Hi Tweets,

Janet Keen writes:

>I figured Michael Price would be the first to criticize me for stating an
>opinion regarding Don Bacus' post. I'm not offended by the use of the
>word 'fuck' but by the vitriolic, personalized, attacking tenor of the
>post. Surely you guys, who seem soooo impressed with your own brilliantly
>pedantic diatribes, can find a way to present a good argument and engage in
>a stimulating debate, without cussing and name calling like 13 year-old
>boys. Then again, maybe not...?

Once again, I'm baffled. Being both unwilling and unable to speak for Don
Baccus, you have me employing "brilliant pedantry" --whatever that is-- and
"cussing and name calling like 13 year-old boys" simultaneously. I'll
observe that this is a a pure contradiction, the intellectual equivalent of
having me playing a Mozart piano concerto at Carnegie Hall at the same time
I'm in a beer-fuelled brawl in some small outback town in Australia. One or
the other, please, Janet.

> "vitriolic, personalized, attacking tenor..."

Is this how you characterise disagreement with your point of view? I
disagreed with your point of view, that's all and, if you'll remember, said
I was disagreeing as *friends* do, and presented why, point by point, in
language which didn't contain slang until the end, and that only for
illustrative purposes. I took some pains to try not to personalise the
debate. Judging by your ad hominem attack, I failed. It may be worth
remembering to stick to the issues, please.

Michael Price A brave world, Sir,
Vancouver BC Canada full of religion, knavery, and change;
mprice at mindlink.net we shall shortly see better days.
Aphra Behn (1640-1689)