Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!umcp-cs!mangoe
From: mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Rich Promises to Ignore Me
Message-ID: <1745@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 2-Oct-85 23:47:46 EDT
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.1745
Posted: Wed Oct  2 23:47:46 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 9-Oct-85 06:46:42 EDT
References: <1753@pyuxd.UUCP> <1666@umcp-cs.UUCP> <1787@pyuxd.UUCP>
Organization: U of Maryland, Computer Science Dept., College Park, MD
Lines: 57

>>>>"Hmmm, Darwinism talks about survival of the fittest.  Obviously my Aryan
>>>>race is superior and more fit than those Jews, who cause all our problems.
>>>>(An example of a proven scientific fact that introduced a "horror of
>>>>science"?)  The obvious thing to do is to purify the Aryan race and get
>>>>rid of the Jews!"  Let's get serious, really.  [Rich]

>>> Well, you for one are not so pure. [Charles]

In my monthly act of stupidity I totally missed the parallelism in language
between the two passages.  What I am calling into question is not racial
purity at all, but moral purity.  To put it simply, I don't believe Rich is
so free of the will to pursecute as he would believe.  Fortunately, his
power over me and my kind is limited to defamation over the net, so that I
don't have to find out the truth of the matter.  But the essential hatred
that seems to back up his statements makes me wonder.

>>It is because of foul crap like this that it is likely you will not see me
>>respond to the obnoxious Wingate in the future.

Fine.

>>[T]he "horrors" that Gary Smith spoke of come not from science but from
>>application of scientific facts by people who add in other bogus
>>assumptions, such as the one I described.

And my point, obscure as it was, was that Rich should not presume himself to
be free of such influences.

>>  I take Charles' silence (outside
>>of his stupid remark--is he saying I'm not pure because I'm Jewish, reliving
>>his anti-Semitic remarks of the past?---hard to tell WHAT it is he means) to
>>mean that he has nothing constructive to say about that issue.  I am forced
>>to interpret that silence as concurrence.  I not that Wingate is often
>>silent (again, with the exception of some snotty remark) after I and others
>>say things he seems to have no answer for.

[Warning: heavy flaming ahead]

Rich has never caught on to the fact that the net is an imperfect medium.  I
am not at all sure why I have not previously responded to this typical
attack from Rich previously.  I do not remember reading this article,
perhaps because it never arrived here.  Or perhaps I skipped over this
section because of boredom with Rich's tedious and repetitious attacks upon
my character.  Rich at least could do me the service of coming up with a few
new insults once in a while.  As it is, he rants and raves with the same
religious fervor and the same unchanging cant as the local fundamentalist on
the library mall.  His victory over the evil devil-God worshippers is always
complete; I have never ever recalled him recanting a position or conceding a
point (or for that matter, ever expressing doubt on an issue).  If he really
intends to make good on his promise to ignore my postings, I for one will be
relieved; I will then have every reason to put his name in my kill files, no
longer having to wonder what defamation he has spewed forth this day.

Here endeth the flame.  I think this exhausts what I have to say on the
subject, so don't expect any replies.

Charley Wingate