Spike, I've been put squarely on the defensive ever since I ventured into this tar baby of a discussion. Then when I factually, logically and reasonably defend my position, I am told I'm out of line, that my argument is not "real," and that my "respectability" has suffered where you are concerned.
I don't have time to carry on a debate in which I have to continually go back and correct misrepresentations of my position, e.g. the implication that your bearish T/A on EBAY was the basis for my charge that you were being ill-mannered toward me. (By the way, I agree that EBAY's T/A is awful, so why should I object to that observation?)
Call me an idealist or whatever, but I believe we all can and should treat each other with respect and dignity.
I think a big part of the problem is in determining the line between good-natured sparring and serious exchanges. One poster may say something "tongue-in-cheek" that another takes as a serious statement. I know that has happend to me more than once. It's unfortunate.
I don't have time to carry on a debate in which I have to continually go back and correct misrepresentations of my position, e.g. the implication that your bearish T/A on EBAY was the basis for my charge that you were being ill-mannered toward me. (By the way, I agree that EBAY's T/A is awful, so why should I object to that observation?)
Call me an idealist or whatever, but I believe we all can and should treat each other with respect and dignity.
I think a big part of the problem is in determining the line between good-natured sparring and serious exchanges. One poster may say something "tongue-in-cheek" that another takes as a serious statement. I know that has happend to me more than once. It's unfortunate.
Comment