“You are trolling” is my personal analysis of the facts. So, “educated opinion” as is everything that isn’t a number (like “But that is not technology.” “This is not erasing women tech.” “Her artwork would have looked just as beautiful if printed on cardboard.” “People paid the top dollar for that computer because they wanted the technology, not just the art.” “The fact that Rolling Stone only makes mention of men of the Mac team in itself does not mean that it was an unfair representation of the actual situation.”).
3 Likes
I only ask because if it’s not a fact* he’s not going to listen.
* - In this person’s case, just a personal belief that they can find information supporting their current opinion
2 Likes
Don’t care?
3 Likes
“However, you have posted in no other thread “
So if I’d made a post in another thread, everything would have been fine? Strange. The only thing I can come up with that would have been different is that some posters would have missed out on an opportunity to divert from what I had to say by questioning my integrity.
Why should there be any relevance in who said something? What women had to say has not been taken seriously for years, or they were even told to shut up (source: bible, quran). These days there are quite a few men who think different about that and consider what they have to say as more important. I believe that the substance of the contributions should determine the discussion, not who posted it.
“You have made more than 1/6 posts in this thread. “
In a discussion, should a person be limited in his/her opportunity to a rebuttal to replies to his own contribution if such replies contain fallacies (irrespective of whether these fallacies comprise personal attacks, distortions of what he stated, logical fallacies etc.)? One way of answering the question would be to put yourself in the position of that person.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
