RAW-FOOD Archives

Raw Food Diet Support List

RAW-FOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Mark Hovila <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 25 Sep 1999 23:50:41 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (62 lines)
Tom,

As one who has no particular ax to grind in this discussion, I will
offer
a few comments.

You make a number of good points, as you always do, but you damage
your
own credibility by making unnecessary personal attacks on Loren.  You
have
already decided in your own mind that it is impossible for him to
thrive
on the diet he describes, and on that basis you call him a fake. I
suggest
that a better strategy is to simply present your reasons for believing
that
he cannot be doing what he says he is doing, or to question him in
detail
about his diet, rather than to come out with both barrels blazing from
the
get-go.  Then, after reading your evidence and his evidence, we can
all
decide for ourselves whether he is a fake or not.  This is much better
than
making up our minds based on who comes up with the most creative
insults.

You accuse Loren of having a "closed mind."  You have demonstrated in
your
post that your own mind is closed with regard to the 1000 calorie
issue. An
open minded person, upon hearing claims that contradict his previously
held
beliefs, will ask for supporting evidence before dismissing those
contradictory claims, or calling the person making them a fake.  Even
if
that evidence is found to be unconvincing, one is still bound to learn
something, because it is very rare indeed that the person we are
having a
discussion with is 100% in the wrong.

Personally, I welcome Loren's contribution and hope he continues to
contribute.  I would not be surprised if he goes elsewhere, though
(i.e.
the Rawlife list) if he continues to be attacked in this way.  Nor
would
I be surprised if others with similar views do likewise.  This is
hugely
ironic, because in the past you have written at great length defending
the decision to throw people off e-mail lists who engage in precisely
the
kind of behavior you are now engaging in.  And if I remember right,
one
of the reasons you gave was that others would be afraid to express
their
views for fear of being attacked, so therefore the attackers should be
removed.  Did you take this position only because in that case the
attackers were raw vegans?

Mark Hovila
Seattle, Washington, USA

ATOM RSS1 RSS2