Why are certain people here threatened by DPF?

[Charles Drago]

Greetings, Fellow Travelers,

I'm checking in on a friend's computer.

Let's see how long this stays up.

Charles R. Drago

The fact that Drago can logon on normally from another computer pretty much confirms Andy's explanation that his problems are due to his computer rather than his account. Odd that he seems to think otherwise.

Hey there Len! Did you see this fascinating thread?

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=14076

"Conspiracy of Big Tobacco Companies - 100 Years of Deceit, They KNEW Smoking Was Addictive & Caused Cancer!"

Do you have any thoughts on the subject?

Myra, I'm afraid that Len has too many thoughts on the subject -- warm, fuzzy thoughts of the sort one usually derives from, say, a family album of cherished memories.

I must wonder, though, if Len counts himself among the deniers of the holocaust unleashed on the world by big tobacco. And I also am keen to learn if he's lost any immediate family members or loved ones to tobacco-related cancers.

[Guest]

I'll close with a fashion tip: Brown slacks nicely compliment the yellow of that streak down your back.

Charles Drago

Please be warned Charles that I will not tolerate any repetition of this kind of rudeness.

[Jack White]

I'll close with a fashion tip: Brown slacks nicely compliment the yellow of that streak down your back.

Charles Drago

Please be warned Charles that I will not tolerate any repetition of this kind of rudeness.

How does having a yellow streak compare with calling a member "a senile old man". I think a

person who says that should not be tolerated.

Jack

(senile old men have long memories)

[Guest]

I'll close with a fashion tip: Brown slacks nicely compliment the yellow of that streak down your back.

Charles Drago

Please be warned Charles that I will not tolerate any repetition of this kind of rudeness.

How does having a yellow streak compare with calling a member "a senile old man". I think a

person who says that should not be tolerated.

Jack

(senile old men have long memories)

Please show me your powers of memory and identify where this has happened and it will be deleted. It has been too easy for many of us here (including both you and me Mr White) to fall into a kind of mechanical rudeness based on negative emotion which should not be tolerated. This forum is for education and research after all.

Take the plank out of your own eye and I'll do likewise.

[Jack White]

I'll close with a fashion tip: Brown slacks nicely compliment the yellow of that streak down your back.

Charles Drago

Please be warned Charles that I will not tolerate any repetition of this kind of rudeness.

How does having a yellow streak compare with calling a member "a senile old man". I think a

person who says that should not be tolerated.

Jack

(senile old men have long memories)

Please show me your powers of memory and identify where this has happened and it will be deleted. It has been too easy for many of us here (including both you and me Mr White) to fall into a kind of mechanical rudeness based on negative emotion which should not be tolerated. This forum is for education and research after all.

Take the plank out of your own eye and I'll do likewise.

I have no time for nonsense.

Jack

(I replied earlier, but my message never appeared.)

[Evan Burton]

Jack has a habit of making claims about the forum which turn out to be inaccurate or completely wrong.

What he claims may indeed be true - but instead of making the claim then saying "I have no time", let him show the claim to be true; otherwise he should not make the claim - against another Forum member - until he has the evidence to back it up.

[Guest]

(I replied earlier, but my message never appeared.)

No you didn't otherwise your post would have appeared on the forum.

[Pat Speer]

For what it's worth, I, too, remember Jack receiving some pretty dreadful insults regarding his mental capabilities. If I recall think they came from that Brendan Slattery character, who was sent on his way long ago.

Why can't we all just get along?

[Jack White]

(I replied earlier, but my message never appeared.)

No you didn't otherwise your post would have appeared on the forum.

This is false.

Jack

[Len Colby]

I'll close with a fashion tip: Brown slacks nicely compliment the yellow of that streak down your back.

Charles Drago

Please be warned Charles that I will not tolerate any repetition of this kind of rudeness.

How does having a yellow streak compare with calling a member "a senile old man". I think a

person who says that should not be tolerated.

Jack

(senile old men have long memories)

Please show me your powers of memory and identify where this has happened and it will be deleted. It has been too easy for many of us here (including both you and me Mr White) to fall into a kind of mechanical rudeness based on negative emotion which should not be tolerated. This forum is for education and research after all.

Take the plank out of your own eye and I'll do likewise.

I have no time for nonsense.

Jack

(I replied earlier, but my message never appeared.)

I don't know [remember] where it was - it was quite a way's back now - but I can attest that Jack was called a 'senile old man' and that he asked repeatedly for it to be removed and to the best of my knowledge it was not. The search function on the software is not grand....perhaps via google....?

