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?