Arny said,
"The common thread is that the perpetrators of just about all of this foul
behavior has generally been traceable to people of the so-called
subjectivist persuasion. As a rule subjectivists posting on Usenet are more
insulting, more profane, and more childish."

This is the opposite of tolerance. This is the worst form of intellectual
bigotry, committed by a cruel man.

Robert Morein wrote:
Arny said,
"The common thread is that the perpetrators of just about all of this foul
behavior has generally been traceable to people of the so-called
subjectivist persuasion. As a rule subjectivists posting on Usenet are more
insulting, more profane, and more childish."

This is the opposite of tolerance. This is the worst form of intellectual
bigotry, committed by a cruel man.

Somehow, I suspect they will survive.

Robert Morein wrote:
Arny said,
"The common thread is that the perpetrators of just about all of this foul
behavior has generally been traceable to people of the so-called
subjectivist persuasion. As a rule subjectivists posting on Usenet are more
insulting, more profane, and more childish."

This is the opposite of tolerance. This is the worst form of intellectual
bigotry, committed by a cruel man.

That's correct, subjectivists are the most intolerant and bigotted
assholes on usenet.

In article .com,
" wrote:

Robert Morein wrote:
Arny said,
"The common thread is that the perpetrators of just about all of this foul
behavior has generally been traceable to people of the so-called
subjectivist persuasion. As a rule subjectivists posting on Usenet are more
insulting, more profane, and more childish."

This is the opposite of tolerance. This is the worst form of intellectual
bigotry, committed by a cruel man.

That's correct, subjectivists are the most intolerant and bigotted
assholes on usenet.

Let me guess: you're against blanket statements, right?

From: Jenn
Date: Sun, Mar 5 2006 9:09 pm
Email: Jenn

That's correct, subjectivists are the most intolerant and bigotted
assholes on usenet.

Let me guess: you're against blanket statements, right?

nob does this all the time. It must have to do with those elusive
'debating trade' points I keep reading about.

If you tell nob that a position he took on some matter is stupid, he
responds with 'If I'm stupid, then I can now join the Democratic Party.
Have some more Kool-Aid.'

In this case, he took the well-known 'IKYABWAI' route. Far more
childish (if such a thing is possible), but an equally valid 'debating
trade' tactic in nob's 'mind.'

I *knew* the post yesterday was from a forger. There's no way that nob
could actually have said that he and Mr. Krueger frequently act in a
nasty fashion, bringing most of the nastiness that they get upon
themselves.

That was far too honest of a post for nob; this is what 'we' would
expect from him.;-)

In article .com,
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote:

From: Jenn
Date: Sun, Mar 5 2006 9:09 pm
Email: Jenn

That's correct, subjectivists are the most intolerant and bigotted
assholes on usenet.

Let me guess: you're against blanket statements, right?

nob does this all the time. It must have to do with those elusive
'debating trade' points I keep reading about.
snip

I guess. Plus, if he thinks that audio people of any stripe are the
"most intolerant and bigoted assholes on usenet" he obviously hasn't
seen the racial, gender, and sexual orientation bigots on usenet.
Unreal.

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
" wrote:

Robert Morein wrote:
Arny said,
"The common thread is that the perpetrators of just about all of this
foul
behavior has generally been traceable to people of the so-called
subjectivist persuasion. As a rule subjectivists posting on Usenet are
more
insulting, more profane, and more childish."

This is the opposite of tolerance. This is the worst form of
intellectual
bigotry, committed by a cruel man.

That's correct, subjectivists are the most intolerant and bigotted
assholes on usenet.

Let me guess: you're against blanket statements, right?

Only wrong ones?

From: Jenn
Date: Mon, Mar 6 2006 12:33 am
Email: Jenn

I guess. Plus, if he thinks that audio people of any stripe are the
"most intolerant and bigoted assholes on usenet" he obviously hasn't
seen the racial, gender, and sexual orientation bigots on usenet.

He's one of them.

You may not have seen nob saying that businesses that do not want to
serve black people shouldn't have to. nob values private property
rights over the rights of human beings. He thinks that the private
property rights of the owner take precedence over human rights.

One can extrapolate from this that the private property rights of
business owners include sexually harrassing employees. After all, the
employee can work elsewhere, right?

nob's got some very strange and backward beliefs.

Unreal.

I know. Sad, but true.

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote:

From: Jenn
Date: Sun, Mar 5 2006 9:09 pm
Email: Jenn

That's correct, subjectivists are the most intolerant and bigotted
assholes on usenet.

Let me guess: you're against blanket statements, right?

nob does this all the time. It must have to do with those elusive
'debating trade' points I keep reading about.
snip

I guess. Plus, if he thinks that audio people of any stripe are the
"most intolerant and bigoted assholes on usenet" he obviously hasn't
seen the racial, gender, and sexual orientation bigots on usenet.
Unreal.

Well I don't want to associate in any way people that are not smart enough
to know that those sorts of ideas are baseless as well as not well thought
out.

I'm on record as being unopposed to gay marriage, and opposed to all forms
of tribal or collective type of prejudice. I fully agree with the character
over color notion and find anybody who is not in agreement with it, is not
worth me bothering to know.

On this NG, however the first to start mudslinging are nearly always the
so-called subjectivists, that's from observation. The minute you start
trying to get people to understand that they may have really heard the
things they think they heard and explain how they could have been fooled,
they get oh so ****y.

124 wrote:

I agree. There are, though, some subjectivists here that are pleasant.
I have enjoyed some cordial exchanges with some of them. George,
however, is a special case. All of the worst of all of the bad
subjectivists put together cannot approach what George is capable of.


Uh-huh. Ok. I'm gonna pretend you didn't just say that....

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article
.com,
" wrote:

Robert Morein wrote:
Arny said,
"The common thread is that the perpetrators of just
about all of this foul behavior has generally been
traceable to people of the so-called subjectivist
persuasion. As a rule subjectivists posting on Usenet
are more insulting, more profane, and more childish."

This is the opposite of tolerance. This is the worst
form of intellectual bigotry, committed by a cruel man.

That's correct, subjectivists are the most intolerant
and bigotted assholes on usenet.

Let me guess: you're against blanket statements, right?

All generalizations are false, including this one.

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article
.com,
" wrote:

Robert Morein wrote:
Arny said,
"The common thread is that the perpetrators of just
about all of this foul behavior has generally been
traceable to people of the so-called subjectivist
persuasion. As a rule subjectivists posting on Usenet
are more insulting, more profane, and more childish."

This is the opposite of tolerance. This is the worst
form of intellectual bigotry, committed by a cruel man.

That's correct, subjectivists are the most intolerant
and bigotted assholes on usenet.

Let me guess: you're against blanket statements, right?

All generalizations are false, including this one.

I'm glad that we agree.

In article t,
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote:

From: Jenn
Date: Sun, Mar 5 2006 9:09 pm
Email: Jenn

That's correct, subjectivists are the most intolerant and bigotted
assholes on usenet.

Let me guess: you're against blanket statements, right?

nob does this all the time. It must have to do with those elusive
'debating trade' points I keep reading about.
snip

I guess. Plus, if he thinks that audio people of any stripe are the
"most intolerant and bigoted assholes on usenet" he obviously hasn't
seen the racial, gender, and sexual orientation bigots on usenet.
Unreal.

Well I don't want to associate in any way people that are not smart enough
to know that those sorts of ideas are baseless as well as not well thought
out.

I'm on record as being unopposed to gay marriage, and opposed to all forms
of tribal or collective type of prejudice. I fully agree with the character
over color notion and find anybody who is not in agreement with it, is not
worth me bothering to know.

On this NG, however the first to start mudslinging are nearly always the
so-called subjectivists, that's from observation. The minute you start
trying to get people to understand that they may have really heard the
things they think they heard and explain how they could have been fooled,
they get oh so ****y.

I appreciate your opinion. Mine is different.

In article ,
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
" wrote:

Robert Morein wrote:
Arny said,
"The common thread is that the perpetrators of just about all of this
foul
behavior has generally been traceable to people of the so-called
subjectivist persuasion. As a rule subjectivists posting on Usenet are
more
insulting, more profane, and more childish."

This is the opposite of tolerance. This is the worst form of
intellectual
bigotry, committed by a cruel man.

That's correct, subjectivists are the most intolerant and bigotted
assholes on usenet.

