Rynar wrote:
DE wrote:
Well, guess what? We're not going to examine my statement.
Clearly we are.
No, clearly we are not.. at least until there's a few more sets of ideas out there to be examined also, and not just mine, yours, and Elmos. Evidently we're still waiting for RD to post something. My ideas don't call for special examination by you guys in the absence of any other meaningful proposals to compare them to. If you're going to insist on "examining" them without a meaningful selection of other ideas available as well, I'm going to continue to point out that lack of effort. Dereail the thread if you want to though.
Quote:
Quote:
Stathol asked everyone what they thought good government is.
On a message board. Where we discuss things. What do you think the intention was?
It's pretty obvious that the question, since it wasn't addressed to me or anyone else personally, or to any speific segement of thought was for a number of ideas to be exlained in some reasonable level of detail, and then the disucssion to center around a comparison. It was pretty clearly not his purpose to get DE to post his ideas so that you two could cricticize them for not meeting your own standards which are left unarticulated.
To your credit - and to Elmo's lack thereof - you DID at least post something, but after reading it, it is so vague and undefined that I don't really get anything from it about what you actually think. If I'd never encountered you before and had no idea at all what you think, I'd be baffled as to why you're disagreeing with me. You are, however, disagreeing with me, or at least with one particular thing I think, but you haven't explained how that's unacceptable in
your vision of good government.
Really, if you have some idea of good government, you should not be relying on a comparison to mine to articulate it. How would you explain it if I had posted nothing? I don't believe anyone would know what you think from what you initially said except by interpreting it in light of your posting history, and that is obviously problematic.
Quote:
Quote:
That does not mean that a few of us say what we think and then the lolbertarian brigade complains that they don't like it while making a cursory, or in your case, no, attempt to say what they think would be good.
Ad Hom instead of embracing a discussion of ideas?
The last charge is a fair one, however. I'm working on a more detailed version as we speak. Feel free to debate and critique my thoughts as you see fit.
[/quote]
Well, there is no discussion of ideas. There's an attempt to discuss
my ideas. If you're working on your own, great. I don't, however, plan in critiquing yours or entertaining any more critique of mine until we see a few more beyond that, and from some other perspectives such as RD, who is supposedly working on his own, and possibly Stathol's as well since he started the thread. I don't have any more interest in a back-and-forth between you and I than in what's gone on so far.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
