[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

MR. ROBOTO (was: Oh, what a tangled web we weave)



>You see, this was my point exactly.  What I said in my last paragraph
>WAS that having an opinion and expressing it is all right, but let's not
>get multiples of the same arguments, there's no point to it except to
>waste bandwidth. (And now someone will mail saying "Well, if you're that
>concerned about BANDWIDTH, then....") No, that's not my point, my point
>is arguing for the sake of arguing, or arguing and then finding no
>weaknesses in the other person's position so mailing about things like
>spelling (i.e. "last time I checked, coporate had an r after the first
>o", etc.), it's all just syntax and virtual mudslinging and it's
>ridiculous.  If you've got enough time to write about things like that,
>why not write to everyone on SloanNet individually rather than cramming
>the faulty minutiae of someone's argument through the server and making
>ridiculous arguments like this one valid.

In the "virtual world" you can be all that you can be (who needs the ARMY
for that...).  You can have the most integrity.  You can be the coolest and
the most indie.  You can be an asshole.  Noone has to know the truth.  The
truth of the matter is that in any verbal argument there is always
re-iteration, especially when emotions flare.  You can wear the "Save the
Bandwidth" ribbon in cyberspace but that's not going to change the people
using the machines.  Remember, there are people on the other end, not
perfect cyberplasticbeings.

I'm repeating myself...did I say that already...Geneyus.