Let me guess: you're against blanket statements, right?

Only wrong ones?

There are no correct ones, IME.

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article
t,
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article
.com,
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:

From: Jenn
Date: Sun, Mar 5 2006 9:09 pm
Email: Jenn

That's correct, subjectivists are the most
intolerant and bigotted assholes on usenet.

Let me guess: you're against blanket statements,
right?

nob does this all the time. It must have to do with
those elusive 'debating trade' points I keep reading
about.
snip

I guess. Plus, if he thinks that audio people of any
stripe are the "most intolerant and bigoted assholes on
usenet" he obviously hasn't seen the racial, gender,
and sexual orientation bigots on usenet. Unreal.

Well I don't want to associate in any way people that
are not smart enough to know that those sorts of ideas
are baseless as well as not well thought out.

I'm on record as being unopposed to gay marriage, and
opposed to all forms of tribal or collective type of
prejudice. I fully agree with the character over color
notion and find anybody who is not in agreement with it,
is not worth me bothering to know.

On this NG, however the first to start mudslinging are
nearly always the so-called subjectivists, that's from
observation. The minute you start trying to get people
to understand that they may have really heard the things
they think they heard and explain how they could have
been fooled, they get oh so ****y.

I appreciate your opinion. Mine is different.

Jenn, too bad you weren't around RAO in the pre-Middius era. You can still
find a record of it on google. RAO went to pieces in stages. The first stage
of degradation involved adding Zipser and Derrida, both of whom were
subjectivists and are now departed from this earth.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Jenn" wrote in message

In article
t,
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article
.com,
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:

From: Jenn
Date: Sun, Mar 5 2006 9:09 pm
Email: Jenn

That's correct, subjectivists are the most
intolerant and bigotted assholes on usenet.

Let me guess: you're against blanket statements,
right?

nob does this all the time. It must have to do with
those elusive 'debating trade' points I keep reading
about.
snip

I guess. Plus, if he thinks that audio people of any
stripe are the "most intolerant and bigoted assholes on
usenet" he obviously hasn't seen the racial, gender,
and sexual orientation bigots on usenet. Unreal.

Well I don't want to associate in any way people that
are not smart enough to know that those sorts of ideas
are baseless as well as not well thought out.

I'm on record as being unopposed to gay marriage, and
opposed to all forms of tribal or collective type of
prejudice. I fully agree with the character over color
notion and find anybody who is not in agreement with it,
is not worth me bothering to know.

On this NG, however the first to start mudslinging are
nearly always the so-called subjectivists, that's from
observation. The minute you start trying to get people
to understand that they may have really heard the things
they think they heard and explain how they could have
been fooled, they get oh so ****y.

I appreciate your opinion. Mine is different.

Jenn, too bad you weren't around RAO in the pre-Middius era. You can still
find a record of it on google. RAO went to pieces in stages. The first stage
of degradation involved adding Zipser and Derrida, both of whom were
subjectivists and are now departed from this earth.

Prove it.

Jenn wrote:
In article ,
wrote:


"Jenn" wrote in message
...

In article .com,
" wrote:


Robert Morein wrote:

Arny said,
"The common thread is that the perpetrators of just about all of this
foul
behavior has generally been traceable to people of the so-called
subjectivist persuasion. As a rule subjectivists posting on Usenet are
more
insulting, more profane, and more childish."

This is the opposite of tolerance. This is the worst form of
intellectual
bigotry, committed by a cruel man.

That's correct, subjectivists are the most intolerant and bigotted
assholes on usenet.

Let me guess: you're against blanket statements, right?

Only wrong ones?


There are no correct ones, IME.

That seems like a huge blanket statement, so it must not be correct by
your own admission .

chung wrote:
Jenn wrote:
In article ,
wrote:


"Jenn" wrote in message
...

In article .com,
" wrote:


Robert Morein wrote:

Arny said,
"The common thread is that the perpetrators of just about all of this
foul
behavior has generally been traceable to people of the so-called
subjectivist persuasion. As a rule subjectivists posting on Usenet are
more
insulting, more profane, and more childish."

This is the opposite of tolerance. This is the worst form of
intellectual
bigotry, committed by a cruel man.

