OT -- Re: random cover of a range

[grauzone]

John Reimer wrote:
> Hello Christopher,
> 
>> John Reimer wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Christopher,
>>>
>>>> John Reimer wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello bearophile,
>>>>>
>>>>>> (And my name is bearophile, thank you).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bye,
>>>>>> bearophile
>>>>> I'm curious to know what "bearophile" means?
>>>>>
>>>> No cross, no crown, no green star. If you're disgusted by someone's
>>>> username and it isn't actively evil, pretend you don't know what it
>>>> means. Don't write a post abusing his desired lifestyle.
>>>>
>>> Hmm... very interesting.
>>>
>>> And where does this "rule" of yours come from?
>>>
>> The Constructed Languages mailing list. (The green star refers to
>> Esperanto. The Constructed Languages list does not allow advertising
>> for languages intended as international auxiliary languages.)
>>
> 
> 
> 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.

> 
> 
>>> I'd say your forcing your philosophy on me. That's not very nice. :)
>>>
>> I would like to. It would make everyone be nice, or pretend to be
>> nice, or stay on topic. And since relatively few people want to be
>> mean, and one mean person can upset many others, this should increase
>> the amount of happiness in the world.
>>
> 
> 
> And will you please define "nice" then?  You have chosen your side.  I'd 
> rather you just be honest and say that you don't like my side of the 
> discussion. But you are refusing to recognize that "nice", in your case, 
> is letting whichever side you prefer have their say, no matter how 
> diabolical, without a balance from the opposite side.   I'm amazed you 
> pursue this argument so relentlessly too.
> 
> 
>> I wrote a further reply to you offlist so as not to clutter this
>> forum.
>>
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, as you wish. :)
> 
> 
> -JJR
> 
>