Freethought & Rationalism Archive

spin · 03-09-2011, 08:09 PM

In a recent thread:

Quote:

Originally Posted by EarlDoherty

P.S. Incidentally, I will take the opportunity to voice one of my pet peeves. Any DB that wants itself to be taken seriously or aspires to respectability ought to require that its participants go under real names. There is something amiss in one party to a debate having his or her identity in the open while others remain faceless and nameless (and usually sexless). If someone hasn’t got the courage or sense of fair play to back up their views, especially critical ones, with their own identity, they shouldn’t be here.

I, spin, have been posting relatively consistently at this site for nine years. People, who have been here a while, know me and know what to expect. I know the people here and there is a community here. The person with the user name "EarlDoherty" has also been here for quite a long time, but when I say "been here" he is not a regular. In the six years he's been a member he's posted less than 700 times and that has been mostly on issues relating to his books. He doesn't generally partake in the community here. He has no allegiance here. Here he makes comments about what is necessary in order for this forum to be taken seriously and who should and should not be here.

Comments, BC&Hers?

mountainman · 03-09-2011, 09:01 PM

Dear spin,

We all know that pet peeves and pet hobby horses are two entirely different animals, and that everyone - including you - is guilty of running both strings. There are no exceptions. The latter carries the message, while the former carries the messenger. Which are you addressing?

Best wishes,

Pete

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

In a recent thread:

Quote:

Originally Posted by EarlDoherty

P.S. Incidentally, I will take the opportunity to voice one of my pet peeves. Any DB that wants itself to be taken seriously or aspires to respectability ought to require that its participants go under real names. There is something amiss in one party to a debate having his or her identity in the open while others remain faceless and nameless (and usually sexless). If someone hasn’t got the courage or sense of fair play to back up their views, especially critical ones, with their own identity, they shouldn’t be here.

I, spin, have been posting relatively consistently at this site for nine years. People, who have been here a while, know me and know what to expect. I know the people here and there is a community here. The person with the user name "EarlDoherty" has also been here for quite a long time, but when I say "been here" he is not a regular. In the six years he's been a member he's posted less than 700 times and that has been mostly on issues relating to his books. He doesn't generally partake in the community here. He has no allegiance here. Here he makes comments about what is necessary in order for this forum to be taken seriously and who should and should not be here.

Comments, BC&Hers?

Toto · 03-09-2011, 09:08 PM

I came close to edited out Earl's comment. Perhaps I should have. But this forum is not for dragging out this sort of personal conflicts.

I will lock this thread.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-09-2011, 09:08 PM	#3
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	I came close to edited out Earl's comment. Perhaps I should have. But this forum is not for dragging out this sort of personal conflicts. I will lock this thread.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.