OT -- Re: random cover of a range

[grauzone]

John Reimer wrote:
> Hello grauzone,
> 
>> John Reimer wrote:
>>
>>> Hello grauzone,
>>>
>>>>> Oh boy!  Come on now... you guys, this is so apparent an issue.  I
>>>>> am actually a little surprised a few of you are so defensive of
>>>>> this situation.  I'm not sure how far you would go to defend
>>>>> something "evil"... but I become more astounded all the time.  How
>>>>> far does this go before you finally decide it's time to step in?
>>>>> I hear some of you gripe so strongly (verbally violent) over the
>>>>> internet marketing and web scripts... and yet you will defend such
>>>>> things as this so ruthlessly?
>>>>>
>>>> Yes. That's exactly because we're not assholes.
>>>>
>>> So you approve of the material on the website then?
>>>
>> Not necessarily. I don't even know what exactly is on his website.
>>
>> But I defend free speech, not attacking people because of irrelevant
>> issues, and all that.
>>
> 
> 
> Hmm... irrelevent, eh?  If you haven't figured out the content yet... 
> how are you able to make a decision on whether it is irrelevent or not.

I suppose it's about "furrys". It might very well be that I'm offended 
by the actual content, but since I'm obviously not forced to look at it, 
I don't really care.

> 
> Anyway... you can have no issue with my free speech then.  But it's 
> apparently called "attack" when it's from my side of the fence.  I ask 

You were the first one to attack. Why do you think you're in the 
position to complain?

> you if calling a person a a**hole can be considered an attack or free 
> speech?  I don't call people names.  I think you fail the consistancy test.

I'd rather call this a "counterattack". Not sure if I want to play the 
pacifist.

Anyway, I don't really have the time to flame around. I guess I'll stop 
posting now. I suggest you do the same.

> 
>> I guess you're worried that the personal desires of people like him
>> lead to the downfall of moral values and society at large or
>> something, which is why you feel the need of putting pressure on them
>> in order to stop it? Sounds like a plan.
>>
> 
> 
> Yes, good description.

Your approach doesn't work.

> 
> -JJR
> 
>