Arugmentation (Was: Re: [PLUG-TALK] Fair Use, etc.)

[Jeff A. Henshaw]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Russ Johnson" <russj at dimstar.net>
To: <plug-talk at lists.pdxlinux.org>
Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 2:36 PM
Subject: Re: Arugmentation (Was: Re: [PLUG-TALK] Fair Use, etc.)


> I love websites that speak in half truths, doublespeak and broken links.
>


And your point?  Is there anyone who is 100% correct 100% of the time?

If you answer no,  then you must be admitting that your sources may not
always be 100% correct either.


Now,  thankfully we have laws of nature that govern over irrational emtional
people,  whether or not they accept it or even know it.

And what this does is allows me to go down and check the PROMIS db myself,
and if I see a 600% increase in put options the day after NY Times prints an
article stating the stock is poised to go UP,  and I see that the characters
who are part of that act are a part of many other scenes in the play,  I can
evaluate this based upon the fact that it is true,  not it whether my
neighbor thinks it is half-true,  "doublespeak" or any other type of "speak"
which rocks someone's precious canoe.

UAL stock and Buzzy Kroengaard cannot be denied,   can it?

That's as far as I am going to debate it with you,  because that one is not
subject to emotional distortion of vision.

I agree with Jeme that the preponderence of evidence is quite well
established,  and I don't rely upon one website or the other - I use
critcial thinking skills,  unencumbered by a fear of the govt or a fear of
what my neighbor thinks for that matter.

I don't look over my shoulder and see which way the bleating herd is headed
before I can decide what my opinion "ought" to be.

Usually,  that kind of honesty is met with a lot of frenzied bleating from
the herd.

So be it.