Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site masscomp.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!masscomp!carlton
From: carlton@masscomp.UUCP (Carlton Hommel)
Newsgroups: net.flame
Subject: Re: Persuasion through Intimidation
Message-ID: <168@masscomp.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 11-Dec-84 09:54:54 EST
Article-I.D.: masscomp.168
Posted: Tue Dec 11 09:54:54 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 12-Dec-84 04:45:03 EST
References: <4750@fortune.UUCP> <1732@umcp-cs.UUCP> <326@pyuxd.UUCP>
Reply-To: carlton@masscomp.UUCP (Carlton Hommel)
Organization: Masscomp - Westford, MA
Lines: 27

In article <326@pyuxd.UUCP> rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) writes:
>Instead, let's call the method an appeal to reasoned thinking.  Presenting
>verifiable facts, allowing the listener/reader to come to the same conclusion
>through his own reasoning power.

A wonderful idea in theory, but unworkable in practice.  Consider the high
volume of traffic in groups like net.politics, net.abortion, net.origins, or
net.flame.  In my 6 months of reading net.{wombat}, I have yet to see an 
article like the following:

	"Hey, you guys are right!  Article <326@pyuxd.UUCP> finally
    convinced me.  Until now, I had a deep, heartfelt conviction
    that {wombats} were godless atheists, and closeminded fanatics
    to boot.  But now, after reading your appeals to reasoned 
    thinking, I have seen the clear light of truth.  {Wombats}
    don't lesnerize, eat unborn kittens, or do any of the other
    disgusting things my parents said they did.
	I was wrong.  My position was based on blind unreasoning
    stupidity.  I apologize.

I don't think the net software could stand the strain of a message like that.

	Carl Hommel

Husband: A fetus is never alive, so it is ok to abort it.
Wife:	 If a fetus were never alive, it is not animal.  Does that mean that
	 its ok for a vegitarian to eat it?