That's correct, subjectivists are the most intolerant and bigotted
assholes on usenet.

Let me guess: you're against blanket statements, right?

Only wrong ones?


There are no correct ones, IME.

That seems like a huge blanket statement, so it must not be correct by
your own admission .

LOL Good one. But I'm right (and Arny agrees). Unless a sample is
very small,(i.e. "all people named Arny Krueger who live in Groose
Point, MI run PCABX websites) blanet statements don't hold up.

chungborg said:

There are no correct ones, IME.

That seems like a huge blanket statement, so it must not be correct by
your own admission .

If you shot your head off, would you be able to hear the sound of the gun?

George M. Middius wrote:
chungborg said:

There are no correct ones, IME.

That seems like a huge blanket statement, so it must not be correct by
your own admission .

If you shot your head off, would you be able to hear the sound of the gun?

I believe the correct answer would be yes, but you would have little
time to reflect upon it.

said:

If you shot your head off, would you be able to hear the sound of the gun?


I believe the correct answer would be yes, but you would have little
time to reflect upon it.


The good part is one doesn't have to worry about tinnitus.

--

- Never argue with idiots, they drag you down their level and beat you with experience. -

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...
From: Jenn
Date: Mon, Mar 6 2006 12:33 am
Email: Jenn

I guess. Plus, if he thinks that audio people of any stripe are the
"most intolerant and bigoted assholes on usenet" he obviously hasn't
seen the racial, gender, and sexual orientation bigots on usenet.

He's one of them.

You may not have seen nob saying that businesses that do not want to
serve black people shouldn't have to. nob values private property
rights over the rights of human beings. He thinks that the private
property rights of the owner take precedence over human rights.

One can extrapolate from this that the private property rights of
business owners include sexually harrassing employees. After all, the
employee can work elsewhere, right?

nob's got some very strange and backward beliefs.


I think that there needs to be respect of both individual rights and
private property rights, and I belive that
view is consistent with both mainstream liberals and mainstream
conservatives.
The kooks are elsewhere.



--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Jenn" wrote in message

In article
.com,
" wrote:

Robert Morein wrote:
Arny said,
"The common thread is that the perpetrators of just
about all of this foul behavior has generally been
traceable to people of the so-called subjectivist
persuasion. As a rule subjectivists posting on Usenet
are more insulting, more profane, and more childish."

This is the opposite of tolerance. This is the worst
form of intellectual bigotry, committed by a cruel man.

That's correct, subjectivists are the most intolerant
and bigotted assholes on usenet.

Let me guess: you're against blanket statements, right?

All generalizations are false, including this one.


Just because there are a few exceptions, it doesn't mean the
rule isn't valid.

paraphrased from one of yesterday's ARny krueger posts



--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article ,
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
" wrote:

Robert Morein wrote:
Arny said,
"The common thread is that the perpetrators of just about all of
this
foul
behavior has generally been traceable to people of the so-called
subjectivist persuasion. As a rule subjectivists posting on Usenet
are
more
insulting, more profane, and more childish."

This is the opposite of tolerance. This is the worst form of
intellectual
bigotry, committed by a cruel man.

That's correct, subjectivists are the most intolerant and bigotted
assholes on usenet.

Let me guess: you're against blanket statements, right?

Only wrong ones?

There are no correct ones, IME.

Well, there could be some, maybe, maybe not.



--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article t,
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote:

From: Jenn
Date: Sun, Mar 5 2006 9:09 pm
Email: Jenn

That's correct, subjectivists are the most intolerant and bigotted
assholes on usenet.

Let me guess: you're against blanket statements, right?

nob does this all the time. It must have to do with those elusive
'debating trade' points I keep reading about.
snip

I guess. Plus, if he thinks that audio people of any stripe are the
"most intolerant and bigoted assholes on usenet" he obviously hasn't
seen the racial, gender, and sexual orientation bigots on usenet.
Unreal.

Well I don't want to associate in any way people that are not smart
enough
to know that those sorts of ideas are baseless as well as not well
thought
out.

I'm on record as being unopposed to gay marriage, and opposed to all
forms
of tribal or collective type of prejudice. I fully agree with the
character
over color notion and find anybody who is not in agreement with it, is
not
worth me bothering to know.

