- Capitalism and Alternatives -

Argue, argue. Bicker, bicker. And we continue . . .

Posted by: Spikes McGuire on February 06, 19100 at 19:53:56:

In Reply to: No, accountable to Frenchy (corrected) posted by Barry Stoller on February 05, 19100 at 18:15:45:

So titled because experience teaches us that Barry will take the last.
This argument has taken on personal dimensions, but it is relevant to politics, a point I may pursue at some other time. For now, a quick review:

In one corner, the Unknown Poster (?), sly in his own mind, an annoyance in others. Known for fancy footwork, has a okay jab but no power, no K.O punch. Probably has a glass jaw, but, naturally, record unknown.

In the next corner, Barry "Mad Dog" Stoller, a fighter whose tenacity keeps him punching even after the bell has rung.

Middle of the first round Barry: "subterfuge . . .find a point to debate or get lost . . . there's something pathological about you..."

(Argue, argue. Bicker, bicker. And we continue . . .)

Barry writes to Krasny: "I'm only requesting that people take RESPONSIBILITY for their statements and opinions instead of hiding behind a barrage of identities."

Notice: from saying "get lost" to giving a diagnosis of "pathological", Barry later in the argument allows himself the dignity and patience inherent in the phrase "only requesting." Then he decries the low standards of debate here.

? : I shudder to think what you might mean by "held responsible for their statements"--please no torture with ant hills, Barry!) But we're not making a government, Barry.

More from ?: By the way, I never was Mrs. Winkler. I was only the original, Ms. Winkett.

More from Barry: I KNOW we are not making a government, whateveryernameiz. We are debating on the Mcspotlight board. And, just to make it real clear, I'll say it one more time: Being held responsible for what one says is having the intellectual integrity to be associated with one's opinions. For example: you say that only the first Winkler post was yours, not the second; with so many differing identities, how could anyone tell? THAT IS THE POINT.

And ? responds now with: Why does anyone have to tell? What the hell does it matter? THAT IS MY POINT. If it matters to you, IT SHOULDN'T. You're not sizing up potential friends and foes, Mr. Stoller.

I pointed out that you've said as much in an earlier post in which you said you were trying to find out who is revolutionary and who is reformist "before (you) stick (your) neck out."

In my opinion, Mr. Stoller, you've simultaneously overestimated what's happening here (counting heads for a revolution) and UNDERESTIMATED what's happening here (exchanging ideas across the globe almost instantaneously.)

So, please tell me again: Why does changing my name compromise my intellectual integrity. If I commit a sin as "John Smith," I'll own up to it as "John Smith." I did this as "Jesse." I'll never plagiarize, and I won't post using any name I know be use on this board. (i.e., I'm not David, nor am I Dr. Cruelt.)

Let's say, from this fight, I'd like to get your opinion or views on something? Can I do it as Jesse, or Spikes, or Pete or Henry? No, not without it carrying a baggage along with it. So, lighten up Barry. We all like you over here, ya Big Lug.

: The rest of your overwrought post was beside the point.

Beside your point, that is. I don't agree, but let's just say you're right, it was beside the point. So what? I can't have two points in one post? Anyway, in my mind, the points are next-door neighbors.

Have at it, Barry. I'm bowing out of this string, too.

Follow Ups:


The Debating Room Post a Followup