Re: What is a proof, exactly?

From: George Greene (greeneg_at_cs.unc.edu)
Date: 11/29/04 

Date: 29 Nov 2004 15:48:55 -0800

daryl@atc-nycorp.com (Daryl McCullough) wrote in message news:<coft3n0ovl@drn.newsguy.com>...
> George Greene says...
> >
> >daryl@atc-nycorp.com (Daryl McCullough) wrote
>
> >> I disagree. Calling Mike Oliver a liar is intellectually
> >> and morally inappropriate.
> >
> >In what context?
>
> In the context of sci.logic discussions.

You, Darryl McCullough, are being an idiotic
FUCKING DIP***.

The location of the forum IS NOT a context,
in the context of this discussion. The aspects
of the context that are relevant are the TOPIC
or SUBJECT of the discussion and WHAT SPEECH ACTS
the speakers are performing in the context.
ANY context in which ANYone IS lying is an appropriate
context in which to call the liar a liar, COMPLETELY
irrespective of whether the context of the conversation
is located in sci.logic OR ANYWHERE ELSE.

You personally are every bit as much responsible for
maintaining a floor under the level of debate here
as anyone else. Intentionally missing the point
or misdirecting the issue IS NOT appropriate.
I called Mike a liar SPECIFICALLY IN THE CONTEXT
OF A FALSE STATEMENT HE MADE *ABOUT ME* and about
what I've said about models of theories. For you
to be claiming that sci.logic is an INappropriate
place for me to do that -- as if ANY place EVER could
trump the SUBSTANCE of the commentary -- is doubly
idiotic BECAUSE sci.logic is NOT ONLY an UNmoderated
newsgroup, it is notoriously MORE prone to cranks
and rants THAN MOST contexts.

In other words, SHUT YOUR LYING HOLE,
LIAR.

Quantcast