On this NG, however the first to start mudslinging are nearly always the
so-called subjectivists, that's from observation. The minute you start
trying to get people to understand that they may have really heard the
things they think they heard and explain how they could have been fooled,
they get oh so ****y.

I appreciate your opinion. Mine is different.

You mean you disagree that it's the subjectivists who tend to start the
nastyness?

That's not a difference of opinion, that's ignoring reality.

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article ,
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
" wrote:

Robert Morein wrote:
Arny said,
"The common thread is that the perpetrators of just about all of
this
foul
behavior has generally been traceable to people of the so-called
subjectivist persuasion. As a rule subjectivists posting on Usenet
are
more
insulting, more profane, and more childish."

This is the opposite of tolerance. This is the worst form of
intellectual
bigotry, committed by a cruel man.

That's correct, subjectivists are the most intolerant and bigotted
assholes on usenet.

Let me guess: you're against blanket statements, right?

Only wrong ones?

There are no correct ones, IME.

That's the thing about generalization, tehy are generally true.

"chung" wrote in message
rvers.com...
Jenn wrote:
In article ,
wrote:


"Jenn" wrote in message
...

In article .com,
" wrote:


Robert Morein wrote:

Arny said,
"The common thread is that the perpetrators of just about all of this
foul
behavior has generally been traceable to people of the so-called
subjectivist persuasion. As a rule subjectivists posting on Usenet
are more
insulting, more profane, and more childish."

This is the opposite of tolerance. This is the worst form of
intellectual
bigotry, committed by a cruel man.

That's correct, subjectivists are the most intolerant and bigotted
assholes on usenet.

Let me guess: you're against blanket statements, right?

Only wrong ones?


There are no correct ones, IME.

That seems like a huge blanket statement, so it must not be correct by
your own admission .

Touche'.

There are no absolutes.

Except that one.

"George M. Middius" cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote
in message ...


chungborg said:

There are no correct ones, IME.

That seems like a huge blanket statement, so it must not be correct by
your own admission .

If you shot your head off, would you be able to hear the sound of the gun?



Why not conduct that experiment and get back to us.

In article . net,
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article ,
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
" wrote:

Robert Morein wrote:
Arny said,
"The common thread is that the perpetrators of just about all of
this
foul
behavior has generally been traceable to people of the so-called
subjectivist persuasion. As a rule subjectivists posting on Usenet
are
more
insulting, more profane, and more childish."

This is the opposite of tolerance. This is the worst form of
intellectual
bigotry, committed by a cruel man.

That's correct, subjectivists are the most intolerant and bigotted
assholes on usenet.

Let me guess: you're against blanket statements, right?

Only wrong ones?

There are no correct ones, IME.

That's the thing about generalization, tehy are generally true.

Except when they aren't.

In article t,
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article t,
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote:

From: Jenn
Date: Sun, Mar 5 2006 9:09 pm
Email: Jenn

That's correct, subjectivists are the most intolerant and bigotted
assholes on usenet.

Let me guess: you're against blanket statements, right?

nob does this all the time. It must have to do with those elusive
'debating trade' points I keep reading about.
snip

I guess. Plus, if he thinks that audio people of any stripe are the
"most intolerant and bigoted assholes on usenet" he obviously hasn't
seen the racial, gender, and sexual orientation bigots on usenet.
Unreal.

Well I don't want to associate in any way people that are not smart
enough
to know that those sorts of ideas are baseless as well as not well
thought
out.

I'm on record as being unopposed to gay marriage, and opposed to all
forms
of tribal or collective type of prejudice. I fully agree with the
character
over color notion and find anybody who is not in agreement with it, is
not
worth me bothering to know.

On this NG, however the first to start mudslinging are nearly always the
so-called subjectivists, that's from observation. The minute you start
trying to get people to understand that they may have really heard the
things they think they heard and explain how they could have been fooled,
they get oh so ****y.

I appreciate your opinion. Mine is different.

You mean you disagree that it's the subjectivists who tend to start the
nastyness?

That's not a difference of opinion, that's ignoring reality.

Not in my experience. The fault lies on both "sides" of the fence.

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article
t,
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article
t,
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article
.com,
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:

From: Jenn
Date: Sun, Mar 5 2006 9:09 pm
Email: Jenn

That's correct, subjectivists are the most
intolerant and bigotted assholes on usenet.

