On 18-10-2020 11:42, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote: > Le 17 octobre 2020 23:03:22 GMT+02:00, Weaver <wea...@riseup.net> a > écrit :
And now we go another step further: with double postings into my inbox. Why don't you massage your petit ego requirements on somebody else's time.? I'm quite sure everybody here is as sick of it as I am. >> On 18-10-2020 00:53, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 10:39:01PM -0700, Weaver wrote: >> On 17-10-2020 15:05, Michael uplawski wrote: >> Leslie Rhorer: >> Until someone does earn respect, there is no reason anyone >> should afford it them. It is utterly ridiculous to think everyone >> deserves respect. >> >> This is where you are excluding yourself from the human community. >> Face >> it. Live with it. *We* will be fine, anyway. > > Rubbish! > > Tone not helpful here on either side. > > Rubbish is rubbish > Some may see a point in dressing it up as otherwise. > I don't. > >>> There are certain qualities which must be extended before you are >>> worthy >>> of receiving them, trust, loyalty, to mention a couple, but you >>> can >>> throw respect in there also, along with one or two others. >>> I have to earn the respect of every child I meet, and maintain the >>> standard every time I encounter that child in the future. >>> Some, in their retarded viewpoint, believe respect is something >>> engendered by social position. >> >> Retarded is not a helpful term here or, indeed, anywhere. > > Retarded is retarded. > You seem to prefer to believe it is aimed at an individual, when it is > clearly applied to a viewpoint. > >>> Wrong! >>> Social position is engendered by earned level of respect. >>> `excluding yourself from the human community', what a load of >>> puerile >>> ignorance! >> >> Puerile here is also not helpful. Considered, constructive language >> which advances a thought through viewpoint is preferable. >> Another way of putting it "never argue with an idiot on the >> Internet. >> After a couple of rounds, a dispassionate observer will not be able >> to tell who's who" > > Puerile is puerile. > `Immature, especially in being silly or trivial; childish'. > The terminology applies: employ it. > `Considered, constructive language' - is language which communicates > effectively. > `which advances a thought through viewpoint' - Pseudo-intellectual > waffle! > You know another method? > Observation is dependent on conditioned viewpoint. > Beginning, end, and entire middle of story. > >> If you were to treat your readers with a greater consideration for >> their intellect, you might come across better. > > A discerning intellect would have not sent this to me directly, would > have identified the aspects specified more accurately, and kept it on > list. > > <snip> > >> See also Edward Gibbon - Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, >> chapter 2 > > We live in exactly those times, a classic example being played out > before our very eyes. > > You currently just are making yourself look both arrogant and > ridiculous. I guess this is why Andrew sent his reply just to you, > instead of giving you another shovel to dig with. > > I don't know what you are trying to achieve here, but I stand my point > : your lack of respect for others is not welcome here. > > Regards. > -- > Pierre-Elliott Bécue -- `Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful'. — Lucius Annæus Seneca. Terrorism, the new religion. Registered Linux User: 554515
