On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 21:49:36 -0500, rick and/or linda strong
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Greg said:  Andrew is out of control.
>
>I ask that Andrew set forth his credentials.  What education, training and
>experience do you possess that should impel list members to abide your
>opinions and trust your oft cited "facts."

While I do agree with Greg's point, I don't agree with this additional concept.

If a statement is true, it doesn't matter who said it.

If a roomful of chimpanzees with typewriters managed, by sheer chance, to
create "Neanderthin", it wouldn't make it any more or less true or worthwhile.

On the other hand, I don't think that many people understood Greg's points, so
I will elaborate - Greg stated:

" He [Andrew] does not realize many things-- among them: (1) this is a "support
list," where trashing members is not appropriate; (2) the logical fallacy of ad
hominem arguments (attacking the person, not the argument being made) "

In other words, statements like Andrew's:

"  of course, you could just admit that you were being an idiot. that would be
far more credible. "

are not appropriate, since they are rude and insulting.

Appropriate is specifically what I am referring to.   I used to hang out with a
group of guys where the mode of communications consisted entirely of insults,
so it is certainly not due to having a "thin skin" that I bring this up.
However, that was an entirely different time and place.   In this public list
consisting of people who don't know each other, rudeness and insults would
destroy the exchange of information that goes on.

Having said that, I very seriously question whether the people who are stating
that they value his contributions are referring to statements such as Andrew's:

" ...well, maybe we have an answer to the original question posed: why does
Cordain recommend it. because it is the worst, and it makes the most money
for the agribusiness companies. good on you Cordain! "

I've noticed that none of the people who have made significant contributions to
this list have posted recently, and it is possibly because of "valuable
scientific contributions" like the above quote.

I would also guess that none of the people who previously moderated the list
have read it for the past few months...


--
Cheers,

Ken
[log in to unmask]