On Thu, 11 Mar 1999, TheHermit wrote:
> Ummm, did the alliteration not indicate to you that the observations were
> made with my lingualis hard against my Buccinator?
And that's why I relpied equally tounge-in-cheek. (But never "with my lingualis hard against my Buccinator" -- who talks like that anyway?!?)
> It is only worthwhile listening rather than speaking only so long as the
> speaker is making sense,
Something that can only be discovered through a close listening, no?
> Approval (even passive approval) of people who
> attempt to use reason to attack reason and cannot see or will not
> acknowledge the impossibility of their position, is the last thing I intend.
Exactly. But I know you're not implying that reason is either vulnerable to attack using its own tools or held in principle beyond rational criticism or scrutiny, so we are in agrement here.
> If as you seem to imply, this position is a sham, then it is the most
> obscenely malevolent unethical display I have ever had the misfortune to
> observe. Fascinating though it may be, it is like watching a snake playing
> with a young bird.
Nature is full of marvels, is it not?
> At the last company I worked with (they are in Chapter 11 right now), I
> headed up the research team investigating fundamental computer,
> communications and engineering techniques and performing product definition
> and preparation of material for potential investors. No substantial
That is quite interesting. Why do you claim you "headed up" the team?
> In my department most everyone was a peer.
"Most every animal in the farm is equal."
I want to say more on this and share a little more of myself and my experience with hierachies, but at the moment I'm telneting with a very slow connection and it's difficult to concentrate on the words while I wait for the cursor to move between my every keystroke. More tomorrow, hopefully.