Re: Logos -vs- Vulis

[Dale Thorn <dthorn@gte.net>]

logos wrote:
> Dale Thorn wrote:
> > Dimitri Vulis wrote:
> > > Lame losers who call themselves "cypher punks" and bend
> > > over for John Gilmore.

> > It is obvious that you, Dimitri Vulis, intend to be
> > disruptive to the operation of this list. I have politely
> > asked you several specific questions about your motives.

> Sorry for the noise, but could Logos be specific as to the fallacy in
> each item he/she is addressing?  I thought that was the purpose of
> the Logos character.

> I indicated in my original post that I would be addressing both logic
> and decorum.[snip]
> It was never my intent to nit pick about every bit of sloppy reasoning
> by every poster to Cypherpunks.  Rather, I am trying to elevate the
> general level of discourse via selective commentary and (hopefully) by
> example.  If Dale Thorn, or anyone else, feels that a more rigourous
> attention to logic and/or decorum is called for, I heartily welcome
> your participation.

I understand that you don't want to nit-pick *every* bit of every post,
however, once you do decide to pick on somebody, surely you could point
to the specific fallacies, rather than wring your hands and gnash your
teeth as you did in the long note to the Great Expelled One.

Don't think I don't know what's going on here. I got permanently expelled
from two schools as a youth, to name just two examples from my illustrious
career, yet after learning how to play the game, I probably am doing much
better than most of the drones who completed their studies and kept their
mouths shut.  My life is continually interesting, and I wouldn't think of
trading it for the neurotic, control-freak-mentality lifestyle certain
folks around here "enjoy".

I'm sure (if you know crypto topics) you realize that in creating a crypto
solution, there's no substitute for rigorous attention to detail.  I'm not
opposed to paying some attention to decorum, but logic comes first,
otherwise, you won't have a leg to stand on.