Let me guess: you're against blanket statements,
right?

nob does this all the time. It must have to do with
those elusive 'debating trade' points I keep reading
about.
snip

I guess. Plus, if he thinks that audio people of any
stripe are the "most intolerant and bigoted assholes
on usenet" he obviously hasn't seen the racial,
gender, and sexual orientation bigots on usenet.
Unreal.

Well I don't want to associate in any way people that
are not smart enough
to know that those sorts of ideas are baseless as well
as not well thought
out.

I'm on record as being unopposed to gay marriage, and
opposed to all forms
of tribal or collective type of prejudice. I fully
agree with the character
over color notion and find anybody who is not in
agreement with it, is not
worth me bothering to know.

On this NG, however the first to start mudslinging are
nearly always the so-called subjectivists, that's from
observation. The minute you start trying to get
people to understand that they may have really heard
the things they think they heard and explain how they
could have been fooled, they get oh so ****y.

I appreciate your opinion. Mine is different.

You mean you disagree that it's the subjectivists who
tend to start the nastyness?

That's not a difference of opinion, that's ignoring
reality.

Not in my experience. The fault lies on both "sides" of
the fence.

Usual Jenn straw man "debating trade" argument. The question is not whether
the fault is entirely on one side or the other. The question is where the
majority of the fault lies. As long as Middius is a subjectivist, its a slam
dunk - the fault mainly lies on the so-called subjectivist side.

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article t,
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article t,
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote:

From: Jenn
Date: Sun, Mar 5 2006 9:09 pm
Email: Jenn

That's correct, subjectivists are the most intolerant and
bigotted
assholes on usenet.

Let me guess: you're against blanket statements, right?

nob does this all the time. It must have to do with those elusive
'debating trade' points I keep reading about.
snip

I guess. Plus, if he thinks that audio people of any stripe are the
"most intolerant and bigoted assholes on usenet" he obviously hasn't
seen the racial, gender, and sexual orientation bigots on usenet.
Unreal.

Well I don't want to associate in any way people that are not smart
enough
to know that those sorts of ideas are baseless as well as not well
thought
out.

I'm on record as being unopposed to gay marriage, and opposed to all
forms
of tribal or collective type of prejudice. I fully agree with the
character
over color notion and find anybody who is not in agreement with it, is
not
worth me bothering to know.

On this NG, however the first to start mudslinging are nearly always
the
so-called subjectivists, that's from observation. The minute you
start
trying to get people to understand that they may have really heard the
things they think they heard and explain how they could have been
fooled,
they get oh so ****y.

I appreciate your opinion. Mine is different.

You mean you disagree that it's the subjectivists who tend to start the
nastyness?

That's not a difference of opinion, that's ignoring reality.

Not in my experience. The fault lies on both "sides" of the fence.

Never said there wasn't fault on both sides, only that the bulk of the blame
and the usual source is the "subjectivists."

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article . net,
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article ,
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
" wrote:

Robert Morein wrote:
Arny said,
"The common thread is that the perpetrators of just about all of
this
foul
behavior has generally been traceable to people of the so-called
subjectivist persuasion. As a rule subjectivists posting on
Usenet
are
more
insulting, more profane, and more childish."

This is the opposite of tolerance. This is the worst form of
intellectual
bigotry, committed by a cruel man.

That's correct, subjectivists are the most intolerant and bigotted
assholes on usenet.

Let me guess: you're against blanket statements, right?

Only wrong ones?

There are no correct ones, IME.

That's the thing about generalization, they are generally true.

Except when they aren't.

But that's not genreally the case.

In article ,
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article t,
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article t,
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote:

From: Jenn
Date: Sun, Mar 5 2006 9:09 pm
Email: Jenn

That's correct, subjectivists are the most intolerant and
bigotted
assholes on usenet.

Let me guess: you're against blanket statements, right?

nob does this all the time. It must have to do with those elusive
'debating trade' points I keep reading about.
snip

I guess. Plus, if he thinks that audio people of any stripe are the
"most intolerant and bigoted assholes on usenet" he obviously hasn't
seen the racial, gender, and sexual orientation bigots on usenet.
Unreal.

Well I don't want to associate in any way people that are not smart
enough
to know that those sorts of ideas are baseless as well as not well
thought
out.

I'm on record as being unopposed to gay marriage, and opposed to all
forms
of tribal or collective type of prejudice. I fully agree with the
character
over color notion and find anybody who is not in agreement with it, is
not
worth me bothering to know.

On this NG, however the first to start mudslinging are nearly always
the
so-called subjectivists, that's from observation. The minute you
start
trying to get people to understand that they may have really heard the
things they think they heard and explain how they could have been
fooled,
they get oh so ****y.

I appreciate your opinion. Mine is different.

You mean you disagree that it's the subjectivists who tend to start the
nastyness?

That's not a difference of opinion, that's ignoring reality.

Not in my experience. The fault lies on both "sides" of the fence.

Never said there wasn't fault on both sides, only that the bulk of the blame
and the usual source is the "subjectivists."

Not in my experience.

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article
t,
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article
t,
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article
.com,
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:

From: Jenn
Date: Sun, Mar 5 2006 9:09 pm
Email: Jenn

That's correct, subjectivists are the most
intolerant and bigotted assholes on usenet.

Let me guess: you're against blanket statements,
right?

nob does this all the time. It must have to do with
those elusive 'debating trade' points I keep reading
about.
snip

I guess. Plus, if he thinks that audio people of any
stripe are the "most intolerant and bigoted assholes
on usenet" he obviously hasn't seen the racial,
gender, and sexual orientation bigots on usenet.
Unreal.

Well I don't want to associate in any way people that
are not smart enough
to know that those sorts of ideas are baseless as well
as not well thought
out.

I'm on record as being unopposed to gay marriage, and
opposed to all forms
of tribal or collective type of prejudice. I fully
agree with the character
over color notion and find anybody who is not in
agreement with it, is not
worth me bothering to know.

On this NG, however the first to start mudslinging are
nearly always the so-called subjectivists, that's from
observation. The minute you start trying to get
people to understand that they may have really heard
the things they think they heard and explain how they
could have been fooled, they get oh so ****y.

I appreciate your opinion. Mine is different.

You mean you disagree that it's the subjectivists who
tend to start the nastyness?

That's not a difference of opinion, that's ignoring
reality.

Not in my experience. The fault lies on both "sides" of
the fence.

Usual Jenn straw man "debating trade" argument.

LOL

The question is not whether
the fault is entirely on one side or the other. The question is where the
majority of the fault lies. As long as Middius is a subjectivist, its a slam
dunk - the fault mainly lies on the so-called subjectivist side.

Are there any, say, 5 posts in a row that you've made here over the
years where you don't take a swipe at someone?

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
. ..

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
ups.com...
From: Jenn
Date: Mon, Mar 6 2006 12:33 am
Email: Jenn

I guess. Plus, if he thinks that audio people of any stripe are the
"most intolerant and bigoted assholes on usenet" he obviously hasn't
seen the racial, gender, and sexual orientation bigots on usenet.

He's one of them.

You may not have seen nob saying that businesses that do not want to
serve black people shouldn't have to. nob values private property
rights over the rights of human beings. He thinks that the private
property rights of the owner take precedence over human rights.


Property rights are a human right, an essential one, probably the most
essential one.

I don't think any right has precedence over any other, theya ll compliment
each other.

One can extrapolate from this that the private property rights of
business owners include sexually harrassing employees.

Only if one were an irrational dickhead.

It would also depend on the meaning you give to sexual harrassment, like
many other words, it has been somewhat diluted. If you mean threatening
people with termination if they aren't "cooperative," then no I don't think
that is proper. I'm not sure it is amatter for the law.

If you mean a woamn firefighter suing because the men have girlie posters or
calendars on the walls or lockers, then I think that's over the bull****
limit and she needs to grow up.

After all, the
employee can work elsewhere, right?


They can. That's the wonerful thing about a free society, you are not bound
to any one job.

nob's got some very strange and backward beliefs.


I think it's backward to think the employee is ore important than the
employer.

I think that there needs to be respect of both individual rights and
private property rights, and I belive that
view is consistent with both mainstream liberals and mainstream
conservatives.
The kooks are elsewhere.

