Re[7]: [at-l] You've gotta love it...

[spiriteagle99@hotmail.com (Jim and/or Ginny Owen)]

"Bob C." wrote:
>"...In  other  words  -  essentially  untrue  because  unprovable. YMMV But
>OB's
>statement  was/is  provable,  therefore  justifiable.  Elementary logic, my
>dear
>Weary <VBG>" argues a somewhat illogical Jim, regardless of the size of his
>grin
>or his skills as an engineer/scientist/trail advice giver.
>
>Many  things  can't be proved, but that in no way makes them untrue. But in
>this
>case, that doesn't matter. OB"s original claim is simply untrue.

LOL!!!

That's called circular logic, Bob - and what you may not realize is that
circular logic invariably goes Moebius and comes back to bite you.  If
anyone's still paying attention to this garbage, they'll reaize that you've
just been bitten on the ass by your own circular logic.  <VVVBSEFG>

You seem to have missed the fact that OB has read TA - and formed his own
opinion.  So what makes you think your opinion is so much better than his
that you're qualified to judge him?

By the way - do you realize that one does not have to be supscribed to TA in
order to read the posts?  Anybody can read them and form their own opinion
--- they're at: http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/ta/


>Sure. We've had what  some  might  mistakenly call rants, though probably
>far fewer than on this list.

No - TA has had only one rant - it's been continuous for the last 5 months.


>But  they  have  involved  the meaning of what the progenitor of the
>Appalachian
>Trail  meant  in his original essay, which is surely on topic for a list
>devoted to the the Appalachian Trail.

It might be a good topic if it were "discussed" rather than preached.


>None have involved "off topic political" subjects.

Pay attention, Bob - "off topic political" referred to this list - not TA.


>Finally  what  some  may  term  "rants"  are  not  "extremely well
>tolerated and encouraged?"  On  the  contrary, they are actively
>discouraged, though

Really??  Don't you know there are those few who actively seek the rants.
They get off on the "combat."  Or haven't you figured that out yet?  That
was obvious (and in fact, was stated plainly) 18 months ago.

As for active discouragement - unless it's happened in the Sept/Oct posts
that I haven't read yet, you're dreaming. In fact, I've seen you become an
"enabler" and thus prolong the latest rant - that's hardly discouragement.

>given the nature of the forum, they can't be eliminated.

That's true.

Now - let's take this to TA as I suggested last night - before you do any
more damage to TA than has already been done by your insistence on hashing
this out on at-l.

Jim

_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus