NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #18/NN_1992_18.iso/spool/talk/rape/2225

Text File | 1992-08-18 | 6.5 KB | 111 lines

Newsgroups: talk.rape
Path: sparky!uunet!cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!news.acns.nwu.edu!casbah.acns.nwu.edu!query
From: [e-mail] (Samuel Green)
Subject: Re: Forget it.
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Usenet on news.acns)
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 06:33:15 GMT
Lines: 99

    Well, tyhis will be my last post in this thread, as several things
have become obvious.  Several things that, while they might be appropo to
discuss via e-mail, if I cared to invest the time on an irrelevant
argument, are pointless to discuss in this forum.
    I have noticed, and I wonder if anyone else has also, that DC seems
only interested in telling people that they are wrong.  Even if a person
dissagrees with him on a matter of opinion, he will insist that they are
wrong.  Even if a person repeatedly points out that it is a matter of
opinion, or personal choice, DC will post several hundred lines of
arguments that will say that you are still wrong.  I feel that an opinion
can be prooven neither right nor wrong, but, apparently DC disagrees with
me on that too.
    DC, I must ask you:  Why must you feel the need to prove some
irrelevant point to everyone who disagrees with you?
  What should it matter to you, if someone other than yourself's rights are
violated?  You have stated repeatedly how stupid I am for risking my life
to help someone I do not know, then you say that I am violating that persons
rights!  What do *you* care about other people?
    You have stated several times that you would refuse someone who
weas not a friend or family member some protection, yet, when the
(according to you) "moral rights" of a person who you do not know are
possibly violated, you immediately attack?
    DC, if you do not care to risk your self for someone else, then
fine.  I hope that the majority of people out there do not feel the same as
you.  But, I cannot say what the majority thinks, because no one has posted
to this thread, except for once, other than you or I.  And, they dissagreed
with you to some extent.  I vaguely recall you responding to them telling
them in essence, that they were wrong.  I might guess that a few people who
may have otherwise posted decided not to, due to the possibility of you
posting huge follow ups and attempting to get them into an argument that is
pointless.
    DC, I do not care if you say I am wrong, or if you say that I am
violating someones moral rights.  *I* know that *I* do the right thing for
me, and I sure as hell help other peoplr.  Sure, it's their choice to do
what they want, but, I draw the line at letting people risk themselves for
no gain.  Yeah, I know, I know, I am not letting others live their own
lives, whatever you say.  Right, like, preventing someone from getting
attacked is going to remove all the controll from their lives.  You know,
maybe so...  *sarcasm time*
    Perhaps we should all be like DC, and not stick our noses in when
there is a personal risk, but, only interefere with peoples business if we
can't be hurt by it.  Thats the idea, now!  Hey, who cares if you cannot go
out at night because its too dangerous to go alone, who cares if your
friends won't help you.  Hey, as long as they don't bother me...
    *sarcasm off*
    Anyway, I realized, too late, alas, that the only thing being
accomplished from this thread was to give DC a chance to argue.  Thats all
he does, here, is dissagree with people.  I think I have seen 1 post of his
which actually had some relevance to preventing rape.
    Now, why do I say that it seems like DC only likes to be here to
argue?
    1)  Several times in his posts he referrs to various "thrashings"
of others posts, or "defeating" their arguments.  Sounds like he is trying
to 'win' or proove something.  From the fact that he is a non interference
type, I assumme that he is jealous of people who are willing (and,
sometimes dumb enough :)) to go out and help someone.
    2)  Frequently he will ask multiple choice questions, and, then,
seconds later in the same post, he will say "Surpirise!"  as though anyone
reading them could not POSSIBLY have had an answer to those questions that
could have been even remotely correct.
    3)  If anyone ever tells him one of his arguments does not fit,
pretty much all he says is "Your examples just go to furthur proove my
hypo."  C'mon, DC, not EVERYONE on the net who responds to your posts could
be such total loosers that they are 100% wrong ALL of the time.  I only
recall one thread (the handguns one) in which you agree with someone, and
that is basically because they said that they agreed with your previous
post.
    4)  He makes personal attacks towards other people who disagree
with him, without ANY provocation whatsoever.  Of course! I forgot.  When
he complained that ATAYLOR (whom he has referred to me as, in his last
post, so what the hell, I'll bring that in too) began name calling, and he
complained that this was done (quoting her, approx, now) "just to get your
attention"  Fine, I can see having a problem with that.
    BUT, then when HE does the same thing to someone else, he justifies
it by saying "But, you ARE an idiot" and then tries to prove it!  Boys and
girls, sad but true, and no matter how hard he tries to deny it, DC is a
hypocrite, and that may be the least of his 'virtues'
    5) In one of my articles, he criticized my spelling (whats the
point of using up even more of my time when posting by spell checking, if
the words are easily recognizable?) and other petty shit.  Does not sound
like a person who wants to find the meat of the argument, but rather petty
shit that is totally irrelevant.

    So, what I ask of other people is that they look at the 'evidence'
(in quotes, because, after forging quotes is apparrently something that
EVERYONE [excluding DC] does, in vain attempts to refute his 'thrashing
arguments') here and then decide if it is worth responding to DC's posts in
future.  Because, since I am such moral slime that I could not possibly
have a valid point to my name, even if I were a cactus, I will not waste
time responding to his posts.
    DC, if you really get off on just arguing, go to a bar and start an
argument there.  Drunks are the easiest to argue with, BTW, since you like
'thrashing' peoples arguments so much...

    Sign me,

    Disgusted with how much time I wasted by just giving DC another
chance to try and make himself feel valid in life...
    Sam