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