In a message dated 10/5/2000 11:42:19 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
Nucacids@aol.com writes:
> In a message dated 10/5/00 6:17:32 PM Dateline Standard Time,
> FMAJ1019@aol.com writes:
>
> >Do you have any argument to make other than to assert?
>
> Still wearing that battle gear, eh?
>
Sure, in battle gear I understand best.
> >Why do you suggest that I do not want to understand?
>
> I don't know if you want to understand. You simply didn't.
>
As I said, a mere assertion.
> >Nor is battling an argument inconsistent with understanding an argument.
>
> Except that you posted your lengthy battle reply about, oh, 30 minutes
> after
> I posted
> my essay. Give you time to write, and well, that leaves about 15 minutes
> to
> "understand." Thus, it's more likely that you approached my essay with one
> intention - to find arenas for battle. Did you read my essay before
> responding or did you read it while responding?
>
How does this diminish the value of my response. Either you comment on it or
don't. Don't try to reject it based on unfounded assertions. Show me the
supporting evidence .
> >If you want to make an argument then at least address why my argument is
> >incorrect.
>
> Obsessed with battling, eh? I never said your argument was incorrect. It's
> simply out of place and irrelevant. But I don't expect you to understand.
> :)
>
An argument ad hominem with a smiley face is still an argument ad hominem.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Oct 06 2000 - 02:44:31 EDT