Re: profane logic

Subject: Re: profane logic
From: Bev Parks <bparks -at- HUACHUCA-EMH1 -dot- ARMY -dot- MIL>
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 1995 22:25:14 MST

>> I admit that his use of the word took me off guard, but that's
>> only because I'm not used to seeing that language on techwr-l.
>> But if you've ever browsed the usenet newsgroups, you would
>> quickly see that such language is fairly common out there.

> This is fallacious "well, everyone else is doing it, so it must be okay"
> argument, which makes about as much sense as a screen door in a
> submarine. Here are some other things that are "fairly common out
> there" that people would be better off not partaking of:
> - pornography
> - suicide
> - NT

I see you are reading more into my words than is there. I simply
stated that it was present, not that I condoned it.

You just stated that pornography and suicide are present;
therefore, you must condone them. Yeah, great logic.

>> Some people are using the example of using such language or
>> performing some socially unacceptable act at somebody's house.
>> Well--surprise everybody!--this *is not anyone's* home. It's
>> more like a public cafe where tech writers congregate on their
>> lunch break or after a hard day of work.

> So if the writer had used a cafe as the scene, instead of someone's
> home, you'd have been persuaded?

Persuaded to do what? Sorry, but I have no idea what you are
talking about here.

>> =*= Huachuca : That's pronounced "wah-CHEW-ka" =*=

> Gesundheit.


bparks -at- primenet -dot- com

Previous by Author: Re: Using software your clients propos
Next by Author: Re: couple of questions
Previous by Thread: profane logic
Next by Thread: Re: profane logic

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads