineer on how he communicates often on SRQ in such
manner as to lead to breakdown - the title of this thread.
Engineer is as close to perfectly logical as any human I know. His
communication on SRQ is clear, concise and well thought out, and indeed, I
find it the easiest to follow out of anyone here, even when he is presenting
complex arguments. He is willing to provide references for any assertions he
makes and is willing to entertain the notion that he is wrong. I very much
admire the way he presents both sides of the argument with references and
healthy discourse. If he finds another espousing what he thinks is untrue,
he presents a sound case as to why they are wrong, without judging them
personally, although, like all humans, can sometimes get 'a bit snarky' when
his attempts to reason with another person are dismissed, ignored or evaded
and bad debating techniques such as assertions, calls to authority and other
fallacious arguments are used instead.
I would want to make very sure of my facts before entering a debate with
Engineer, not because I"m scared of him but rather, have a great respect for
his logic and ability to find resources and references.
If he wasn't an engineer, he'd probably make a great Queen's Council. (I was
going to say 'lawyer' but that has negative connotations).
IOW, let's start holding SRQers in general, including Engineer, to a
As long as you hold yourself to the same or higher standard as you require
ps...i in no way mean "the doctor spock", who many people raised their
kids on his baby books...god help us still as we have two in our
family raised on doctor spock books and god help us still...faith
- Prev by Date: Re: Intimation of breakdown of communication that has plagued SRQ consistently
- Next by Date: Re: For future reference
- Previous by thread: Re: Intimation of breakdown of communication that has plagued SRQ consistently