The search function works quite well actually and allows you to limit your search to posts by a particular member. It turned up 0 hits for posts where Andy used the word senile. A search for the keyword Jack only turned up one post where directed the word "old" at Jack was in response to a post where the octogenarian insulted him.

That said IIRC at one point Jack appeared confused about something and Andy implied his confusion was age related.

Andy, I agree that civility is the best way to carry on a debate/discussion and to result in light, rather than heat alone.

I agree but think it's quite ironic that someone who on numerous occasions labeled other members Nazis simply because their views oppose his would say this

[Steve Mcdonagh]

Hi All,

I too have observed some negative and condescending posts directed at Jack since I have been here, especially the ones poking fun at his ability. Now it may well be that many of these originate from previous encounters before I joined this forum, but they are still rightly or wrongly sad to read. I don't doubt that Jack always gives as well as he gets and then some, but personally I am amazed by his observation skills and I pray that I may retain half his vigour and determination when I am his age.

I think Jack like so many others here at the EF forum such as Len Colby (who rightly or wrongly has received his share of negative posts which is also sad) should not be ridiculed or dismissed for attempting to submit information, even if it that information proves not to be valid or contrary to your own beliefs and opinions, they should be applauded for their willingness to actively participate in an area that is filled with so many great minds.

Having said this, one should never close the door on reconciliation because life is simply too short and Andy Walkers comments which appear to be offering a truce and if sincerely meant (as they appeared to me to be so) should be restated:

“It has been too easy for many of us here (including both you and me Mr White) to fall into a kind of mechanical rudeness based on negative emotion which should not be tolerated. This forum is for education and research after all. Take the plank out of your own eye and I'll do likewise.”

It would be nice to see Charles Drago posting here more frequently so I personally hope the above statement applies to him also, and besides if it doesn’t work out; well I am sure there will be another post right around the corner where you can fall out all over again.

Steve

[Len Colby]

Hi All,

I too have observed some negative and condescending posts directed at Jack since I have been here, especially the ones poking fun at his ability. Now it may well be that many of these originate from previous encounters before I joined this forum, but they are still rightly or wrongly sad to read. I don't doubt that Jack always gives as well as he gets and then some, but personally I am amazed by his observation skills and I pray that I may retain half his vigour and determination when I am his age.

I think Jack like so many others here at the EF forum such as Len Colby (who rightly or wrongly has received his share of negative posts which is also sad) should not be ridiculed or dismissed for attempting to submit information, even if it that information proves not to be valid or contrary to your own beliefs and opinions, they should be applauded for their willingness to actively participate in an area that is filled with so many great minds.

Having said this, one should never close the door on reconciliation because life is simply too short and Andy Walkers comments which appear to be offering a truce and if sincerely meant (as they appeared to me to be so) should be restated:

"It has been too easy for many of us here (including both you and me Mr White) to fall into a kind of mechanical rudeness based on negative emotion which should not be tolerated. This forum is for education and research after all. Take the plank out of your own eye and I'll do likewise."

It would be nice to see Charles Drago posting here more frequently so I personally hope the above statement applies to him also, and besides if it doesn't work out; well I am sure there will be another post right around the corner where you can fall out all over again.

Steve

Excellent post I agree with 80% of what you wrote but you put it more eloquently than I ever could. At risk of touching off a flare-up I beg to differ a bit concerning Jack though. While his mental ability is remarkable for his age in large part he attracts negative comments for repeatedly making gross errors are rarely acknowledging them.

EDIT - Typos (see below)

Edited March 20, 2009 by Len Colby

[Guest]

Very cleverly part-disguised off-handed ad hom Len. Your a real master at it.

aaaarrrggghhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Len Colby]

Hi All,

I too have observed some negative and condescending posts directed at Jack since I have been here, especially the ones poking fun at his ability. Now it may well be that many of these originate from previous encounters before I joined this forum, but they are still rightly or wrongly sad to read. I don't doubt that Jack always gives as well as he gets and then some, but personally I am amazed by his observation skills and I pray that I may retain half his vigour and determination when I am his age.

I think Jack like so many others here at the EF forum such as Len Colby (who rightly or wrongly has received his share of negative posts which is also sad) should not be ridiculed or dismissed for attempting to submit information, even if it that information proves not to be valid or contrary to your own beliefs and opinions, they should be applauded for their willingness to actively participate in an area that is filled with so many great minds.

