From: Fred on
A continuation of this is in a June 4th post in the "General Questions"
From: David W. Fenton on
"Jeff Boyce" <nonsense(a)> wrote in

> I was just pointing out that the odds of getting heard and
> understood go down if you yell ...<G>

I don't yell. I do use strong rhetoric.

David W. Fenton
usenet at dfenton dot com
From: David W. Fenton on
"Jeff Boyce" <nonsense(a)> wrote in

> Hold on, are you saying that if folks don't agree with your
> approach, they wish to be treated like children?

No, only that the desire to be protected from strong rhetoric is
asking to be treated like less than an adult.

> Using phrasing like that seems to imply that you think your
> approach is the only correct way for adults to help each other...
> Is that what you think?

I think that people who want to be protected from strong speech are
foolish, in that a lot of valuable discourse is couched in terms
that are less than gentile.

> Again, if what you want to do is help folks learn, does it work
> better to do it the way YOU want to, or they way THEY want it
> done?

When the situation warrants, I use strong rhetoric. Some people get
all flustered about that. I say they should get a thicker skin.

If they don't like my rhetorical style, they can killfile me. On the
other hand, if they find the *content* (as opposed to the style) of
my posts valuable, they can read past the style for the substance.

It's entirely up to them.

My criticism of sites like and MS's new
walled-garden support forums is that there is a chokepoint of
control that can be used to unfairly exclude on grounds that aren't
necessarily fair. That control is not possible with Usenet, and I
consider that a good thing that makes Usenet (despite the
possibility of wild-west unruliness breaking out) vastly superior.

David W. Fenton
usenet at dfenton dot com
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: Ribbon
Next: Store info for reports from switchboard