Babbiehorn?: Was: a sincere question mostly for roy

Lee Berman · 17 Nov 2011, 21:11 · from 2011-November.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: severiansola at hotmail.com (Lee Berman)
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 16:11:51 -0500
Subject: (urth) Babbiehorn?: Was: a sincere question mostly for roy
Message-ID: <SNT123-W30838392282D71310CD3FCFC70 at phx.gbl>

>Gerry Quinn: What you seem to be saying here is that anyone who disagrees 
>that lianas and inhumi are biologically connected is lying or stupid or both.  
>That says more about you than about me.

Not at all since those are your words, not mine. Don't worry Gerry. Nobody thinks
you are stupid. And "lying" is such a harsh word. I think playacting is much nicer.
If you are worried about your staged pose being too apparent at this time, that 
could be a legitimate concern.

It isn't really your disagreement which I would consider playacting. It is more your
assertion that such a clear and understandable idea as James' is so ridiculous as to be 
out of the realm of possible interpretations. There is a little part of your brain which 
knows that is a clever and insightful idea and that it may well represent what Wolfe intended.
But there is  another part of your brain which, in the heat of battle, refuses to allow you 
to acknowledge that in writing. Hence the act. C'mon. We are all friends here! A little
truth never hurt anyone.

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net