Having said this, one should never close the door on reconciliation because life is simply too short and Andy Walkers comments which appear to be offering a truce and if sincerely meant (as they appeared to me to be so) should be restated:

"It has been too easy for many of us here (including both you and me Mr White) to fall into a kind of mechanical rudeness based on negative emotion which should not be tolerated. This forum is for education and research after all. Take the plank out of your own eye and I'll do likewise."

It would be nice to see Charles Drago posting here more frequently so I personally hope the above statement applies to him also, and besides if it doesn't work out; well I am sure there will be another post right around the corner where you can fall out all over again.

Steve

Excellent post I agree with 80% of what you wrote but you put it more eloquently than I ever could. At risk of touching off a flare-up I beg to differ a bit concerning Jack though. While his mental ability is remarkable for his age in large part he attracts negative comments for repeatedly making gross errors are rarely acknowledging them.

Very cleverly part-disguised off-handed ad hom Len. Your a real master at it.

Peter apparently doesn't even know what the term "ad hom" means.

An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the authorof or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting). This type of "argument" has the following form:

1. Person A makes claim X.

2. Person B makes an attack on person A.

3. Therefore A's claim is false.

The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made).

Example of Ad Hominem

1. Bill: "I believe that abortion is morally wrong."

Dave: "Of course you would say that, you're a priest."

Bill: "What about the arguments I gave to support my position?"

Dave: "Those don't count. Like I said, you're a priest, so you have to say that abortion is wrong. Further, you are just a lackey to the Pope, so I can't believe what you say."

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html

My comments about Jack were the exact opposite; I didn't attribute his errors to his age (though it could be argued this was relevant). He brought up the subject and it was discussed by Steve whose post I was responding to.

I made 2 typos in my previous post though I think most people could figure out what I meant.

"touching of a flare-up" should have been "touching off a flare-up" AND

"he attacks negative comments" should have been "he attracts negative comments

Edited March 20, 2009 by Len Colby

[David G. Healy]

Hi All,

I too have observed some negative and condescending posts directed at Jack since I have been here, especially the ones poking fun at his ability. Now it may well be that many of these originate from previous encounters before I joined this forum, but they are still rightly or wrongly sad to read. I don't doubt that Jack always gives as well as he gets and then some, but personally I am amazed by his observation skills and I pray that I may retain half his vigour and determination when I am his age.

I think Jack like so many others here at the EF forum such as Len Colby (who rightly or wrongly has received his share of negative posts which is also sad) should not be ridiculed or dismissed for attempting to submit information, even if it that information proves not to be valid or contrary to your own beliefs and opinions, they should be applauded for their willingness to actively participate in an area that is filled with so many great minds.

Having said this, one should never close the door on reconciliation because life is simply too short and Andy Walkers comments which appear to be offering a truce and if sincerely meant (as they appeared to me to be so) should be restated:

"It has been too easy for many of us here (including both you and me Mr White) to fall into a kind of mechanical rudeness based on negative emotion which should not be tolerated. This forum is for education and research after all. Take the plank out of your own eye and I'll do likewise."

It would be nice to see Charles Drago posting here more frequently so I personally hope the above statement applies to him also, and besides if it doesn't work out; well I am sure there will be another post right around the corner where you can fall out all over again.

Steve

Excellent post I agree with 80% of what you wrote but you put it more eloquently than I ever could. At risk of touching off a flare-up I beg to differ a bit concerning Jack though. While his mental ability is remarkable for his age in large part he attracts negative comments for repeatedly making gross errors are rarely acknowledging them.

Very cleverly part-disguised off-handed ad hom Len. Your a real master at it.

Peter apparently doesn't even know what the term "ad hom" means.

An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the authorof or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting). This type of "argument" has the following form:

1. Person A makes claim X.

2. Person B makes an attack on person A.

3. Therefore A's claim is false.

The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made).

Example of Ad Hominem

1. Bill: "I believe that abortion is morally wrong."

Dave: "Of course you would say that, you're a priest."

Bill: "What about the arguments I gave to support my position?"

Dave: "Those don't count. Like I said, you're a priest, so you have to say that abortion is wrong. Further, you are just a lackey to the Pope, so I can't believe what you say."

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html

My comments about Jack were the exact opposite; I didn't attribute his errors to his age (though it could be argued this was relevant). He brought up the subject and it was discussed by Steve whose post I was responding to.

I made 2 typos in my previous post though I think most people could figure out what I meant.

"touching of a flare-up" should have been "touching off a flare-up" AND

"he attacks negative comments" should have been "he attracts negative comments

yep, sure, uh-huh..... lmao!