>
>Bravo, John! Very well stated. This emotionally loaded topic seems
>to surface from time-to-time on the various reflectors with the usual
>one-sided political knee-jerking coming from both sides of the fence. ...
In my limited experiences, the political element - as well as the likely
outcome - can pretty much be evaluated by observing the ad hominem
content on each side of the fence. When the ad hominem content is
roughly equal from both sides, odds are that the argument is a stalemate.
However, it's a bit more complicated than that since there are several
grades of ad hominems. Category-1 involves rudimentary insults.
Category-2 involves profanity and/or vulgarities. Category-3 is
allegations of a covert, non-spousal, coital union. Category-4 is the
plural form of Category-3. Category-5 is definitely not suitable for
discussion on a group where minors may be present. Category-6 is
inappropriate for discussions outside of the "Church" of Scientology
Newsgroup. This rating system facilitates scoring a debate since the
number of points is equal to the category number. For example, one
"idiot" and one "stupid" ad hominem is equal to 2-points. One "stupid
bastard" is worth 3-points, except on Sundays where it's worth 3.5
points.
cheers, Mike
- R. L. Measures, 805.386.3734,AG6K, www.vcnet.com/measures.
end
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps
Submissions: amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
|