Lior wrote (with a special CC to David Rosdeitcher):
>Could you please keep your posts a bit shorter? Your points really
>interest me, as you're the first rational representative of Objectivism
>I know. It's just that I practically can't spend the time it takes for a
>full article of yours, and I find myself in depressing situations right
>around the beautiful too-early hours of night-morning.
>I mean, you could get a site and post those articles over there, then
>only link your posts to particular arguments you make there.
>
>This goes for all others on the list as well.
This is incredible. Lior addresses this post to Dave, "the intruder".
I couldn't resist to get some facts from Eudora for the last couple od
days.
I found posts with more than 4 Eudora "pages":
Dave Pape: 7, 5, 11, 6, 9, 5, 5, 5, 6, 11, 6, 11, 5
Richard Brodie: 39, 9, 6
Reed: 6, 5
David Rosdeitcher: 6, 8, 7
Tim: 5
zaimoni: 7
Vicki 9, 8
Dan: 10, 5
Richard's 39 pages post was a copy of an existing web article. Lior, I
am
curious, if you care to answer: why didn't you say anything about
Richard?
(Yes, I know you've added: "This goes for all others on the list as
well").
----------------------------------
Good question. I'll try to be objective, excuse me if it sounds like
self-justification.
I thought Richard knew that no one would read 39 pages excerpted of an
existing web article.
You're right about the 'Shift to Chatter' which dwells among 'senior'
virions atleast as well, but David's posts aren't just disoriented
chatters which got pages-long. They're well-constructed articles which
were simply too long to read for the common sofastsodumb couchpotatoes
like me.
And as Corey pointed out, some people pay for mail-DLing.
Even if there is a considerable hostility towards new virions, so what?
The first responses to Dave Pape bordered with a full-scale allayhum,
but that wasn't what made him psychic. It's must be the morphine ;)
Lior.
BTW: What's Eudora?