From: Karl Anderson (email@example.com)
Date: Tue May 15 2001 - 12:00:51 PDT
Tom <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On 15 May 2001, Karl Anderson wrote:
> --]When you said that the results were "well documented." Throwing in
> --]all possiblities isn't well documented. It also waters your statement
> --]down to meaningessness:
> --]"SO to when putting sperm and egg togther. The results are well
> --]documented [you take a morning after pill], so are the requirements to
> --]deal with said results [cramps for a day or two]."
> And this shows us your leap from my statement to you accusing me of not
> having compassion for AIDs victims how?
Why so defensive, Tom? I never accused you of that. You mentioned
that certain actions have well-defined consequences; I replied that
you seemed to be implying that one should be prepared to deal with
these conseqences after performing these actions, hence a large chunk
of Africa should be prepared to die of AIDS.
I said that if you weren't making that connection, I didn't see it -
Tom, that's where I'm pointing out to you that it's possible that we
see see things differently, and giving you a chance to explain where
you meant something else.
You prefered to reply with 10 times as many lines of badly spelled
insults as with actual responses to what I said, but that's just your
watered-down style, Tom, and I've come to love you for it as much as
the rest of FoRK does, you cute little bug!
> You ever watch one die? I did.
I bet you didn't say "The results are well documented, so are the
requirements to deal with said results" on his or her deathbed. Which
is my point - nobody actually treats the real people that they know
like logic machines, becuse they know that they themselves are more
complex than that.
> YOu still feeling froggy there kra? Anymore leaps from you?
-- Karl Anderson email@example.com http://www.monkey.org/~kra/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 17 2001 - 14:07:19 PDT