Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site wivax.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!wivax!dyer From: dyer@wivax.UUCP (Stephen Dyer) Newsgroups: net.motss,net.singles Subject: Re: Sargent/Brenner Con't (flame contra Arndt) Message-ID: <19636@wivax.UUCP> Date: Thu, 21-Jun-84 07:49:47 EDT Article-I.D.: wivax.19636 Posted: Thu Jun 21 07:49:47 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 22-Jun-84 01:11:31 EDT References: <1656@decwrl.UUCP>, <19630@wivax.UUCP>, <132@wnuxb.UUCP> Organization: Wang Institute, Tyngsboro, Ma. 01879 Lines: 16 Deciding when to comment instead of ignoring someone's flame is sometimes hard to call. For example, I felt no need to act on harpo!jrl's posting, since it was so obviously outrageous. On the other hand, Ken Arndt has a pretty strange history here (ever read some of his postings to net.motss and net.women?), and I was quite worried about his attempt to turn this discussion into a philosophical discussion of morality (the business with his dog was an attempt to be a kind of reductio ad absurdum, I guess), since that was pretty clearly outside the scope of what people like Ellen and I were saying. I have to admit, I just don't have too much patience with many of his postings. Mea culpa. -- /Steve Dyer decvax!bbncca!sdyer sdyer@bbncca.ARPA