Quote:
Jim,
If you ever want to discuss what I actually said instead of your usual batch of hypotheticals that have absolutely nothing to do with what I said then I will be more than happy to talk to you.
|
Here's the quote I referred to:
Quote:
|
Liar..... you don't even have to call someone a liar to get your point across. Simply saying John Doe "has a history of lying" gets the same thing across without it being name calling.
|
Sammy, it is one of the probelms with the printed page, I guess. My point was that calling someone a liar, and stating that they have a history of lying, are the same IMO. And I provided an personal example of being on the receiving end. Sorry that you don't like it, but its all about being on the receiving end in this discussion. Maybe not yours, but this thread has already indicated that one of the problems in enforcing subjective rules is that Rich's standard is not just how something was intended, but how it was taken. I agree with Rich's assessment that he needs to defer to how things can be taken.