Pike's ghost

António Pedro Marques · 29 Nov 2011, 19:15 · 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: entonio at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?QW50w7NuaW8gUGVkcm8gTWFycXVlcw==?=)
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 19:15:10 +0000
Subject: (urth) Pike's ghost
In-Reply-To: <4ED52922.5040503 at irit.fr>
References: <SNT123-W32DE1E1E63A572375FA831CFB20 at phx.gbl>	<70C71EDFDC3B4AEBA0FD38FD41FB8551@Rover>	<4ED39725.9090804 at gmail.com>	<4ED3ABE8.8060807 at verizon.net>	<4ED3BEAA.1080107 at gmail.com>	<4ED3CB92.40502 at verizon.net>	<4ED3D4DC.3000409 at gmail.com>	<4ED3DFF2.8050208 at verizon.net>	<4ED3F57B.8050104 at gmail.com>	<4ED40796.8030108 at verizon.net>	<4ED41277.9040204 at gmail.com>	<4ED41B0E.6050507 at gmail.com>	<4ED41F91.1020906 at gmail.com>	<4ED4276E.8040608 at gmail.com>	<4ED4293C.2010906 at gmail.com>	<4ED50482.8030804 at gmail.com>	<4ED5064C.8000004 at gmail.com>	<4ED50A58.7080100 at gmail.com>	<4ED50C1A.2060103 at gmail.com>	<4ED511BF.8050105 at gmail.com>	<4ED51769.7080001 at gmail.com>	<4ED51CFB.7010209 at gmail.com>
	<4ED51E51.4060809 at verizon.net> <4ED52922.5040503 at irit.fr>
Message-ID: <4ED52F3E.40202 at gmail.com>

Sergei SOLOVIEV wrote (29-11-2011 18:49):
> I think that there are still some "minimum requirements" to the people
> who advance an extravagant new theory -
>
> - if they claim that the theory is supported by the text, it would be
> fair to do the work finding necessary quotations, and honestly present
> the context (not to make the opponent to browse the whole book to find
> out that the next sentence to the sentence just quoted is disproving the
> theory)

Something which has happened more than once. But of course that applies only
to the point where there already is an 'opponent'.

> - to be polite, and not to present disagreement as stupidity

Something which happens all the time, usually in the form of sarcasm.

> - not to try to intimidate the opponents presenting their hypotheses as
> common knowledge and consensus

'Pass off as common knowledge and consensus' is also a problem here.

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