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article
t,
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article
t,
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article
.com,
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:

From: Jenn
Date: Sun, Mar 5 2006 9:09 pm
Email: Jenn

That's correct, subjectivists are the most
intolerant and bigotted assholes on usenet.

Let me guess: you're against blanket statements,
right?

nob does this all the time. It must have to do with
those elusive 'debating trade' points I keep
reading about.
snip

I guess. Plus, if he thinks that audio people of
any stripe are the "most intolerant and bigoted
assholes on usenet" he obviously hasn't seen the
racial, gender, and sexual orientation bigots on
usenet. Unreal.

Well I don't want to associate in any way people that
are not smart enough
to know that those sorts of ideas are baseless as
well as not well thought
out.

I'm on record as being unopposed to gay marriage, and
opposed to all forms
of tribal or collective type of prejudice. I fully
agree with the character
over color notion and find anybody who is not in
agreement with it, is not
worth me bothering to know.

On this NG, however the first to start mudslinging
are nearly always the so-called subjectivists,
that's from observation. The minute you start
trying to get people to understand that they may
have really heard the things they think they heard
and explain how they could have been fooled, they
get oh so ****y.

I appreciate your opinion. Mine is different.

You mean you disagree that it's the subjectivists who
tend to start the nastyness?

That's not a difference of opinion, that's ignoring
reality.

Not in my experience. The fault lies on both "sides" of
the fence.

Usual Jenn straw man "debating trade" argument.

LOL

The question is not whether
the fault is entirely on one side or the other. The
question is where the majority of the fault lies. As
long as Middius is a subjectivist, its a slam dunk - the
fault mainly lies on the so-called subjectivist side.

Are there any, say, 5 posts in a row that you've made
here over the years where you don't take a swipe at
someone?

Of course, tons of them. It's not my fault if so many of the so-called
subjectivists here are spoiling to pick a fight with me. Heck, they've
abused my name when I've been on vacation in the woods for two weeks and
obviously not posting.

"Jenn" wrote in message


Not in my experience.

Jenn, it's already a proven fact that you are blind to many of the
subjectivist attacks on objectivists.

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message


Not in my experience.

Jenn, it's already a proven fact that you are blind to many of the
subjectivist attacks on objectivists.

It is?

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article
t,
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article
t,
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article
.com,
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:

From: Jenn
Date: Sun, Mar 5 2006 9:09 pm
Email: Jenn

That's correct, subjectivists are the most
intolerant and bigotted assholes on usenet.

Let me guess: you're against blanket statements,
right?

nob does this all the time. It must have to do with
those elusive 'debating trade' points I keep
reading about.
snip

I guess. Plus, if he thinks that audio people of
any stripe are the "most intolerant and bigoted
assholes on usenet" he obviously hasn't seen the
racial, gender, and sexual orientation bigots on
usenet. Unreal.

Well I don't want to associate in any way people that
are not smart enough
to know that those sorts of ideas are baseless as
well as not well thought
out.

I'm on record as being unopposed to gay marriage, and
opposed to all forms
of tribal or collective type of prejudice. I fully
agree with the character
over color notion and find anybody who is not in
agreement with it, is not
worth me bothering to know.

On this NG, however the first to start mudslinging
are nearly always the so-called subjectivists,
that's from observation. The minute you start
trying to get people to understand that they may
have really heard the things they think they heard
and explain how they could have been fooled, they
get oh so ****y.

I appreciate your opinion. Mine is different.

You mean you disagree that it's the subjectivists who
tend to start the nastyness?

That's not a difference of opinion, that's ignoring
reality.

Not in my experience. The fault lies on both "sides" of
the fence.

Usual Jenn straw man "debating trade" argument.

LOL

The question is not whether
the fault is entirely on one side or the other. The
question is where the majority of the fault lies. As
long as Middius is a subjectivist, its a slam dunk - the
fault mainly lies on the so-called subjectivist side.

Are there any, say, 5 posts in a row that you've made
here over the years where you don't take a swipe at
someone?

Of course, tons of them. It's not my fault if so many of the so-called
subjectivists here are spoiling to pick a fight with me. Heck, they've
abused my name when I've been on vacation in the woods for two weeks and
obviously not posting.

Care to show those posts?